The ‘tampon tax’ fight has reached D.C

[Zyphlin]

The point, which you totally missed, is that feminine hygiene products and diapers really are necessities, unlike Viagra-type products which are exempted from sales tax because they are supposedly "necessities". I thought that was quite clear. It was certainly quite clear to anyone who read the linked article in the OP.

No, you weren't clear at all. You were horribly misleading and dishonest. You claimed that Viagra was exempt for being a "necessity", which without research I would've believed, when in reality it's exempt for being a prescription...the same as any other prescription. It was a dishonest, misleading, poor argument that suggests your argument is actually extremely weak since you had to rely on dishonesty to make it.

Many prescriptions are not "necessary"; are you advocating sales taxes on all of them? Or are you latching onto Viagra simply to create a gender argument to appeal to emotion?

 

[Zyphlin]

Now, despite the fact that so often the claim that a group is being "disproportionately affected" is often used as justification for declaring something as racist/sexist/etc and problematic (but of course would be ignored in this case), I'm all in favor with a locality choosing to remove a tax if they feel they can fiscally do it. I have no issue with DC removing the sales tax on these items.

 

[Lovebug]

So let me start at the beginning.
The only ones who pay taxes on tampons are women of childbearing years.
Why is anyone comparing this to Viagra and toilet paper?

 

[jonny5]

So let me start at the beginning.
The only ones who pay taxes on tampons are women of childbearing years.
Why is anyone comparing this to Viagra and toilet paper?

Because divisive politics are the thing the do today. Class, race, gender. Whatever wedge people can use against each other to win votes to their side.

 

[ludin]

As a republican, I say eliminate as many taxes as possible. Glad to see liberal women joining for that, too bad they are only calling for the repeal of a tax that they are the ones to pay.

However, it really isn't a tax on women. It's just a tax on hygiene products. Same as toilet paper, toothpaste, soap, etc. The only difference is this one is only used by women.


https://www.washingtonpost.com/loca...3b1c0c-f84c-11e5-8b23-538270a1ca31_story.html

sales tax is sales tax. it isn't a tax on women I am sick of this meme.
people really need to stand up and tell it for what it is.

 

[jonny5]

As a republican, I say eliminate as many taxes as possible. Glad to see liberal women joining for that, too bad they are only calling for the repeal of a tax that they are the ones to pay.

However, it really isn't a tax on women. It's just a tax on hygiene products. Same as toilet paper, toothpaste, soap, etc. The only difference is this one is only used by women.


https://www.washingtonpost.com/loca...3b1c0c-f84c-11e5-8b23-538270a1ca31_story.html

Its a local issue, so its up to the locals, but Im all for keeping taxes on sales. Of everything. And before that, getting rid of taxes on everything else, like income and corporate profits and property value.

 

[Lovebug]

sales tax is sales tax. it isn't a tax on women I am sick of this meme.
people really need to stand up and tell it for what it is.

I want to booze tax removed. It is unfair.

 

[Jack Fabulous]

I think the accusation is purposefully misleading.

Women aren't being targeted unfairly. This is a simple case of feminine hygiene products falling into a broad category of products which are subject to taxation. Not a whole lot different than taxing shaving cream. I wouldn't have a problem at all if they carved out an exemption for gender specific necessities but keep in mind that by doing so, they will create a revenue shortage that will have to be made up somewhere.

 

[AliHajiSheik]

So the goal of making the day after pills be sold over the counter is to have them taxed? Insidious.

 

[Harry Guerrilla]

As a republican, I say eliminate as many taxes as possible. Glad to see liberal women joining for that, too bad they are only calling for the repeal of a tax that they are the ones to pay.

However, it really isn't a tax on women. It's just a tax on hygiene products. Same as toilet paper, toothpaste, soap, etc. The only difference is this one is only used by women.


https://www.washingtonpost.com/loca...3b1c0c-f84c-11e5-8b23-538270a1ca31_story.html

Simplest solution is to eliminate the none taxed categories.
Then no one can claim unfairness.

Edit add:

Why is Viagra the go to product to make stupid comparisons?

 

[Harry Guerrilla]

What's the thinking in taxing hygiene products specifically? We don't want people using toilet paper and deodorant?

Not being a dick but hygiene products are affordable, with the tax, there's no good reason to not tax them.
Get rid of all the exempt categories and be done with it.

 

[radcen]

Perhaps if the same states that impose sales tax on feminine hygiene products and diapers... which are not luxury items, btw... also imposed the same tax on Viagra, which is exempt because it is considered a "necessity", there wouldn't be such pent-up resentment on the topic.

Just sayin'.

I don't recall prescription medication being taxable. ANY prescription medication, subject matter irrelevant. Just sayin'.

Sorry, but poor analogy.

 

[LaMidRighter]

They are exempt because they are prescription pills. No hygiene product is technically a necessity. Soap and toilet paper are taxed and everyone needs those too.

I don't know about that, I have run across people with such poor hygiene that I knew they were in the area before they entered the room. In the cases of hygiene so poor that it activates the collective gag reflexes of any given crowd I would say those products are absolutely a necessity.

 

[radcen]

Simplest solution is to eliminate the none taxed categories.
Then no one can claim unfairness.

Edit add:

Why is Viagra the go to product to make stupid comparisons?

Seems to be the "go to" when comparing men's/women's issues and/or differences. The implication being that men get away with everything and women have to fight for what little they can get.

 

[Harry Guerrilla]

Seems to be the "go to" when comparing men's/women's issues and/or differences. The implication being that men get away with everything and women have to fight for what little they can get.

I'd be more than willing to trade the extra cost of the "tampon tax" for the additional cost of car insurance for males.
Or of course, we can just agree to live with life's little foibles.

 

[radcen]

Personally, I don't feel that these products *need* to be tax-exempt, but I'm fine if they are declared tax-exempt. It's not wholly unreasonable. They are not "luxury" items, but they're not strict necessities for health any more than TP or toothpaste are. They're certainly preferable and beneficial, you better believe it, but they're not absolute necessities.

Maybe disposable diapers should be taxed and cloth diapers be exempt so as to encourage responsible environmental behavior.

 

[Aunt Spiker]

As a republican, I say eliminate as many taxes as possible. Glad to see liberal women joining for that, too bad they are only calling for the repeal of a tax that they are the ones to pay.

However, it really isn't a tax on women. It's just a tax on hygiene products. Same as toilet paper, toothpaste, soap, etc. The only difference is this one is only used by women.


https://www.washingtonpost.com/loca...3b1c0c-f84c-11e5-8b23-538270a1ca31_story.html

I don't support tax exemptions most of the time... I don't see how it's really a problem. You buy a box once a month, pay what? 7$ per month if you live in California.
Well good for Californians, one of the most expensive state to live in, but most people don't live in the most expensive states.

And there are things only guys buy, too, that are taxed - so claiming that only women have an 'extra tax to pay' is really ****ing stupid. Many men have expensive razors that they can't get a break on, and shave every day, cut their hair much more frequently than most women do.

Afterthought:
The $7.00 in Cali actually seems excessive to me, so I think those estimates are wrong. What's a box of maxi pads cost? Even out that way it can't be more than $10.00. Around here where I live it's $4.97 for a box of the brand I prefer (which isn't the cheapest stuff) - so my taxes are like less than .50 / month. I've been to California and find it hard to imagine that even though the state is pathetically expensive, that the product is so high-price that it constitutes $7.00 / month in TAXES for one person's supply.

In fact, I'll be in California in a few months and odds are I'll be there when I'm on my period. I'll find out just how much taxes are - trust me - it won't be $7.00.

 

[radcen]

I don't support tax exemptions most of the time... I don't see how it's really a problem. You buy a box once a month, pay what? 7$ per month if you live in California.
Well good for Californians, one of the most expensive state to live in, but most people don't live in the most expensive states.

And there are things only guys buy, too, that are taxed - so claiming that only women have an 'extra tax to pay' is really ****ing stupid. Many men have expensive razors that they can't get a break on, and shave every day, cut their hair much more frequently than most women do.

Don't get me started on the price of razors (blades, specifically). Ugh!

 

[Aunt Spiker]

Further, I'll contest that 'women only pay for this tax on this product' is bull****.

Girls start periods long before they leave their house - so their parent(s) collectively pay for them. Further, a lot of women (millions) are stay at home mothers and reliant on their husband's income - thus placing the cost on him and not her.

So it impacts both men and women, cost wise. Trying to pretend as if guys never pay for fem products is quite blind.

 

[roguenuke]

As a republican, I say eliminate as many taxes as possible. Glad to see liberal women joining for that, too bad they are only calling for the repeal of a tax that they are the ones to pay.

However, it really isn't a tax on women. It's just a tax on hygiene products. Same as toilet paper, toothpaste, soap, etc. The only difference is this one is only used by women.


https://www.washingtonpost.com/loca...3b1c0c-f84c-11e5-8b23-538270a1ca31_story.html

These are an absolutely necessary hygiene product. If you go without soap or toothpaste for a day or even week, you may feel the consequences, but others are only inconvenienced with your smell (although I'm not against removing taxes on these products either) but if we go without tampons or pads during our monthly cycle, it causes some sanitation issues for everyone.

 

[roguenuke]

I don't support tax exemptions most of the time... I don't see how it's really a problem. You buy a box once a month, pay what? 7$ per month if you live in California.
Well good for Californians, one of the most expensive state to live in, but most people don't live in the most expensive states.

And there are things only guys buy, too, that are taxed - so claiming that only women have an 'extra tax to pay' is really ****ing stupid. Many men have expensive razors that they can't get a break on, and shave every day, cut their hair much more frequently than most women do.

Afterthought:
The $7.00 in Cali actually seems excessive to me, so I think those estimates are wrong. What's a box of maxi pads cost? Even out that way it can't be more than $10.00. Around here where I live it's $4.97 for a box of the brand I prefer (which isn't the cheapest stuff) - so my taxes are like less than .50 / month. I've been to California and find it hard to imagine that even though the state is pathetically expensive, that the product is so high-price that it constitutes $7.00 / month in TAXES for one person's supply.

In fact, I'll be in California in a few months and odds are I'll be there when I'm on my period. I'll find out just how much taxes are - trust me - it won't be $7.00.

How is a razor anything like a tampon or pad? If my husband doesn't shave a day or two or even a whole year, it won't cause any sanitation issues, but if we don't have a pad or tampon on during our period, we cause sanitation issues wherever we go during that time.

 

[roguenuke]

Personally, I don't feel that these products *need* to be tax-exempt, but I'm fine if they are declared tax-exempt. It's not wholly unreasonable. They are not "luxury" items, but they're not strict necessities for health any more than TP or toothpaste are. They're certainly preferable and beneficial, you better believe it, but they're not absolute necessities.

Maybe disposable diapers should be taxed and cloth diapers be exempt so as to encourage responsible environmental behavior.

Lets go without toothpaste for a month and tampons/pads for a month and see which causes more issues. (Toilet paper should be tax exempt too since that too would be a necessity, at least for our current culture until we learn to use the frickin three seashells.)

 

[American]

Perhaps if the same states that impose sales tax on feminine hygiene products and diapers... which are not luxury items, btw... also imposed the same tax on Viagra, which is exempt because it is considered a "necessity", there wouldn't be such pent-up resentment on the topic.

Just sayin'.

Viagra is exempt from taxes?

 

[roguenuke]

Can men's razors be tax exempt? Many jobs expect a clean, shaven face.

Many jobs expect you to be clothed and shod as well, so should clothes and shoes be tax exempt?

 

[Samhain]

I don't support tax exemptions most of the time... I don't see how it's really a problem. You buy a box once a month, pay what? 7$ per month if you live in California.
Well good for Californians, one of the most expensive state to live in, but most people don't live in the most expensive states.

And there are things only guys buy, too, that are taxed - so claiming that only women have an 'extra tax to pay' is really ****ing stupid. Many men have expensive razors that they can't get a break on, and shave every day, cut their hair much more frequently than most women do.

Afterthought:
The $7.00 in Cali actually seems excessive to me, so I think those estimates are wrong. What's a box of maxi pads cost? Even out that way it can't be more than $10.00. Around here where I live it's $4.97 for a box of the brand I prefer (which isn't the cheapest stuff) - so my taxes are like less than .50 / month. I've been to California and find it hard to imagine that even though the state is pathetically expensive, that the product is so high-price that it constitutes $7.00 / month in TAXES for one person's supply.

In fact, I'll be in California in a few months and odds are I'll be there when I'm on my period. I'll find out just how much taxes are - trust me - it won't be $7.00.

It's the same logic that started the "birth control costs $3,000 a year" line. It's not reality, but it helps sell your argument.

Many jobs expect you to be clothed and shod as well, so should clothes and shoes be tax exempt?

Exempt? Clearly they should be free!