Announcement

Collapse

Facebook Forum Migration

Our forums have migrated to Facebook. If you are already an iMSN forum member you will be grandfathered in.

To access the Call Room and Marriage Matters, head to: https://m.facebook.com/groups/400932...eferrer=search

You can find the health and fitness forums here: https://m.facebook.com/groups/133538...eferrer=search

Private parenting discussions are here: https://m.facebook.com/groups/382903...eferrer=search

We look forward to seeing you on Facebook!
See more
See less

Nip/Tuck Tax

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • Nip/Tuck Tax

    http://www.cnn.com/2005/US/01/27/vanity ... index.html

    Lawmakers trying to plump up the bottom line are considering a "vanity tax" on cosmetic surgery and Botox injections in Washington, Illinois and other states.

    Plastic surgeons and their patients say the idea is just plain ugly.

    "It makes no sense. Where does it stop -- massages, facials, teeth cleanings?" asked Karen Wakefield, 51, who has had a nose job, dermabrasion, liposuction, tummy tuck and breast lift -- plus a little Botox here and there.

    "Even having a baby is elective surgery," added Wakefield, an event planner in Woodinville. "Why not tax that, too?"

    The Washington state senator who proposed the tax said she has never gone under the knife for beauty, but wouldn't rule it out.

    "I, too, look in the mirror and see my mother," said Seattle Democrat Karen Keiser, 57. But she thinks cosmetic surgery patients can afford the state's 6.5 percent sales tax. She wants to earmark the money for poor children's health insurance.

    "We could do Botox-for-babies parties. It might be the new thing," Keiser said. "Anyone who can afford the money for cosmetic procedures, I don't think they would be deterred by a little sales tax. You pay it on your lipstick."

    The tax would not apply to reconstructive surgery for, say, burn victims or women who have undergone mastectomies.

    In September, New Jersey became the first and so far the only U.S. state to tax plastic surgery, at 6 percent. The tax is projected to bring in $25 million (euro19 million) a year.

    In Illinois, the state comptroller has proposed a 6 percent tax on cosmetic surgery to create a stem cell research institute. If the Legislature approves, the question could be put to the voters in 2006.

    In California, the very capital of cosmetic surgery, such procedures are tax-free.

    The cosmetic surgery tax is a cousin to the "sin taxes" many states slap on drinking, smoking and gambling during tough budget times.

    "In this anti-tax climate, these user-based, selective tax proposals are more palatable than broader ones," said Bert Waisaner, tax policy analyst for the National Conference of State Legislatures.

    The American Society of Plastic Surgeons frowns on this new wrinkle, calling New Jersey's law a "dangerous precedent."

    Seattle surgeon Dr. Phil Haeck noted that 86 percent of cosmetic surgery patients are women.

    "This is an unfair tax on women," said Haeck, editor of Plastic Surgery News. "The bulk of the people who have procedures are not financially upper-class women. They've saved hard, and this is about restoring their self-esteem."

    Wakefield, for one, wants people to know she paid for her own nips and tucks.

    "I'm not married to some rich guy," she said. "I worked my butt off for this."

    ************************************************** **********

    Thoughts?

  • #2
    Not sure on this one....you could say why not tax women for having tubal ligation, that is elective most the time, correct? Why not tax vasectomy procedures, that is also elective? Why not tax hip/knee replacement those are mostly elective...you already have a knee/hip, if you need a cane/walker/wheelchair to get around then a replacement would be elective right?(sure it could make your life much easier with a replacement but you get the point).

    The budget crunch in most states it leading to some creative thinking about how to get more from anything. Why not tax lawmakers for the amount of time that they spend coming up with crazy ideas, instead of getting things accomplished that are already on their agendas?

    Comment


    • #3
      I am definitely sure on this one. My vote is "no freakin' way!". I think the government should do what us mere mortals have to when we overspend - trim all the fat off the budget and have a surplus for paying down our debts.

      It's always easy for people to spend money that's not theirs, ie the govt.

      Comment


      • #4
        Yeah, I can't really think of a way to make this one work out fairly. I think there are people for whom plastic surgery is an unnecessary luxury and some people for whom it is not, and who's to decide who gets taxed and who doesn't? For instance, on the Discovery Health Channel they showed a story about a college-age girl who had naturally developed two radically different breasts. Each on it's own was within the normal size range but one was literally about twice the size of the other. So they were going to do an implant on the smaller one. That's cosmetic and elective and not reconstructive, but I certainly wouldn't like to see a "sin tax" put on the situation. Who's going to be in charge of drawing the line to say who has a deformity worthy of fixing, and who's just ugly and should learn to live with what God gave them?

        AND, what would be even more interesting, is it seems like this would inevitably eventually head toward a sin tax on cosmetic dentistry, which would be a whole other ball of wax, since the condition of one's teeth has (for some bizarre reason) become such an important social class marker. You don't see too many people in the professional classes with majorly screwed up teeth, and for that matter, you don't see too many people in the professional classes with majorly screwed up faces, either.

        What I'm trying to say is that cosmetic surgery isn't just about strippers having bigger boobs--some people were born screwed up and just want to look more like the norm. And since looking like the norm is pretty much going to continue to be a key component of poor people becoming un-poor . . . The tax on cosmetic surgery might have the intent of leveling the playing field by making the rich and frivolous pay extra, but I fear that really it will have the opposite effect and contribute to the "rich get richer, poor get poorer" situation, since the rich will be able to afford to fix themselves up and become normal looking but the barrier will be that much higher for the poor.
        Married to a hematopathologist seven years out of training.
        Raising three girls, 11, 9, and 2.

        “That was the thing about the world: it wasn't that things were harder than you thought they were going to be, it was that they were hard in ways that you didn't expect.”
        Lev Grossman, The Magician King

        Comment


        • #5
          I don't think it's the answer. Where do you draw the line, as others suggested. There's got to be a better way to generate the money for children's insurance, etc. Don't ask me what that is, though!
          Awake is the new sleep!

          Comment


          • #6
            Originally posted by Julie
            Yeah, I can't really think of a way to make this one work out fairly. I think there are people for whom plastic surgery is an unnecessary luxury and some people for whom it is not, and who's to decide who gets taxed and who doesn't? For instance, on the Discovery Health Channel they showed a story about a college-age girl who had naturally developed two radically different breasts. Each on it's own was within the normal size range but one was literally about twice the size of the other. So they were going to do an implant on the smaller one. That's cosmetic and elective and not reconstructive, but I certainly wouldn't like to see a "sin tax" put on the situation. Who's going to be in charge of drawing the line to say who has a deformity worthy of fixing, and who's just ugly and should learn to live with what God gave them?
            I was just getting ready to cite this same example when I scrolled up and read your post Julie!!! I'll bet theirs tons of stories like this one that fall into a "gray area".
            Awake is the new sleep!

            Comment


            • #7
              We got that channel last spring, and I was addicted to it for about six months.
              Married to a hematopathologist seven years out of training.
              Raising three girls, 11, 9, and 2.

              “That was the thing about the world: it wasn't that things were harder than you thought they were going to be, it was that they were hard in ways that you didn't expect.”
              Lev Grossman, The Magician King

              Comment


              • #8
                I'd rather work at taxing the @#&$* out of cigarettes and snuff, first. IMHO, this tax can NEVER be too high! Ok, and maybe a little more of an alcohol tax, although I do enjoy the occasional brew. I think we should lay off surgery tax, personally.

                Comment


                • #9
                  Nothing to add here because Chris (Dagny) said exactly my own thoughts on the subject....

                  Jennifer
                  Who uses a machete to cut through red tape
                  With fingernails that shine like justice
                  And a voice that is dark like tinted glass

                  Comment


                  • #10
                    Originally posted by Julie

                    What I'm trying to say is that cosmetic surgery isn't just about strippers having bigger boobs--some people were born screwed up and just want to look more like the norm. And since looking like the norm is pretty much going to continue to be a key component of poor people becoming un-poor . . . The tax on cosmetic surgery might have the intent of leveling the playing field by making the rich and frivolous pay extra, but I fear that really it will have the opposite effect and contribute to the "rich get richer, poor get poorer" situation, since the rich will be able to afford to fix themselves up and become normal looking but the barrier will be that much higher for the poor.
                    I also definitely agree with this assessment. Very interesting observations. You could probably write an entire book on the subject of "class mobility" and physical appearance (in fact, I'm sure someone somewhere has!).

                    Jennifer
                    Who uses a machete to cut through red tape
                    With fingernails that shine like justice
                    And a voice that is dark like tinted glass

                    Comment


                    • #11
                      I think that deciding to tax services and labor (rather than goods) is a huge shift in tax policy and not one to take lightly.

                      Comment

                      Working...
                      X