Gwyneth Paltrow's Gemstone-Encrusted Alpaca Wool Diaper Is…a Tax Protest?
"If treating diapers like a luxury makes you mad, so should taxing them like a luxury," said Paltrow.

An infuriating ad for luxury disposable diapers is actually a campaign against diaper taxes.
The ad/anti-tax protest comes from goop, a lifestyle brand—founded and run by actress Gwyneth Paltrow—known for its often ridiculous (and pricey) wellness products and woo-woo sensibility.
Goop's "The Diapér" was advertised as a "disposable diaper lined with virgin alpaca wool and fastened with amber gemstones, known for their ancient emotional-cleansing properties." The Diapér is "infused with a scent of jasmine and bergamot for a revitalized baby," goop posted yesterday on Instagram. "Dropping tomorrow at 11a.m. EST at $120 for a pack of 12."
Many weren't sure what was going on. Surely, not even the rich and famous could justify such a ridiculously decadent, wasteful, and pricey product to catch baby poop? Then again, this is goop, which sells things like Yoni eggs—meant to be inserted in the vagina to "harness the power of energy work, crystal healing, and a Kegel-like physical practice."
It wasn't long before Vice unveiled the truth: The Diapér is not a real product (thank goodness). Rather, it's meant to raise awareness about sales taxes on diapers.
In more than half of U.S. states, diapers are considered a nonessential item for sales tax purposes. This means they're subject to sales taxes that items considered necessities are not.
According to the National Diaper Bank Network, 35 states charge sales tax on diapers. "This tax can range from 1.5% in Virginia to 7% in Indiana, Mississippi, and Tennessee" and "in many states, cities and counties can add additional tax," it says.
Goop's ad for wool-and-gemstone disposable diapers was created to highlight the absurdity of considering diapers a nonessential product—in essence, a luxury. It's part of an awareness campaign goop is undertaking with the nonprofit Baby2Baby.
The ad garnered "a lot of outrage," said Paltrow in a video posted to Instagram by goop today. "Good. It was designed to piss us off. Because if treating diapers like a luxury makes you mad, so should taxing them like a luxury."
"Despite the absolute necessity of diapers, in 33 states they aren't treated like an essential item. They're taxed like a luxury good," Paltrow continued, noting that a lot of U.S. families struggle to afford diapers. "While eliminating the diaper tax is not a complete solution, it could allow many families to pay for another month's supply."
Goop's fake Diapérs were priced at $120 "because that is what the diaper tax could cost families annually," goop posted alongside the Paltrow video.
Vice scoffed at the whole thing, calling it a "poorly-timed PR stunt" that fails on the grounds that "any absurd Goop product could very well be real" and that it comes "in the wake of the news that Roe v. Wade will likely be overturned" and as the U.S. is experiencing a baby formula shortage.
But just because some issues related to parenting may be more newsworthy or pressing doesn't mean it's a bad time to raise awareness about this issue. There will always be more pressing or momentous issues—which is why it takes a celebrity and a flashy stunt to draw attention to an issue like this. And the fact that goop seemed willing to satirize its own hippie-luxury aesthetic to do so is actually to the company's credit.
Taxing diapers may not be a major issue. But the extra taxes do add up, especially for families that need a lot of diapers. And besides, anything that lets Americans pay a little less in taxes to the government is a good thing.
Editor's Note: As of February 29, 2024, commenting privileges on reason.com posts are limited to Reason Plus subscribers. Past commenters are grandfathered in for a temporary period. Subscribe here to preserve your ability to comment. Your Reason Plus subscription also gives you an ad-free version of reason.com, along with full access to the digital edition and archives of Reason magazine. We request that comments be civil and on-topic. We do not moderate or assume any responsibility for comments, which are owned by the readers who post them. Comments do not represent the views of reason.com or Reason Foundation. We reserve the right to delete any comment and ban commenters for any reason at any time. Comments may only be edited within 5 minutes of posting. Report abuses.
Please
to post comments
They sound super comfortable. Are these for babies or for adults that identify as babies?
"taxed like a luxury good" is code for "taxed like normal things"?
That's what struck me, as if the only choices are essential and luxury.
Damn the propaganda is getting bad. Where is the actual journalism in this article? Or any of the linked articles? All too damned woke.
Those were Paltrow's words... in an article that argues she's a kook, and that a tax is wrong.
The linked Vice article is the result of investigative journalism. Two of the other links are to Goop/Paltrow statements. The last one links to a non-profit (funded primarily by Huggies and Kotex) that helps take pressure off the welfare system.
That's too woke for you?
A lot of the tone of this article comes from the article itself, not the quotes. For instance
There's a bit of outrage there. It's not as much as the Paltrow quotes, but it's there.
Then read the last two paragraphs, agreeing that diapers should not be taxed.
Now tell me again how much it scoff's at Paltrow's ginned-up outrage.
So Huggies and Kotex fund a non-profit that advocates for "free" products handed out to welfare people from the government that just happens to buy from Huggies and Kotex? This is my stunned face
We can always trust ENB to tell us what absurd nonsense is passing for discourse in the Blue-check Twitterati Bubble (BTB).
Thanks ENB...I guess.
She's like an unironic libs of tik tok.
What this actually demonstrates is that we need is a thousand-percent excise tax on products from celebrity lifestyle brands.
I guess nobody heard of cloth diapers?
Tax free.
Additionally, those woke people want to reduce waste and disposable diapers have plastic so they won't leak through. Are we arguing both sides?
Yeah, that's what I was thinking. Disposable diapers are not essential, you can use cloth.
The funny thing is cloth diapers are way worse for the environment than disposables. The only way they are better is if you remove manufacturing, and cleaning cloth diapers from the equation
I would think it depends on where you live. Using water to clean diapers in Las Vegas? Probably not so great. Using water to clean diapers in the Great Lakes region? Less of a problem.
Gwyneth is as dull as a butter knife but she knows how to sell overpriced crap to bored, rich white liberal women.
That she was actually able to market a candle that smells like her vag to these status-chasers is pretty fucking impressive.
That any of her customers pretend they know how to verify it, and that Paltrow wants them all to think they all can verify it, says something else entirely.
If she had kept her mouth shut she could have made another million or two
a little impressed Gwynneth found a sense of humor and used it.
I suspect she rented it.
Just this once.
I think their facts are a little misleading. I can't speak for all states but they mention TN. There is an exemption here for very few "essential" items. Food, for example, is subject to sales tax, albeit at a slightly lower rate. And I think all states with sales tax will tax many things that most people consider "essential".
Toilet paper is taxed.
Clothing, including underpants, is taxed.
With the intersection of these items, I see no reasons why diapers should not be taxed as well
Because it's not fair to people who have children they can't afford. People must be protected from the foreseeable consequences of the choices they make in life.
Same with Indiana, there are two levels of sales tax: Groceries (0%) and everything else (7%)
Besides if essential items shouldn't be taxed then why are none of these celebrities decrying the property tax I pay on the roof over my head? Or is housing not a human right when the tax man comes around?
How about we just tax stupid?
Sure, and paper plates, dixie cups, plastic spoons...sheez
Without disputing that taxes generally are too broad and too high, Paltrow's argument is just silly.
Food is "essential". A warm jacket in winter is "essential". Air is "essential". A disposable diaper is no more "essential" than paper plates or disposable batteries. Parents and children survived for literally millennia before the invention of disposable diapers. Is cleaning dirty diapers icky? Yes - and it's a luxury that we don't have to anymore.
Go ahead and tell your wife tampons and feminine napkins are not essential. I dare you
Agreeing with Wally, seriously this is a disgusting libertarian comment, even for the reason dot com comment section it stands out for it's viciousness, heartlessness & misogyny. Rossami you're a fucking loser
even for the reason dot com comment section it stands out for it's viciousness, heartlessness & misogyny.
Uh, thanks! (I guess.) 🙂
Men wash diapers, you ignorant asshat, but at least you got in the accusation of misogyny while hyperventilating.
I don't really like carve-outs in general for taxes. Having a relatively simple, broad-based set of taxes is for the best.
but then what would They do to protect their phoney-baloney jobs?
I'm sorry, my head is still swimming after I just learned what 'packing underwear' is which is sold to children in major department stores. This stunt by Paltrow just makes me kind of not care.
They say it's to combat dysphoria, which is interesting because that is conceding it's a mental illness but I digress. Is it really so bad that people are forced to sometimes reconcile with the fact that the world how it is differs from how they imagine they want it to be?
Also, I can't help but wonder how far kids are being pushed into this. How people are seeking for meaning in any random thing a kid says and then pressing that upon them as evidence of transgenderism.
Like, do they get some girls and ask them if they've ever wondered what it's like to have a penis and then press them that this means they're transgender? I feel like with motivated reasoning and pressing people you can make someone feel weird about anything.
If "gender and sex" are completely separate concepts, I don't know what it is we're "affirming" when we cut parts off, sew parts on, inject chemicals, bind genitals, put bulges in etc.
Huh. I'm not sure I wanted to know that that is a thing.
Fucking clown world.
Every time I begin to wonder if maybe this might just be the fever dream of a Fox News host, and maybe it might not be as bad as we say it is, I find out it's not only as bad as we say, it's much, much worse.
Better anyway than James Cromwell supergluing his hand to a Starbucks counter in protest that they're charging more for vegan milk (which costs about 75% more than regular milk retail and wholesale) than for regular milk in coffee.
https://www.washingtonpost.com/food/2022/05/10/james-cromwell-starbucks-glue-protest/
This is going to lead to them having an upcharge for all milk, I just know it.
Which, maybe is fine. I do like a la carte ordering. Though I also doubt it would actually lead to me black coffee being cheaper.
A man comes into a restaurant. He sits down at the table and he says, ‘Waiter, bring me a cup of coffee without cream.’ Five minutes later, the waiter comes back and says, ‘I’m sorry, sir, we have no cream. Can it be without milk?'
You just know the whole place smelled like a nail salon from all the Acetone they had to use to remove this superglued moron (who prolly sniffed his own glue as well!) And the scent prolly penetrated into the coffee! Ugh!
This is why I have an old-fashioned percolator, a big can of ground roast coffee, instant for when I'm in a hurry, and flavored creamers.
Fuck Off, Virtue-Signallers! I'm not awake yet!
You mean probably? What the hell is prolly?
Something I picked up from the Meme-osphere.
I think they should have put a transparent plastic partition around him and kept him as an exhibit for a few days.
anything that lets Americans pay a little less in taxes to the government is a good thing.
Anyone who believes cutting off a trickle of tax revenue is going to hold back an ocean of government taxation probably should not be writing for a libertarian publication. Taxes are quite fungible.
Yeah, especially because sales taxes are pretty general and so this is a carve-out, and also because they really need to look at cutting spending before fucking with taxes. Though, this is almost certainly a state level tax and so it's up to her state, which is presumably California. They're monetary situation is fine for now.
They are fungible by the fungi who impose them and collect them. Maybe prescribing the drinking of bleach for them would be a possibility.
The ad did what it was intended to do--Raised awareness of a hitherto obscure issue: I had no idea that diapers were considered luxury items in some states.
Quite clever.
If Gwyneth isn't renouncing her selling of Woo crap and isn't plugging The Free State Project for moving to New Hampshire (0% Sales Tax,) then I have no use for whatever she's plugging.
Stick with being Pepper Potts for Tony Stark/Iron Man!
"then I have no use for whatever she's plugging."
If you are a man or boy, have sexual intercourse with kegel-exercised women.
"
Yeah, this is literally the b.s. you believe: the more special treatment there is for special interest groups, the better.
And you call that kind of corruption and vote buying "libertarianism". Disgusting.
Wonder how many diapers they could have bought instead of making this ad.
^
Repeal universal suffrage.