Tanning Tax Seems More Likely Than Botax

Filed Under: Etc. Business Blitz

Months ago, the government proposed putting a 5% tax on cosmetic surgery procedures, aptly dubbed Botax.

Of course, doctors resisted heavily, and finally The American Medical Associate has convinced the Senate to reconsider, opting instead for a 10% tax on tanning.

Now, the AMA has come out and announced its open support for the new Senate bill. David M. Pariser, president of the American Academy of Dermatology Association, said:

"We suggested that the tanning tax would be a better alternative to the cosmetic tax and hopefully will reduce the incidence of skin cancer down the road."

We agree that a tanning tax makes much more sense than a cosmetic tax - for one thing, tanning is terrible for you as some studies show it's even worse than smoking cigarettes. Beyond the health issue, both men and women tan, whereas women use cosmetic procedures far more than men. That's a pretty uneven taxation!

That said, a fiscal problem remains: the Botax was projected to generate approximately $5.8 billion over ten years, while the tanning tax will struggle to make $2.7 billion over the same time period.

Dan Hurniston, president of the Indoor Tanning Association (yes, there is one) said, "It's almost laughable," to think the tanning tax could generate nearly that sum.

What do you think? Which superficial procedure should take the tax?

[Image via AP Images.]

Posted: January 3, 2010 at 10:00 am