Why shouldn't tampons be taxed?

Scroll to see replies

Fair enough.To contribute to the thread, it's my personal opinion that tampons should not be taxed anymore than they are now.

I definitely don't think they should be taxed more but I am indecisive on whether they shouldn't be taxed at all. In a case where (as I erroneously believed) men's razors aren't taxed then tampons definitely shouldn't be. Interestingly, I had a look to see the situation in the US and only 5 states don't tax women's period products (Maryland, Minnesota, New Jersey, Massachusetts, and Pennsylvania).

I do see OP's argument about waste and obviously a lot is created so perhaps alternatives should be promoted more? I know my spouse uses a mooncup (and swears by it) but I think that's a more recent invention.

Reply 41

Dheorl

Original post by Sabertooth

I do think part of the problem is definitely lack of awareness. I know I'm probably going to get called out for being patronising, or mansplaining, or something else here, but I know plenty of women who aren't aware of any options beyond the standard tampons and pads. This country isn't great when it comes to talking about anything to do with the genitals, but hopefully that will change.

I guess being incredibly cynical here; there probably isn't as much advertising for the alternatives because, purely due to the fact they are reusable, they don't provide as much profit.

Reply 42

Yaboi

Yeh never understood this

Reply 43

username1539513

Original post by Dheorl

Now before people have a go at me about being a mysogynistic, privileged whatever else you want to call me, this is a genuine question that I'm hoping someone can sensibly answer. I'm merely curious.

So, from my understanding when people claim tampons are taxed as a "luxury", they seemingly mean they are taxed the same as 99% of products, from adult clothing to furniture and are not treated as an "essential" such as most food and children's clothing. AFAIK there is no additional tax to the standard 20%. If this is wrong could someone please provide a government page showing otherwise.

From various sites around 20 seems a reasonable, sensible, easy to work with number for number of tampons used in a cycle. Assuming women average out to a "regular" 28 day cycle, this means in a year a menstruating woman will go through 260 tampons a year. In the UK there are around 20million women of a relevant age, so that's 520million tampons per year. Assuming an average tampon weighs maybe 5 or 6 grams, thats nearly 3,000 tonnes of waste every single year.

Considering there are non-disposable alternatives, in the form of washable sanitary pads and menstrual cups, shouldn't the convenience of being able to simply throw away the product, at the expense of thousands of tonnes of needless waste, be considered a luxury that people should pay for?

I know there is the argument that women don't choose to have periods and shouldn't have to pay anything, let alone tax, but this applies to so much in life. I have a very fast metabolism, I never chose to, but even lounging around the house I probably have to eat double what most people do. Should I not have to pay for this extra food? Should someone with fair skin not have to pay for the extra suncream they need? By choosing tampons women are choosing to pay more than they have to, and contribute a huge amount more waste to the world that could be avoided, for the sake of their personal convenience. If they choose to do this then to me it's reasonable they are taxed for it.

Right, flame suit on. Try to keep it civil.

[EDIT] Having reread various things as this conversation has gone on I think I may have been mistaken about tampons including a 20% tax, instead they are subject to a rate below the standard VAT. Arguing to get rid of it when it's already lowered seems even more farfetched to me [/EDIT]

Do you have a vagina? No? Then your opinion is meaningless

Reply 44

Dheorl

Are you from a war torn country? No? Then your opinions on refugees are meaningless.
Have you been shot? No? Then your opinions on gun control are meaningless.
Do you run a business? No? Then your opinions on corporation tax are meaningless.

Sorry, but to me that just seems like stupid logic because you're too lazy to actually form a debate.

Reply 45

Yaboi

What kind of logic is that rofl.

Reply 46

username1539513

Original post by Dheorl

You can choose to go to or flee from a war torn country, or to start and set up and run a business, you can also choose to avoid situations where it's likely you would get shot; you can't choose whether or not you're born a woman.

Reply 47

scrotgrot

Original post by OvergrownMoose

Why a tampon tax is a joke:

YOU'RE GETTING TAXED FOR HAVING A UTERUS
You can’t choose to menstruate. It’s not an opt-in sort of deal. Like, oh this month I’ve lost my job, I can’t really afford tampons, can we call it off and wait until next month? It happens. If you were born a woman, like half the population are, chances are you’re having periods and there’s nothing you can do about it but bung it up.

HAVING PERIODS ISNT A LUXURY
People seem to think that tampons can be equated to having a hot bath and listening to some chilled music; many people think women are treating themselves to a wodge of synthetic material to shove up their vaginas. Utter decadence.

YOU NEED TAMPONS, YOU DONT NEED JAFFA CAKES
Jaffa cakes, marshmallow teacakes, herbal tea, incontinence products, edible cake decorations, pitta bread, helicopters, crocodile meat. These are all things taxed at zero per cent or exempt from tax altogether. As Creasy highlighted in one of her speeches: “It is when you start looking at what is described as a necessity and what is described as a luxury, that you see the inequalities in this debate.” Do people really believe that the decorations for a flipping cake are more essential than products that stop women bleeding everywhere every month?

IT PENALISES THE WORKING CLASS AND HOMELESS
Tax on sanitary products doesn’t work like income tax. Tampons aren’t cheaper for those who can’t afford them – they’re the same price for everyone. Increasing that price only means that women who are worse off are losing out the most. And sanitary products aren’t really that cheap. For a heavy period, you’re forking out a lot of your monthly budget.

I could go on, but I wont :lol:

#Moooose

One wonders why people accept having to pay for tampons at all. At least the government has an obligation to invest taxes in whichever parts of British society we decide need it. The businesses who pocket 95% of the purchase price of a packet of tampons for some reason get off scot-free.

Let's put to bed these childish insinuations that taxing tampons means the evil patriarchy is labelling them a luxury product. There are three VAT rates, standard at 20%, reduced at 5% and zero at 0%, as well as exempt goods. Tampons are at the reduced rate. The rational argument for not taxing tampons at the zero rate is that they are not the most environmentally friendly solution. A mooncup should be taxed at the zero rate. Tampons should be taxed at a rate above zero but less than 5%.

All VAT harms the poorest people because it is not income-contingent. Essential goods, not excluding period-related stuff, should, and broadly speaking is, taxed at 0%. Tampon tax is a great way to get people thinking about this but don't pretend the problem actually lies with the tedious, witless politics of gender.

The reason various "non-essential" foodstuffs are taxed at 0% is because food in general is taxed at 0%. The secondary reason why this doesn't make a lot of sense is that companies lobby for this stuff. Jaffa cakes are a decent example, what with the famous court case which established, at a cost of some millions, that they were cakes and not biscuits, thus changing their chargeability to VAT.

Of course really VAT ought to be abolished. Why on earth commercial transactions and income received for work done are taxed is beyond me. It's what keeps the economy going round, so surely the state gets paid in GDP on which it can borrow. Instead, taxes on capital gains, on rental income, and most importantly on the holding of unproductive assets should be ramped up to swingeing levels.

Reply 48

Josb

Original post by Sabertooth

You're saying tampons should be taxed because of the amount of waste they produce. Throwing out those tiny metal blades every couple of weeks also creates waste. However, they are not taxed.

Blades are taxed.

Reply 49

Dheorl

Your right, what now must be hundreds of students of varying ages in America should have chosen to not go to school. The millions of refugees are clearly completely free to choose whatever life they want, and shouldn't hesitate in abandoning whatever life they might have spent generations building *cough cough*.

My point is I bet you have an opinion of some sort on those things, whether or not they directly effect your life. So, are you going to provide any sort of constructive contribution to this thread? If not it would be appreciated if you stopped posting here.

And you can choose whether to use disposable sanitary products or the reusable alternatives.

Reply 50

Josb

Tampons should be taxed like any other product. I don't see why there should be an exemption, which would only represent something like £5-10 a year anyway. It hardly "penalises the working class".

Everybody has expenses that they cannot avoid, it's not a reason for not paying taxes on them.

Moreover, I don't like the "tampon tax" phrase; we should say "VAT on tampons". The US Republicans use the same manipulating rhetoric when they say "death tax" instead of "inheritance tax".

Reply 51

username1539513

Original post by Dheorl

Why are you going on about students and refugees for? What you're saying has literally no relevance to tampon tax whatsoever; you're just sprouting words for the sake of it

Your thread is open for anyone to comment on, my friend, that's how forums work, in case you haven't noticed :h:

I'm as entitled to express my opinion on your opinion as you are to post your opinion.

I can't choose whether or not I have a period though, can I? It's alright you saying I can choose alternatives, you don't have to deal with the reality of having and paying for hygiene products when Aunt Flo comes to visit. I mean, I don't use tampons normally anyway because of the risk of TSS but if I need to go swimming and I'm on my period they are invaluable

Reply 52

Dheorl

I mentioned other cases where you likely have an opinion merely to point out how ridiculous your statement about the right to have an opinion is.

I never said you can choose whether you have a period, merely that you can choose what you do about it. If you choose the option that has the larger impact on society, then I don't see why it isn't reasonable to be taxed for that.

And yes, the thread is open for anyone to comment, but there are also forum rules to adhere to. Not quite sure why you felt the need for the condescending tone but being an ass isn't going to help your position in the slightest.

Unbelievable

Original post by scrotgrot

One wonders why people accept having to pay for tampons at all.

When you consider the fact that we have to pay for water, paying for anything else, by comparison, suddenly seems reasonable.

Reply 55

username1539513

Original post by Dheorl

In what way to tampons have the larger impact on society anymore than say, using other sanitary products do? If you're going to start with the environmental argument then there are tons more things that we all do everyday that have more environmental impact than using a tampon, like driving cars, for instance. What about products produced by exploited third world workers?

I'm neither being condescending or an ass, I just don't see why women should get taxed for something they don't have any control over

Reply 56

Josb

Original post by Dheorl

When you consider the fact that we have to pay for water, paying for anything else, by comparison, suddenly seems reasonable.

And water is taxed. Incredible.

Reply 57

drbluebox

As a matter of interest as a very hairy man (even a bear is less hairy than me) are all hair removal products taxed? I know women have their monthlies but as a very hairy man I end up letting my hair grow as it costs too much to buy the cream (would need to use a few tubs a time and do it every week or two)

Reply 58

Dheorl

Of course there are things we do that have more environmental impact, but tbh that logic is almost as bad as you initial statement. Also, do you realise how much cars are taxed in multiple ways? Just because one things needs attention, it doesn't mean everything else should be completely ignored.

If you don't see you second paragraph in the quoted text as condescending then I feel the need to enquire what your native language is, because it surely can't be english.

And lastly you do have control over it, as repeatably mentioned, in the sense that you can control how you deal with it (well, most people with at least two brain cells to rub together can). It is a choice to use a disposable item over a reusable one, and due to the impact of that choice, a tax seems suitable.

Reply 59

scrotgrot

Original post by Dheorl

When you consider the fact that we have to pay for water, paying for anything else, by comparison, suddenly seems reasonable.

Water is a fully renewable resource and therefore has an inherent cost of nil.

The only reason we have to pay for it out of the tap is because governments and private concerns own the infrastructure used to deliver it to our homes. Ownership is a legal fiction backed ultimately by military force which entitles the owner to a perpetual stream of rents from users of the owned asset without doing any work other than maintenance of the asset.

If you don't want to pay for water you can do it the old school way and sink a well in your back garden. To the extent that this is onerous, or impossible if you don't live near a water course, you are in hock to the rentiers who own the water infrastructure.

At least if that rentier is the government we have some oversight, control, accountability and transparency over how they use the money we give them for water. Not so with a private "enterprise".

Thinking about how we have to pay for water may make you more amenable to paying for other essentials, but it only makes me more resentful about it.