In mid-January, YouTube star Ingrid Nilsen broached the subject of tampons with President Obama.
The ordinance, introduced by aldermen Ed Burke and Leslie Hairston, would exempt feminine hygiene products from taxes in Chicago, reclassifying them as “medical appliances.” The aldermen also proposed lowering the tax to 1 percent throughout Illinois, the tax rate currently imposed on drugs, food, and medical appliances.
But some critics contend that the widespread ire against the “tampon tax” is misplaced. Catherine Rampell, an opinion writer for the Washington Post, argues that even the term “tampon tax” is misleading, since tampons are not specifically targeted for taxes (as alcohol might be) but instead included in a general sales tax, applied to most goods. She goes on to describe how dozens of special-interest groups have attempted to legally define their products as “necessary” in order to exempt them from sales taxes; in California, products ranging from commemorative lapel pins to racehorse breeding stock are tax exempt. Rampell maintains that this only raises the tax rates on other goods, increasing the incentive for special-interest groups to lobby on behalf of a product-specific tax exemption.
