Virginia’s sales tax covers almost everything you buy, from athletic socks to zippers. But it doesn’t apply to medicine, contact lenses and certain other personal health items. Now, the General Assembly is considering adding feminine hygiene products to the list of exemptions.
Del. Mark Keam (Fairfax County) introduced House Bill 952, which seeks to remove the sales tax on tampons and sanitary napkins in Virginia. Currently these items are taxed at the standard rate, like most other items: 6 percent in Northern Virginia and Hampton Roads, and 5.3 percent in the rest of the state.
“I think that most people, Republican and Democrats, would agree that this is an unfair tax,” Keam said Wednesday in an interview in his office at Capital Square. “It’s not equitable for women to have to pay a tax on something that guys don’t have to spend money on.”
Virginia is one of 40 states that tax tampons and sanitary napkins. Of the 10 states that don’t tax these products, five deliberately changed their laws specifically to end the policy. The other five do not have a sales tax at all.
“I believe this is such an essential product for women that in the code of Virginia, we have a discriminatory impact on one gender and not on the other,” Keam said. “From a policy perspective, I don’t think it makes sense for us to treat women differently from men in terms of what they have to buy as an essential product.”
The tax on tampons by many states has generated controversy and discussion on the Internet recently. President Obama weighed in on the issue in an interview with YouTube personality Ingrid Nilsen for the news organization AJ+.
Obama said he has no idea why states would tax feminine hygiene products. “I suspect it’s because men were making the laws when those taxes were passed.”
Keam’s bill would add feminine hygiene products to the list of miscellaneous sales tax exemptions in Virginia. The list currently includes such things as firewood, eyeglasses and hearing aids.
“My goal is to make this a parity issue, and not turn it into a partisan fight over who supports women more,” Keam said. “I want to make this about making our tax law equitable for everyone.”
You are welcome in advance for not including illustrations. Maybe I will go back and at least show a box. You know, the old attention grabber….
Seriously, I was totally surprised to read news story coming out of the General Assembly. I can’t imagine who wants to risk voting against this bill. It’s very common sense. On the other hand, I didn’t realize firewood, glasses and hearing aids were exempt. I think that incontinence products should also be included in the list. I guess that all depends on one’s perspective though.
Ahem, if you get your feminine products tax free, we men should get our alcohol tax free during that time of the month you purchase said products. The alcohol purchased during that period has medicinal value as it eases the pain of dealing with crazy women.
And the map award goes to,,,,,,,MOM!!!
just another carve out coming…..
tax everything except for food. Why carve out any items beyond food. This is part of the problem – we have taxes on the books and all kinds of loop holes so that the taxes are not actually paid.
What about diapers? I think most parents would consider them an absolute necessity, yet they are taxed. It’s a War on Children!
But seriously, I would carve out prescription medication as well as food. That’s all. Everything else should be subject to a VAT.
Then there are the Depends….war on old people!
Do they tax ear trumpets for geezers?
@Wolve, see if you can get them to attach a rider to the bill.
I can’t imagine how this got to be a “War on Women” issue. Exempting something from taxation because one group uses it and others don’t strikes me as inequitable as taxing it in the first place. When one looks at the list of exemptions, it seems to be larded with special interest favors. Tax everything uniformly, and devote attention and energy to ensuring that the funds are used efficiently in pursuit of necessary projects that have broad public support. VAT (per Emma, #4) looks better and better to me all the time.
This is so ridiculous it could be an article from The Onion. Mark Keam is not a serious person and his bill should be laughed at. If he were serious he would shine some light on legitimate cost differences between products for women v. men.
Here, Ill help the guy out… https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/wonk/wp/2015/12/22/women-really-do-pay-more-for-razors-and-almost-everything-else/
Women pay more at the cleaners.
@Moon-howler
well, I can kinda understand the cleaners. Their garments usually have different types of fabrics, buttons, zippers, ect.. Men’s clothes are usually pretty simple and uniform. Button up shirts (usually all the same fabric) and slacks.
What I don’t understand are some of the things highlighted in the article like razors for example. Why would a woman’s razor be more expensive than a man’s when they are basically the same?
I don’t know. I can understand more elaborate clothing of course. I just meant plain old shirts. I think it depends on which side the shirts open on. More men take their shirts to the cleaners.