Ad: BlueJ Better Tax Answers. -Accomplish hours of research in seconds -Instantly draft high-quality communications -Verify answers using a library of trusted tax content. Learn more

New Tax May Reduce Use of Tanning Beds

Miller-McCune, Extending the Sin Tax to the Tanning Bed:

A little-known provision in the United States’ divisive new health care reform package might be effective in reducing tanning bed use. The legislation imposes a 10% tax on indoor tanning to help pay for health care reform. The bill originally taxed cosmetic surgery at 5% — a so-called “Bo-tax” — but opposition from medical and dermatological circles led Congress to a tanning tax instead.


The tanning tax has faced opposition from the industry and tanning aficionados alike. Research suggests that if it resembles other so-called “sin taxes,” it just might reduce the use of tanning beds.


Taxes on environmental and social ills, from plastic bag use to obesity, do reduce consumption; one study found that taxing junk food was more effective at improving diet quality than subsidizing fruits and veggies. And there’s plenty of research to support the contention that sin taxes reduce substance use, even for addicts. …


Another paper published this year reviewed 72 studies to determine whether making it more expensive to drink might reduce the bad effects of drinking. The researchers found that as the tax or price on alcohol increased, both excessive drinking and poor health due to drinking decreased.


Whether or not the tanning tax reduces indoor tanning, it might make tanners feel better about their habit. The National Bureau of Economic Research found that smokers are actually happier when cigarette taxes are higher. James Sadowsky, professor of philosophy at Fordham University, writes, some smokers and moderate drinkers like sin taxes because they make them feel less guilty for their actions.


Still, while it appears that a tax on tanning may be just what the dermatologist ordered, it’s important to remember the irony inherent in taxing sin: If the taxes actually discourage “sinful” behavior, they stop being lucrative. In other words, if the tanning tax actually helps addicts kick the habit, it probably won’t succeed in raising the $2.7 billion it’s supposed to generate.

(Hat Tip: Allison Christians.)


About the Author

Ad: BlueJ Better Tax Answers. Blue J's generative AI tax research solution is transforming how tax experts work. Learn more.
Ad: TaxAnalysis Award of Distinction. Honoring those that have made outstanding contributions to the field of taxation.
Information and rates on advertising on TaxProf Blog

Discover more from TaxProf Blog

Subscribe now to keep reading and get access to the full archive.

Continue reading