Right: ... not just in Australia; this group of protesters outside Parliament House in London are demanding the removal or reduction of the tax on tampons.
 Found a word you're not familiar with? Double-click that word to bring up a dictionary reference to it. The dictionary page includes an audio sound file with which to actually hear the word said. |
Arguments against removing the GST from sanitary products
1. Menstruation is not a medical condition
It has been claimed that menstruation is not a medical condition in the same way as various conditions and diseases for which preventative products are GST-exempted.
Items such as condoms and nicotine patches are GST-free because they prevent medical conditions that would be a greater drain on our economy and health system, such as sexually transmitted diseases, unplanned pregnancies and cancer of the lungs.
A senior writer for The Sydney Morning Herald, Jessica Irvine, has stated, 'As for it being unfair that the GST applies to tampons, but not to condoms, this is also a furphy. People seem to think condoms are for men and tampons are for women. But condoms are to the benefit of both sexes, preventing, as they do, the very real medical condition of pregnancy. Periods are not an illness, but unfortunately, a matter of life.'
Former health minister, Michael Wooldridge, shared a similar statement in a 2000 interview when he told a reporter, "Well, condoms prevent illness. I wasn't aware that menstruation was an illness." Though tampons are needed for hygienic purposes, they do not prevent illnesses in the same way as items such as condoms and sunscreen do.
Recent research reported on by the ABC states that Australia is falling behind in preventing the spread of HIV. 'The number of newly diagnosed cases of HIV infection in Australia continues to rise, having increased by 10 per cent in 2012'. According to the Better Health Channel, condoms are 'the most effective way to reduce your risk of contracting a sexually transmissible infection'. This suggests that keeping the cost of condoms down through tax exemptions and therefore removing one possible barrier to their use is an important step towards improving the health of the nation.
Sunscreen is also sometimes condemned as an item no more worthy of tax exemption than tampons. However, sunscreen is another important item for the health of the nation. According to the Cancer Council of Australia, 'Melanoma (skin cancer) is the sixth most common cause of cancer death in Australian men and tenth most common in Australian women,' with 1544 Australians dying of melanoma in 2011 alone. Sunscreen is widely recognised as being a first line of defence against sunburn and melanoma; however, it is often overlooked. Therefore, making the product more available by keeping it tax free and less expensive helps prevent deaths and protects the health of the nation as a whole. The same argument does not apply to removing the GST from tampons.
2. The GST is an efficient tax whose base should be expanded not reduced
Goods and services taxes (often referred to as GSTs) are favoured by governments because they are efficient. From the point of government, this means they are relatively easy to collect and difficult to avoid. According to the 2010 Henry Tax Review, 'the introduction of the GST made Australia's consumption tax base more efficient because it replaced a range of narrowly based Commonwealth and State taxes'.
The GST in Australia covers less than 60 percent of goods, prompting many people to question the wisdom of granting more exemptions rather than increasing the number of goods to which the GST applies. Currently, Australia's GST applies to only 47 percent of all spending, whereas across the advanced world, the average is 55 per cent. New Zealand has almost no exemptions and collects GST on 96 per cent of consumption.
Cameron Cooper, journalist for In The Black, acknowledges the GST as 'one of Australia's most effective taxes', but suggests that it needs to be tweaked to 'reflect modern Australia and shore up revenue for state governments' due to changing economic circumstances and social behaviour.
When the GST was introduced in Australia 15 years ago, 56 per cent of consumption was taxed. That figure has fallen by nearly 10 percent because Australian consumers now spend more of their incomes on products such as education, which are GST-exempted.
Cassie McGannon, public policy specialist at the Grattan Institute, agrees that reforms are needed and suggests that, rather than exempting items from the GST, the tax should be expanded to include more items, such as 'fresh food and private spending on health, education, child care and water'. These reforms, according to Cassie McGannon, are necessary in order to avoid the nation facing a decade of deficits of 'up to 4 per cent of gross domestic product, or A$60 billion a year in today's terms, by 2023'.
Sydney Morning Herald senior writer, Jessica Irvine, also supports increasing the number of goods and services that are taxed under the GST. Irvine states, 'Rather than more tax cuts, we should, as a community, be facing some harder questions about what other things we could apply the GST to.'
3. Removing items from the GST schedule creates anomalies and leads to demands that even more items be made exempt
It has been argued that removing items from the GST would lead to further demands for exemptions and create further inequalities in the way the tax is applied.
In 2000, when the issue of removing the GST from tampons was put to former Prime Minister John Howard, he replied, 'I mean, of course if you look at tampons in isolation - just as you look at something else in isolation - you can mount an argument to take the tax off it. I could mount an argument to take the tax off children's clothes. I could mount an argument to take the tax off old people's clothes; I could mount an argument for a whole lot of things. But we've had that argument and if you start doing that, you will have no GST in the end, and the whole system will begin to unravel.'
Similarly, hours after federal Treasurer Joe Hockey agreed to look into removing the GST on feminine hygiene products, Prime Minister Tony Abbott came forward to say his government was not planning to make changes to the GST. 'I understand that there has long been a push to take the GST off goods which are one way or another regarded as health products. It's certainly not something that this government has plans to do,' Mr Abbott told reporters.
On June 1, 2015, Phillip Hunter, a commentator for The Australian, referred to some of the other items that various pressure groups had demanded be GST-free. These included 'funerals, caravan parks, electricity and gas bills, textbooks and nappies'. Supporters of the GST see such demands as proof of John Howard's prediction that granting exemptions only leads to more exemptions.
A 2015 Treasury discussion paper claims that creating further exemptions within the GST would make the tax more complex and difficult for consumers to understand. It would also create further instances of perceived unfairness.
The Treasury report cited the example of pizza rolls. Generally, food is GST-free unless it is on the schedule. However, a pizza is subject to GST, as is a pizza pocket and a pizza sub. On the other hand, a pizza roll is generally GST-free, unless it can have additional filling added, has thicker topping or can be cut. Critics claim it is exemptions which create these complications and apparent inconsistencies.
4. Gender inequality is not seriously addressed by removing the GST from tampons
It has been claimed that the problem of gender inequality in Australian society cannot be solved simply by removing the GST from tampons and other hygiene products and that this issue is in fact a distraction from the larger issues of gender-based inequity.
The Sydney Morning Herald's senior writer, Jessica Irvine, claims that the money saved by women if GST was removed from tampons and pads is 'but a drop in the ocean compared to the billions women have just missed out on by [the government's decision not to lift] parental leave towards the international best practice.'
Furthermore, Jessica Irvine claims that, 'Removing the GST from tampons doesn't do nearly enough to help women overcome the structural inequalities they face'. According to this argument, continuing inequalities in the workplace are of far greater significance to women than removing a tax on tampons as these workplace inequalities have a far greater impact on people's lives.
The Guardian's Eleanor Robertson agrees with Jessica Irvine's argument. 'The "tampon tax" debate is a furphy. There are better ways to help women.' Robertson goes on to argue, 'The idea that menstrual GST is just straight-up sexist seems pretty clear, but it's not really' and explains that if the issue is really about the idea that woman should not be charged for a biological function, then they should be lobbying for tampons and pads to be totally free rather than simply wanting a tax removed. Irvine has asked, 'Why is GST, a public revenue collection measure, conceived of as unnecessary, but the profits of the tampon industry are necessary?'
Further to this, it has been suggested by a range of commentators that there are some life-threatening issues related to gender inequality that require more urgent government attention. Key among these is taking action against domestic violence.
Critics have noted that the federal government has failed to fund services supporting women who are the victims of domestic violence. On February 2, 2015, Rosemary Batty, one of the founding members of a new national advisory panel on domestic violence, criticised reductions in the number of support workers to assist abused women. 'It is a double standard; it is contradictory and totally undervaluing the part that these workers play in our front line services.'
5. The tampon tax has a minimal impact on household budgets
Those who believe the GST should be retained on tampons and other sanitary products argue that removing it would save families and individual women very little.
It has been estimated that the total GST paid on feminine hygiene products in the average Australian household is around $10 to $15 dollars a year and therefore has little impact. The New Daily writer, Jason Murphy, states, 'A 16-pack of brand-name tampons costs $4 at Coles. Let's estimate a woman spends $10 a month. GST on that adds up to $12 a year. The number of people who can't afford tampons because of GST is therefore negligible.'
Uthinki.com also agrees that the cost of the GST on tampons is not a burden on a household. After comparing the cost of tampons and pads from both Coles and Woolworths, Uthinki.com comes to the conclusion that, 'the average amount of GST paid per year on tampons is somewhere around $22. This does not seem that excessive as far as money and taxes are concerned in Australia.' Uthink.com also points out that the 'GST also applies to other sanitary products which many would also consider essential. This includes GST being applicable on both soap and toilet paper.'