LETTER: To Tax or Not to Tax…That is the question…
Contributed by YaVonne Bourbeau, art and design major
Let’s talk about tampons. Specifically, State Bill 129. A necessity for millions of women, tampons are currently taxed at 6.25% on the state level and another 2% at county level. State Senator Sylvia Garcia (D-Houston) plus House members Donna Howard (D-Austin), Carol Alvarado (D-Houston), Ryan Guillen (D-Rio Grande City), Eddie Rodriquez (D-Austin) and Drew Springer (R-Muenster) have all filed bills to exempt feminine hygiene products from state sales tax. The main reason stated is that they are a necessity. Feminine hygiene products would also include panty liners, menstrual cups and sanitary napkins. Most states tax them as “luxury goods” which is a polite way of saying, “not necessary”. Exempt items currently include cold remedies, acne treatments, antiperspirants, dietary supplements, wound care, insulin, nicotine patches, newspapers, and certain prescription drugs including Viagra and Rogaine. Should feminine hygiene products be taxed as non-essential items, segregating them from commonly un-taxed items such as food, prescriptions, and baby formula (items currently considered a necessity)?
So let’s look at both sides:
Keep taxes off my tampons!
- There would be savings for many women who are already hit with the high price of the items. Depending on the product, women pay anywhere from $5 to $25 for this monthly blessing.
- Shouldn’t there be equality between men’s and women’s items, such as Viagra and Rogaine (which are not taxed). Granted, women use Rogaine too but it initially was targeted to men. Now, I’m not stupid. I understand the importance of Viagra and Rogaine. I can’t imagine losing my hair, but should these be considered non-luxury items when in essence you’re making a personal/cosmetic choice to use these products. There’s not much choice in a monthly menstrual cycle that has to be kept sanitary by any means necessary. Picture if you would, a society where feminine products do not exist. Yeah, not a pretty sight.
- Texas is not the first state to consider this situation. New Jersey, Minnesota, Pennsylvania, Massachusetts, New York and Maryland currently do not tax feminine hygiene products.
Tax those tampons!
- Per the State Comptroller, the Texas general fund could stand to lose 19 million in 2018 and 20 million in 2019. That’s a lot of money that could be used for important services.
- Why not tax everything equally? Considering even cowboy boots and belts are not taxed in Texas, wouldn’t it make sense to just tax all items equally and get rid of the confusion on what is necessary vs luxury goods?
- The yearly savings per person would only be around $30. Is that much of a dent in a person’s wallet compared to $20 million for the State’s general fund?
So what should be done? Personally, I hope the bill gets approved because I like saving money anyway possible. But to be honest, I’d be ok even if it went the other way. The only difference there would be my emailing our legislators to get with the times and look at the in-equality of taxation on a majority of products out there. In 2012 alone, 56 million men and women in the United States experienced hair loss and 60% of those surveyed said they would rather have more hair than more money and friends (www.cassiopea.com/company/market). Me thinks that is an un-tapped market of great monetary possibilities…
Also published on Medium.
