Reason.com - Free Minds and Free Markets
Reason logo Reason logo
  • Latest
  • Magazine
    • Current Issue
    • Archives
    • Subscribe
    • Crossword
  • Video
  • Podcasts
    • All Shows
    • The Reason Roundtable
    • The Reason Interview With Nick Gillespie
    • The Soho Forum Debates
    • Just Asking Questions
    • The Best of Reason Magazine
    • Why We Can't Have Nice Things
  • Volokh
  • Newsletters
  • Donate
    • Donate Online
    • Donate Crypto
    • Ways To Give To Reason Foundation
    • Torchbearer Society
    • Planned Giving
  • Subscribe
    • Reason Plus Subscription
    • Print Subscription
    • Gift Subscriptions
    • Subscriber Support

Login Form

Create new account
Forgot password

Taxes

Tax-Free Tampons Are a Matter of 'Social Justice,' Say California Lawmakers

On Tuesday, the California tax board endorsed a measure to make menstrual products exempt from sales tax.

Elizabeth Nolan Brown | 1.27.2016 1:45 PM

Share on FacebookShare on XShare on RedditShare by emailPrint friendly versionCopy page URL
Media Contact & Reprint Requests
aniquenyc/Flickr

Why should women have to pay a tax on tampons and menstrual pads, which are surely more necessity than luxury? Perhaps because we all pay sales taxes on all sorts of goods—food, toilet paper, shoes—that are an integral part of modern life. But according to certain California lawmakers and the state's tax board, the sales tax on menstrual products is sexist and must be abolished. 

On Tuesday, the California Board of Equalization—the agency in charge of administering California's sales, use, fuel, and vice taxes—endorsed Assembly Bill 1561, which would make menstrual products exempt from sales tax. The measure is co-sponsored by California Assemblymembers Cristina Garcia (D-Bell Gardens) and Ling Ling Chang (R-Diamond) as a way to "bring more gender equity to California's tax code," according to a press release from Garcia's office. 

"Effectively we are being taxed for being born as women," she said. "AB 1561 is about social justice [and] an opportunity to end an outdated tax that uniquely targets women for a function of their body, a function we don't control and can't ignore every month of our adult life."

Currently, five U.S. states—Minnesota, Pennsylvania, New Jersey, Massachusetts, and Maryland— exempt menstrual products from sales tax. 

There tend to be two libertarian camps on sales taxes, which can be described reductively as either 1) screw sales tax, because screw all taxes, or 2) sales taxes are a good alternative to income taxes for raising government funds. But I think we can all agree that if sales taxes exist, they should be straightforward and applied equally across broad categories. Randomly selecting certain products for exemption based on the idea that they're more or less essential to daily life than others is just a recipe for complication and special-interest-mongering. (Just look at the arcane patchwork of rules concerning food taxes in California, which leave bureaucrats perpetually arguing over things like whether a frozen sandwich microwaved at a gas station counts as a hot or cold food for tax purposes.) 

Garcia and Chang argue that for extremely poor women, buying tampons or pads each month is a severe financial burden which we need to mitigate. But is it more of a burden than buying, say, contact lens? Toothpaste? Toilet paper? At least there are reusable options for menstrual products; you can't reuse toilet paper or toothpaste. 

Of course, exempting menstrual products from sales tax is only a stepping stone as far as Garcia is concerned. Her end goal is to "make these essential products free or covered by insurance for women," she said. 

Start your day with Reason. Get a daily brief of the most important stories and trends every weekday morning when you subscribe to Reason Roundup.

This field is for validation purposes and should be left unchanged.

NEXT: Theft-by-Government Continues Through Eminent Domain

Elizabeth Nolan Brown is a senior editor at Reason.

TaxesCaliforniaSexism
Share on FacebookShare on XShare on RedditShare by emailPrint friendly versionCopy page URL
Media Contact & Reprint Requests

Show Comments (169)

Latest

Should the
Civilization Video Games Be Fun—or Real?

Jason Russell | From the June 2025 issue

Government Argues It's Too Much To Ask the FBI To Check the Address Before Blowing Up a Home

Billy Binion | 5.9.2025 5:01 PM

The U.K. Trade Deal Screws American Consumers

Eric Boehm | 5.9.2025 4:05 PM

A New Survey Suggests Illicit Opioid Use Is Much More Common Than the Government's Numbers Indicate

Jacob Sullum | 5.9.2025 3:50 PM

Judge Orders Tufts Grad Student Rumeysa Ozturk Be Released on Bail From Immigration Detention

C.J. Ciaramella | 5.9.2025 3:17 PM

Recommended

  • About
  • Browse Topics
  • Events
  • Staff
  • Jobs
  • Donate
  • Advertise
  • Subscribe
  • Contact
  • Media
  • Shop
  • Amazon
Reason Facebook@reason on XReason InstagramReason TikTokReason YoutubeApple PodcastsReason on FlipboardReason RSS

© 2024 Reason Foundation | Accessibility | Privacy Policy | Terms Of Use

This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.

r

Do you care about free minds and free markets? Sign up to get the biggest stories from Reason in your inbox every afternoon.

This field is for validation purposes and should be left unchanged.

This modal will close in 10

Reason Plus

Special Offer!

  • Full digital edition access
  • No ads
  • Commenting privileges

Just $25 per year

Join Today!