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

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.