Op Ed: The tampon tax is ready to be eliminated in Georgia
This op-ed was co-authored by Georgia STOMP board member Rachel Perlis and UGA Law student Larken Cardin.
Rachel G. Perlis is a UGA Law alumna and Atlanta attorney whose practice has included litigation, state law and policy, and most recently estate planning. She serves as a Board Member and Legislative Chair for Georgia STOMP, a group advocating to expand menstrual equity and eliminate period poverty in Georgia.
Larkin Carden is a third-year law student at the University of Georgia School of Law. She graduated summa cum laude with a Bachelor of Arts Degree from Auburn University. After law school, Larkin will join King & Spalding’s Trial and Global Disputes Team in Atlanta, Georgia. Larkin is currently conducting research and analysis on the history and current treatment of the Tampon Tax in Georgia.
As the halfway point of the legislative session, Crossover Day, fast approaches, we urge legislators to prioritize legislation that would vitally impact the lives of Georgia women.
HB 123 and SB 51 are mirror bills with bi-partisan support that propose changes to O.C.G.A § 48-8-3, a portion of the Georgia code that governs sales tax exemptions.
These bills seek tax exempt status for necessary medical devices required by every Georgia woman to do basic things like go to work, go to school, and fully participate in society. That’s right, we’re talking about menstrual products, or “Menstrual Discharge Collection Devices” (MDCD’s).
Under current Georgia law, every box of tampons is subject to a 4% state sales tax. This adds about $0.32 to a $7.97 box of Tampons.
Opponents of these bills claim this extra expense is cheap, and exempting MDCDs from the state sales tax will not impact women’s wallets. Frankly, that’s not true.
The average woman spends about $20.00 on MDCDs per cycle, adding up to about $18,000 over the course of her lifetime. Because MDCDs are subject to the state sales tax, Georgia women end up paying closer to $19,000. That means the state collects almost $1,000 in revenue per woman over the course of her lifetime, solely because she has a period.
Subjecting menstrual products to sales tax is at a minimum unfair, and at a maximum discriminatory. There is no other medically necessary product purchased solely by one class of people that remains subject to the tax.
In this state, when a product rises to such a necessary level it generally warrants an exemption. Groceries fall into this category, as do prescription medications, but menstrual products continue to be taxed and Georgia women continue to suffer.
While other limited measures are in place to address lack of access to these products, such measures fail to recognize the reoccurring financial burden this tax has on Georgia women and the discriminatory nature of the tax.
Opponents claim that issuing an exemption on menstrual products will significantly impact the state’s tax revenue and overall budget. There is no denying that the revenue generated from the state sales tax is important. Sales tax constitutes the second largest single source of revenue for the state behind the state personal income tax. However, in 2023, the Georgia Department of Audits and Accounts reviewed the impact SB 51 would have on state revenue. Considering that in 2024, Georgia plans to spend $32.4 billion in money raised through taxes and fees, this report found that for fiscal year 2024, if menstrual products are exempted from the sales tax, projected revenue loss is $6.1 million from this $32 billion total. It’s hard to believe that this 0.01% loss is going to break the state budget.
Opponents tenuously argue that the issuance of this exemption will cause a snowball effect of other “special interest” exemptions, and the state’s tax revenue will diminish drastically. Let’s be clear: repealing the tax on menstrual products does not set a precedent for other tax exemptions or carve-outs. This category is singular: menstrual products are medical products that have improperly remained taxable in a state which claims to value exempting necessities.
Furthermore, concern for diminished tax revenue has not prevented the same opponents from pushing legislation that would significantly decrease overall state tax revenue, such as HB 283 (partial sales tax exemption on sale of manufactured homes), and HB 1015 and HB 1019 (respectively propose state income tax cuts and double the homestead tax exemption) which have all already crossed over from the House to the Senate. For further comparison, SB 344 (five-day tax holiday on guns, ammunition, and firearm accessories), has crossed over to the House, and would necessarily cause loss of tax revenue currently generated from these sales.
Legislators have no aversion to issuing exemptions or tax breaks. The issue is whether our legislators consider this particular exemption a priority. The fact that menstrual products remain subject to the state sales tax shows women that the 0.01% in revenue that this tax generates for the state is more important than eliminating this unfair financial burden on women.
Currently 29 states, including Florida, Louisiana, Texas, and Virginia, do not tax menstrual products. As recently as last week, an Alabama Senate Committee approved a bill that would remove its 4% sales tax from menstrual products. These states recognize this tax as unfair, and their legislative action shows women that their physical and financial health are a priority. Georgia shows no signs of doing the same.
HB 123 and SB 51 are stuck in their respective House and Senate Committees, with no indication that they will receive the requisite two hearings and a vote needed to cross over. If these bills do not move out of their respective chambers before Crossover Day, they will be dead and women will have to wait until 2025 to take this issue up again.
Leadership in both chambers should know that there are a great number of Georgians who are not happy about their lack of action to eliminate this discriminatory tax! Head here to e-mail Leadership and your state legislators to tell them you want this legislation pushed forward.
Click here to view the full article in the Georgia Recorder.