Pink tax
The "pink tax" refers to the higher prices often charged for products and services marketed towards women compared to similar items aimed at men. This phenomenon is not a formal tax but rather a pricing disparity observed in various consumer goods, including toiletries, clothing, and even personal services. For instance, studies have shown that items like women's razors and shampoos can be more expensive than their male counterparts, despite being nearly identical in function. The term "pink tax" is derived from the association of the color pink with femininity, leading to the notion that products tailored for women often carry a premium.
Debate surrounds the reasons for this pricing difference, with some manufacturers attributing it to variations in product formulation or design, while many view it as a form of gender discrimination. Activists have called for legislative action to combat these disparities, leading to laws in various jurisdictions aimed at preventing gender-based pricing. Moreover, discussions around the "tampon tax" highlight the additional burdens placed on individuals who menstruate due to sales tax on sanitary products. Overall, the pink tax raises significant questions about gender equality in consumer pricing and has sparked ongoing dialogue about economic fairness and consumer rights.
On this Page
Subject Terms
Pink tax
The pink tax is a term used to describe higher prices for products, goods, and services directly marketed to women or girls. It is not technically a type of tax. It is the difference in cost for items made for women versus the same products made for men. For example, some toiletries such as women's razors tend to cost more than men's razors, even though they are virtually identical—often except for the color. Studies have shown evidence of such price disparities in a wide range of products in many countries.
Researchers have debated the causes and impact of the pink tax. Some manufacturers defend their pricing and state that products made for women cost more to make. Other observers consider it a flagrant example of gender discrimination. Some activists have urged lawmakers to address the issue, and a few jurisdictions have enacted laws meant to prevent companies from charging more based on gender marketing.
Background
The pink tax received its name because products made for females frequently feature the color pink, which tends to be stereotyped as feminine in Western culture. Such products may have other stereotypically feminine characteristics, such as floral patterns or scent, and are also often smaller than men's equivalents. The notion of the pink tax has been dated back to at least the nineteenth century, when tariffs were higher for women's items than for men's items. Since women did most of the shopping at this time, companies altered the appearance—and the price—of items made for women to entice them to choose these products over other versions of the same products.
Much research about the pink tax exists. One especially influential publication on the subject was a 2015 New York City Department of Consumer Affairs study of the pricing differences in New York City that showed that women's items cost an average of 7 percent more than men's similar products. The study compared nearly eight hundred items from ninety-one brands and thirty-five categories at twenty-four retailers. The products ranged from children's toys, clothing, toiletries, and senior home products. The study concluded that products aimed at women and girls cost more than versions made for men.
For example, the study found that a pair of girl's jeans cost nearly $2 more than a pair of boy's jeans, while women's jeans are about $6 more than men's jeans. A red polo uniform shirt cost $2 more for a girl's shirt than for a boy's shirt, even though a side-by-side comparison showed no obvious differences between the two shirts. The red Radio Flyer My 1st Scooter was priced nearly $25 less than a pink version of the same scooter. Women's shampoos cost about $3 more than men's shampoo. Even canes for women were priced more than $2 higher than canes for men. These examples showed the discrepancy in the prices of similar products.
Overview
Not everyone agrees that the pink tax exists, even though several studies confirm women's items are priced higher than men's products. Some manufacturers and retailers argue that the products marketed to women differ from those for men, even if they seem similar. For example, women's shampoo, body washes, and other hygiene products smell differently than ones for men and may contain different ingredients. Some women's razors are larger and have more moisture strips designed to protect women's skin since they typically shave larger areas of their bodies. The manufacturers blame reasons such as these on why women's items cost more to make and justify the increased prices.
Some economists have argued that if companies truly did charge a pink tax, then other businesses would find a competitive edge by charging less for similar products. This would create a decrease in demand, an increase in supply, and an overall decrease in prices. In addition, some observers suggest that price is simply determined by how high people will choose to pay for products. For instance, if women choose to continue paying higher prices for items marketed to them, companies will continue to charge more. If women perceived that these products were truly the same as the male version, then they would purchase the cheaper male items instead. Another argument is availability. If women do not have access to cheaper items, they will purchase the more expensive ones regardless of whether they are aimed at women or men.
Other reports have found that women pay higher prices for other services such as dry cleaning and haircuts. However, companies can account for differences when setting prices. For example, a hair stylist can set prices based on time. A woman may pay more than a man might pay for a haircut based on factors such as hair length and complexity of cut and style.
Some consumer advocacy and feminist groups have called on consumers to take measures to avoid paying the pink tax. They ask women to buy male versions or gender-neutral products that cost less. To avoid masculine-scented products such as shampoos or lotions, women can look for unscented items. For children's items and toys, consumers can choose gender-neutral colors and clothing. However, purchasing men's or gender-neutral products might not always be an option for some items.
Feminine hygiene and sanitary products are other examples of items that have been accused of charging a pink tax but have no alternative. Many states charge sales tax on these items. However, some activists feel that this creates an unfair cost burden on people who menstruate—sometimes called a "tampon tax." They argue that tampons and other feminine hygiene products are necessities and so should not be subject to sales tax.
Some states and local municipalities have passed laws to meant to end gender-based price differences. California passed the Gender Tax Repeal Act of 1995, which barred businesses from charging women more than men for identical services such as car repairs, clothing alterations, dry cleaning, and haircuts. The legislation was eventually expanded to cover products as well. In 1998, New York City passed a law that patrons must be informed of any differences in prices that may be perceived as based on gender differences. New York state then implemented the first statewide ban on pink tax for goods or services in 2020.
Bibliography
Dotson, John. "Why Women Pay Higher Prices for the 'Same' Products." Mises Wire, 19 Feb. 2016, mises.org/library/why-women-pay-higher-prices-same-products. Accessed 30 Oct. 2017.
Feingold, Spencer. "What Is the 'Pink Tax' and How Does It Hinder Women?" World Economic Forum, 14 July 2022, www.weforum.org/agenda/2022/07/what-is-the-pink-tax-and-how-does-it-hinder-women/. Accessed 23 Aug. 2024.
Fontinelle, Amy. "What Is the Pink Tax? Impact on Women, Regulation, and Laws." Investopedia, 21 June 2024, www.investopedia.com/pink-tax-5095458. Accessed 23 Aug. 2024.
Harper, Elizabeth. "Here's How Much the 'Pink Tax' Is Costing Women on Everyday Items." Christian Science Monitor, 28 Feb. 2017, www.csmonitor.com/Business/Saving-Money/2017/0228/Here-s-how-much-the-pink-tax-is-costing-women-on-everyday-items. Accessed 30 Oct. 2017.
Lankford, Kimberly. "The Pink Tax Costs Women Thousands of Dollars Over Their Lifetimes." US News & World Report, 28 Apr. 2023, money.usnews.com/money/personal-finance/taxes/articles/the-pink-tax-costs-women-thousands-of-dollars-over-their-lifetimes. Accessed 23 Aug. 2024.
Ngabirano, Anne-Marcelle. "'Pink Tax' Forces Women to Pay More than Men." USA Today, 28 Mar. 2017, www.usatoday.com/story/money/business/2017/03/27/pink-tax-forces-women-pay-more-than-men/99462846. Accessed 30 Oct. 2017.
"The Pink Tax: How Gender-Based Pricing Hurts Women's Buying Power." Dec. 2016, United States Congress Joint Economic Committee, www.jec.senate.gov/public/‗cache/files/8a42df04-8b6d-4949-b20b-6f40a326db9e/the-pink-tax---how-gender-based-pricing-hurts-women-s-buying-power.pdf. Accessed 30 Oct. 2017.
Sebastian, Clare. "Why Women Pay More than Men for the Same Stuff." CNN Money, 7 Mar. 2016, money.cnn.com/2016/03/07/pf/pink-tax/index.html. Accessed 30 Oct. 2017.