As a 13 year old female, I’ve never been personally affected by pink tax. Although, because I live in the United States, I see many different lives that have been negatively impacted by this detrimental tax.

Imagine you are a woman in a family struggling with poverty in the modern day United States going to the store for a restock of products and items. First you search for multiple items in the women's self care section, but after getting there you notice that the prices are incredibly expensive. Because of how distraught you are, you decide to take care of these items later, and go buy your husband the items he needs first. You make your way over to the men's care aisle and begin looking at the men's razor cartridges. To your surprise it’s $13.59 for a 4-pack, but in the women's aisle a 4-pack of women's razor cartridges was $18.99. Astonished at the price difference, you look at the packaging only to find out that both of these products are made with the exact same materials, and the exact same amount of blades. The only difference was that one was geared towards men and the other was geared towards women. After seeing this you decide to purchase the mens version for yourself because of the more reasonable price. Next on your list of products you need to buy are pads and tampons. You find the aisle they are in and grab the cheapest box. After getting everything on your list you begin checking out, but when the cashier rings up all of your products you notice that you have a large tax on your menstrual products. You ask the cashier “why is there an extra tax on these products'”, but they respond with a short “I don't know”. Confused as to why they wouldn't know, you decide to ignore it for now and look back at it later. While searching it up later, you find out the products that are a necessity for you, are considered an item of personal use. Therefore the extra tax was because the products are considered bought for “personal use” or only to be “accessible to the wealthy”.

These occurrences are common for many women in the United States no matter how diverse their backgrounds may be. The only difference is that some women aren't impacted by the increased price, so they don't pay any attention to it. Although, for some other women, this increase in price is incredibly noticeable and is causing problems on top of all the other expenses they may have. If the U.S. continues to price women’s products higher than mens, women will continue to struggle with inequity and financial distress.

Pink tax is a noticeable problem in the United States that is yet to be completely eliminated. When women are forced to pay more for items that are advertised towards the female gender it has a large negative impact, not only on the female gender, but all citizens of the United States. Women hold up a large portion of society, so when they aren't being treated fairly, this problem begins to develop and affect more and more people. In the article ”What is the ‘Pink Tax’ and how does it hinder women?”, author Spencer Feingold, while discussing specific unequal priced products for women, states “In the United States [...] on average, personal care products targeted to women were 13% more expensive than similar men’s products” (1). That means that if a man were to buy a personal care product for $1.00, a woman would be forced to pay $1.13 for the exact same product, because the item is geared more towards their gender. 13 cents may not seem like much, but once the costs of items begin to add up and pile on top of each other, it causes an extra build up of expenses that men don't have. In addition, in the article “For Women’s History Month, a look at gender gains – and gaps – in the U.S.” by authors A.W. Geiger and Kim Parker, one of the factual passages states roughly “(71%) [of adults] say it is very important for a man to be able to support a family financially in order to be a good husband or partner. Just 32% say it’s very important for a woman to do the same to be a good wife or partner” (1). This means that most adults in the United States think that it is more important for a man to be working and earning income, than a woman to be working and earning income, which is incredibly misogynistic. When both of these facts are added together a sense that not only are women having to pay for expensive products, but they also are looked down upon in the job industry. The United States Congress should regulate price increases for feminine products and take women's hygiene items off of the luxury tax list because women and citizens in the United States are being impacted negatively by overpriced products, and unnecessary taxes.

Pink tax in the United States is a part of a long history of discrimination and inequality against women. Starting very early, women were viewed as inferior to men, meaning that they wouldn't be allowed to have the same jobs as men and would have to marry a man to have a chance at succeeding in life. This idea stayed strong through the 1900’s, as a recent study notes that women earned “64 cents for every man’s dollar in 1980” (Geiger, Parker 1). This means that women were paid roughly 60% of what men were paid when doing the exact same job and exact same amount of work. Although everyone has fought for a change, in addition the study notes, women still only earned “83 cents for every dollar earned by men” (Geiger, Parker 1) in 2016. This may seem much better than in the 1980’s when women were only earning about 60% of what men were earning, but women are still being paid 4 ⁄ 5 of what men are being paid. This can add up to a lot of lost money because of gender inequality. Not only this, but women are also having to pay for more expensive products with less income. Author Feingold claims “women’s deodorant was on average 8.9% more expensive than men’s [and] women’s facial moisturizer was 34.28% more expensive” (1). Basic hygiene products shouldn’t be more expensive only because the item is targeted towards females. Women have to work hard to earn enough income to have a stable money flow, and enough money to be able to afford hygienic products. But when women are able to get a job, other problems begin to occur. According to Geiger and Parker “Women are about twice as likely as men (42% vs. 22%) to say they have experienced at least one of eight specific forms of gender discrimination at work” (1). All of these facts and examples of gender discrimination against women lead to one point: women have been pictured as subservient, causing multiple different occurrences of female gender inequality. One of the occurrences that sprouted from decades of discrimination is Pink Tax.

Pink tax has an effect on all communities because of how crucial of a role women have in modern day society. Women are very important in most households, taking care of more than half of the work around the house, as well as taking care of about half of the earned income. Recent research shows “today, 31% of women who are married to or cohabiting with a male partner contribute at least half of the couple’s total earnings [...] but men earn more than women in 69% of married or cohabiting couples” (Geiger, Parker 1). This means that women are earning half of the amount of income that is within a household, but women also earn, per hour, a lot less than men. Indicating women are working harder than men as well, in order to hold up their financial status. This income that families earn then goes into things like taxes, groceries, and other necessities. One of these other necessities are hygiene products or required feminine products. When these products are priced higher, women are forced to pay for them with money earned from both themselves and their partner. As Feingold states “personal care products targeted to women were 13% more expensive than similar men’s products” (1) which is a lot for an average income family in the United States to handle. This cycle may seem like just a regular task like buying clothes or new shoes, but when the prices of these products are bought monthly or even weekly they begin to pile up, and as a result the whole household is affected. 

Unlike many countries, the United States makes feminine hygiene products taxable, when those products should be easily accessible or free. In the United States women's products having considerably high prices and considered unrequired is a large problem. Recent research shows “Several countries—including Australia, Canada, India, and Rwanda, among others—have eliminated taxes on tampons and other feminine products” (Geiger, Parker 1). Meaning this idea of pink tax has been a problem in other areas of the world, but they have found ways to develop further as a country and find ways to eliminate inequality towards women. But that is something that the United States has yet to complete. Author Sarah Larimer, in “The ‘tampon tax,’ explained”, states “women in California pay about $7 per month for 40 years of tampons and [pads]. Statewide, it adds up ‘over $20 million annually in taxes’" (1). This indicates that women are paying roughly $84 per year for items that are required. which can be a lot for an average salary to afford with other expenses. Not only that, but women’s products are on a list of items that are considered “non-essential” or only to be accessible to the wealthy. This list is called the luxury tax list and usually involves products such as jewelry or perfume, so because items that are required for women are on this list, it has a large impact. Women’s required products, such as menstrual items, should not be put on an extra tax because they are viewed as non-required, but instead they should be able to avoid the tax like groceries and some prescribed medicines and medical devices. Women, especially women in poverty, are being affected monthly or maybe even weekly by products that are physically needed. The United States needs to work hard in order to end discrimination against women, much like other countries that have overcome and defeated inequality. Afterwards, we too as a country will be able to look back at a time when women were treated unfairly only because of the gender they identified as, and see how far we will have come.

Products geared more towards females are considerably more expensive than products geared towards men. Women work hard on a  daily basis to be able to have the same rights as men, but some aspects of inequality have been overlooked for some time. That being, women's products are significantly more expensive than mens, even though the product is the exact same. This situation is a large part of the pink tax, as it is connected to the personal goods tax on menstrual products for women. The New York City Department of Consumer Affairs 2015 study called “From Cradle to Cane: The Cost of Being a Female Consumer” states women are being forced to pay more for common goods, an average of, “48 percent more for shampoo and conditioner, 15 percent more for shirts, 13 percent more for girls’ helmets and pads, 13 percent more for girls’ shirts and 15 percent more for supports and braces” (Gillespie 1). Girls and women around the United States should not have to pay larger amounts of money for similar items, only because the female gender is seen as inferior. When this happens it puts strain on the idea that everyone in the United states deserves equal rights and should revive equal rights. In addition, that same study found that “New York City retailers price women’s products an average of 7 percent more than similar men’s products” (Gillespie 1). It was already known that women's products were priced higher than mens but for all retailed items to be an average of 7% higher than mens is absurd. People in the United States pride themselves on being seen as equal and living fair lives. Although, is that the actual truth of society in America? No, that is only the surface of how modern day society may look. In reality many problems involving inequality against genders, races, or ethnicities can be seen daily or even weekly. Pink tax is one of these “under the surface” discriminatory problems.

Women are primary income earners and are paying for expensive products that are necessary.  Women's menstrual products are a necessity, as periods are “a biological function that women can't control" (Larimer 1). For these products to be taxed as personal care products, or products that are non-essential, it causes many problems. Women shouldn't have to pay large portions of money just to take care of something they can't control. Having a tax on those products is the equivalent to putting a “non-required” tax on prescribed medications. No one would purposefully make someone with an illness pay extra money, because that person is already suffering and needs extra support. So why do women receive taxes on their support products? Research shows “Californian women pay an average of about $2,381 more, for the same goods and services, than men per year. That can add up to about $188,000” (Gillespie 1) throughout a woman's life. That is 188,00 dollars women were ripped off only because of the gender they were assigned at birth. This makes it hard enough for women to have problems keeping stability in society today, but on top of how expensive feminine care products are, women also earn money as primary income earners in families. According to the Bureau of Labor Statistics (BLS) “Women earn 82 cents for every dollar that a man is paid” (Gillespie 1), and this can become “part of financial inequality that chips away women’s purchasing power” (Gillespie 1). Purchasing power is the “power” or “ability” someone has to purchase goods and services, so when women are stripped of that, it takes away from the equality in the United States just as expensive products and “unrequired” taxes do. 

This problem of pink tax should be taken seriously because not only does it affect women, but it also affects the economy all together. If we continue to ignore it and leave it for future generations, women will continue to be diminished and a divide will slowly continue to happen separating women from men and making women be seen as subordinate to men. In order to fix this, everyone needs to come together and push towards a change. If only women are pushing for a change and men are denigrating their objection against pink tax, we will go nowhere. Only when we come together and acknowledge each other's struggles, will we be able to move forward past this time when women were being treated unfairly because of their gender. In other words, the United States congress should regulate price increases for feminine products and take women's hygiene items off of the luxury tax list because women and citizens in the United States are being impacted negatively by overpriced products, and unnecessary taxes.

Work Cited

Director, Sarah Nadea Associate, et al. “The Economic, Educational, and Health-Related Costs of Being a Woman.” Center for American Progress, 11 Apr. 2022, www.americanprogress.org/article/the-economic-educational-and-health-related-costs-of-being-a-woman/. 

Feingold, Spencer. “What Is the ‘pink Tax’ and How Does It Hinder Women?” World Economic Forum, www.weforum.org/agenda/2022/07/what-is-the-pink-tax-and-how-does-it-hinder-women/. Accessed 19 May 2023. 

Gebre-Ab, Sina. “‘Pink Tax’: Women Paying More than Men for the Same Products.” CBS News, 23 Feb. 2023, www.cbsnews.com/baltimore/news/pink-tax-women-paying-more-than-men-for-the-same-products/. 

Geiger, A.W. “For Women’s History Month, a Look at Gender Gains – and Gaps – in the U.S.” Pew Research Center, 15 Mar. 2018, www.pewresearch.org/short-reads/2018/03/15/for-womens-history-month-a-look-at-gender-gains-and-gaps-in-the-u-s/. 

Gillespie, Lane. “The Pink Tax: Latest Updates and Statistics.” Bankrate, 

www.bankrate.com/personal-finance/pink-tax-how-women-pay-more/#what-is. Accessed 19 May 2023. 

Kestnbaum-Cook, Stephanie Muoka & Sabrina. “The Tampon Tax.” Project Pink Tax, 18 Apr. 2022, www.projectpinktax.org/post/the-tampon-tax. 

Larimer, Sarah. “The ‘tampon Tax,’ Explained.” The Washington Post, 25 Nov. 2021, www.washingtonpost.com/news/wonk/wp/2016/01/08/the-tampon-tax-explained/.