Abolishing the 'tampon tax' is a politically-motivated response to special pleading

Early this month State Treasurers agreed to support the Federal Government's proposal to remove the Goods and Services Tax (GST) from women's sanitary products by January 1, 2019.

Taxing sanitary items has long been described by women's advocates as unfair (e.g. "Don't tax my period") because "other health products including condoms and Viagra are exempt". Treasurer Frydenberg recently said the agreement was "good news for women across Australia" and noted that many had been campaigning for the change for years. "Common sense has prevailed and this reform, led by the Federal Government, is long overdue" he said.

The Labor Party had pledged to abolish the GST on tampons, if it wins power. The Party had long argued that the tax should never have been applied in the first place, because sanitary products are "a necessary for reproductive health and not a luxury item". Meanwhile the Greens had also strongly protested against the tax, notably in a demonstration outside Parliament House.

Given all the fuss about removing the GST from tampons and other feminine hygiene products, I decided out of curiosity to look up how much the tax on such products had been costing women. According to the Household Expenditure Survey for 2015-16 the average couple family with dependent children had an average weekly spend of just $1.01 on feminine hygiene products. Dividing by 11 suggests a GST element of just 9.18 cents a week per family - hardly a noticeable impost or worth making an issue about. (The figures are age sensitive since women of child-bearing age are the main users. Higher income households also spend more on such products than those on low incomes.)

In respect of GST exemptions for some other products, I have some sympathy for the argument that (on principle) exempting razor blades from the GST is an anomaly. (As a bearded male I can attest to the fact that razor blades are not a necessity, and are normally used for cosmetic rather than health reasons.) The obvious solution is to get rid of this exemption on equity grounds rather than add a new one.

There are a number of other "hard cases", mostly related to what is or is not included in categories of GST exemptions (particularly "certain health goods" and " certain drugs and medicinal preparations").

One issue is that toilet paper is subject to GST despite being a hygiene product. Australian households apparently spend about $2 a week on toilet paper (about double their spend on feminine hygiene). I am surprised that women's lobbyists failed to focus on this, particularly because females are widely believed to be far greater users of toilet tissue. A gender issue missed?

Of course it is possible to survive without toilet paper. Many less affluent households in the past used newspaper, and in the bush it is not unknown for cockies to resort to a bit of pasture to do the needy!

Incontinence aids, including pads and adult nappies, are already exempt from the GST. Babies nappies, however, are subject to the GST. Now that feminine sanitary pads will be GST-free along with incontinence pads, it gets difficult to argue for not exempting babies nappies. A case of reverse ageism, and discrimination against parents of young children?

When it comes to (GST-free) condoms and incontinence pads, they're classified as health goods, while Viagra falls within the exemption category "certain drugs and medicinal preparations". The semantics involve incontinence pads being considered medical aids, while menstruation isn't regarded as an illness or a disability - resulting in tampons (to date) being taxable. The argument for nappies attracting GST is that, if a baby wets itself, that's considered normal. If an adult has continence issues, however, that's considered a medical condition.

Even though it is generally men that buy condoms, one would think that the hygiene and contraceptive impacts benefit both men and women, so that you would not expect the latter to be complaining about their non-taxation. Not so long ago female AIDS campaigners pushed the slogan "if it's not on, it's not on".

Another common claim is that tampons should be exempt on the basis that they're necessities. There is merit in this argument in respect of today's world. This was not so in the past, when cloth or reusable pads (sometimes home-made) were widely used. Even after disposable pads were commercially available, for some years they were too expensive for many women to afford. In many developing countries, reusable or makeshift pads are apparently still the norm.

There is a broader picture in all this, particularly insofar as women's interests are concerned.

The wider picture involves recognition that women benefit massively in net terms from the overall tax, welfare, and government services system, because men (being on higher incomes and having shorter lives) pay considerably more tax but receive fewer benefits. (I am not arguing against this fiscal situation but am merely stating the facts.) In respect of GST, the share of household spending caught by the GST has come down from 60 per cent to 56 per cent since 2007-8, mostly because of rising prices for exempt services. In this context, carving out more exemptions from the GST threatens its revenue base. One would therefore think that it would be in the interests of those benefitting from government transfers (e.g. women) to argue for fewer GST exemptions rather than more.

The fuss being made about the (9 cents a week) "tampon tax" seems hardly worth the trouble. It seems like a largely symbolic campaign by noisy middle-class women's lobbyists in their never-ending search for victimhood. We know that this lobby has a long-held alignment with Labor/Greens politicians, but why did the so-called "conservative" Coalition give in? Was it due to common-sense prevailing, as claimed by the Treasurer?

Fairfax journalist Jessica Irvine in June 2018 articulated her own opposition to the campaign stating that "Coalition lower house MPs are expected to hold the conservative line and vote down a Greens-initiated bill to exclude sanitary items from the GST, which passed the Senate on Monday. But you don't have to be an ageing white conservative man to think purchasers of tampons should continue to pay GST".

The more recent rhetoric from the Morrison Government is pure political opportunism. The cost to revenue of the extra GST exemption will be negligible, while the measure allows it to flaunt its "concern-for-women" credentials. The context is one where the Coalition is already embarrassed by the relative dearth of female Coalition Ministers and Members of Parliament, and it is now seeking some "brownie points" from women voters.

Finally, I ask the question, if men instead of women had periods and used tampons, would there have been all this political fuss, particularly from Labor and the Greens. My guess is "no". It is even more unlikely that (in such a situation) that men would be bothered protesting and lobbying about a matter of such little financial consequence.