Cecily Zamora
The tanning tax, a 10% excise tax on indoor tanning services, came into effect in 2010 as part of the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act, also known as Obamacare. The tax was intended to help pay for the new healthcare law, but it has faced significant criticism and backlash from the tanning industry and consumers. Some critics argue that the tax discriminates against women and young people, who are more likely to use indoor tanning services, and that it has negatively impacted businesses and jobs in the industry. Despite attempts to repeal the tax, it remains in effect as of 2025, with variations in implementation and enforcement across different states and local laws.
| Characteristics | Values |
|---|---|
| Date of implementation | 1 July 2010 |
| Tax rate | 10% excise tax |
| Taxpayers | Consumers of indoor tanning services |
| Tax collection | Tanning service providers |
| Tax exemptions | Spray tanning services, topical creams and lotions, services provided by a qualified physical fitness facility, services performed by a licensed medical professional on their premises |
| Impact | Decline in the tanning industry, including a reduction in the number of tanning salons and jobs |
| Criticism | Ineffective in achieving goals, government overreach, discrimination against women and young people, regressive tax |
| Repeal attempts | Tanning Tax Repeal Act of 2015, Restoring Americans' Healthcare Freedom Reconciliation Act of 2015 |
Explore related products
What You'll Learn
The tanning tax was implemented in 2010
The origins of the tax are steeped in legend, with some believing it was a dig at House Minority Leader John Boehner, known for his bronzed visage. Others believe it was in retaliation for a proposed tax on Botox injections, rumoured to be a favourite of then-Speaker Nancy Pelosi.
The tanning tax has been controversial, with critics arguing that it is an example of government overreach and micromanagement, as it imposes a tax on a legal and popular activity that does not pose a direct threat to public health or safety. Lawmakers who opposed the tax also argued that it discriminated against women and young people, who were more likely to use indoor tanning services. The tax has had a negative impact on the indoor tanning industry, leading to a decline in business, revenue, and jobs, as well as an increase in prices, taxes, and regulations. According to the American Suntanning Association, nearly 10,000 tanning salons have closed since the tax was implemented, resulting in the loss of 81,000 jobs.
Despite these criticisms and impacts on the industry, attempts to repeal the tax in 2015 and 2018 failed. The United States Department of Health and Human Services and the World Health Organization's International Agency for Research on Cancer have declared ultraviolet radiation from the sun and artificial sources, such as tanning beds, to be a known carcinogen. This may have played a role in the failed repeal attempts.
Robotics Laws: Protecting Humans from Machines
You may want to see also
Explore related products
It is a 10% excise tax
The tanning tax is a 10% excise tax on indoor tanning services. It came into effect on July 1, 2010, as part of the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act, also known as Obamacare. This tax is included in the price of the service and must be paid by the consumer at the time of the service. It is important to note that the tax is not applicable if tanning services are provided as part of a gym membership at a "qualified physical fitness facility", or if the tanning is performed by a licensed medical professional on their premises. Spray tanning services and the purchase of topical creams and lotions are also excluded from the tax.
The main objective of the tanning tax was to help finance the new healthcare law. However, it has faced significant criticism and backlash. Many in the tanning industry have argued that the tax has negatively impacted their businesses, leading to a decline in revenue and jobs. According to the American Suntanning Association, almost 10,000 tanning salons have closed since the tax was implemented, resulting in the loss of approximately 81,000 jobs.
Opponents of the tax have also characterized it as government overreach, claiming that it imposes a financial burden on individuals and businesses for engaging in a legal activity that does not pose a direct threat to public health or safety. They argue that the tax unfairly targets women and young people, who are the primary users of indoor tanning services. Additionally, some critics have labeled the tax as regressive, asserting that it disproportionately affects lower-income individuals and families.
In response to the criticisms and the perceived negative impact of the tanning tax, there have been attempts to repeal it. In 2015, Congressman George Holding introduced H.R. 2698, "The Tanning Tax Repeal Act of 2015," which aimed to eliminate the excise tax. However, the bill did not become law, and the tanning tax remains in effect as of 2025, with variations in its implementation and enforcement depending on state and local laws.
Understanding Liens: Contract Law Basics
You may want to see also
Explore related products
$32.45
It was part of the Affordable Care Act (Obamacare)
The tanning tax was implemented as part of the Affordable Care Act (ACA), also known as Obamacare. It came into effect in 2010, specifically on July 1, and imposed a 10% excise tax on customers of tanning beds and other ultraviolet tanning services. This tax was in addition to any state sales taxes and income taxes paid by the tanning bed business owner.
The origins of the tanning tax in the ACA are a source of political speculation. One theory suggests that it stemmed from a proposed general tax on cosmetics, while another claims it was a retaliatory measure for a suggested tax on Botox injections. Regardless of its origins, the tax was intended to help finance the new healthcare law.
The tanning tax has been a controversial topic, with critics arguing that it is an example of government overreach and discrimination against women and young people, who are the primary users of indoor tanning services. The tax has also been blamed for the decline of the tanning industry, with thousands of tanning salons closing and job losses in the tens of thousands.
Despite these criticisms and the introduction of bills such as the Tanning Tax Repeal Act of 2015, the tanning tax has remained intact, surviving legal and political challenges. The ACA itself was partially repealed in 2017, but the tanning tax was not removed.
Understanding Lawful Authority: Defining Legitimate Power
You may want to see also
Explore related products
The tax has been criticised for being ineffective
The tanning tax, a 10% federal excise tax on indoor tanning services, came into effect in 2010 as part of the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act (also known as Obamacare). The tax was expected to raise $2.7 billion over the first decade, but after five years, it had raised less than $500 million.
In addition, some critics argue that the tax is an example of government overreach and micromanagement, as it imposes a tax on a legal and popular activity that does not pose a direct threat to public health or safety. They compare it to other "sin taxes" on cigarettes, alcohol, and sugary drinks, which have also been criticised for being paternalistic and punitive.
The impact of the tax on the tanning industry has been significant. According to the American Suntanning Association, almost 10,000 tanning salons have gone out of business since the tax was implemented, resulting in the loss of 81,000 jobs. However, experts argue that the tanning industry is overstating the effects of the tax and that other factors, such as public health warnings against tanning, have also contributed to the decline.
In response to the criticisms and the impact on the tanning industry, Congressman George Holding of North Carolina introduced a bill in 2015 called "The Tanning Tax Repeal Act of 2015", which aimed to repeal the ten percent excise tax. However, the tax remains in effect, although its implementation and enforcement may vary depending on state and local laws.
Understanding Obligations and Contracts in Law
You may want to see also
Explore related products
Attempts to repeal the tax have failed
The tanning tax, a 10% excise tax on indoor tanning services, was introduced in 2010 as part of the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act (ACA), commonly known as Obamacare. The tax was intended to help pay for the new healthcare law.
Despite the tanning industry's consistent argument that the tax has devastated their businesses, attempts to repeal it have failed multiple times. Similar efforts failed in both 2015 and 2018. The 2015 attempt saw Congressman George Holding of North Carolina introduce a bill, H.R. 2698, "The Tanning Tax Repeal Act of 2015", which would have repealed the tax. However, this bill did not become law.
The 2018 attempt faced powerful opposition from health organizations, including the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services and the World Health Organization’s International Agency for Research on Cancer. These organizations cited research suggesting that indoor tanning may cause upwards of 400,000 cases of skin cancer in the U.S. annually.
In 2025, House Republicans pushed for legislation that would repeal the tax as part of a larger tax and spending package called "One Big, Beautiful Bill". This bill also included the elimination of taxes on overtime, loan interest for American-made cars, and Social Security, as well as significant changes to social programs such as Medicaid and the Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program (SNAP). Despite its inclusion in this bill, the repeal attempt failed to receive much attention and ultimately did not survive the final vote.
Walter's Secret: Will the Brother-in-Law Discover the Truth?
You may want to see also
Frequently asked questions
The tanning tax law started on July 1, 2010.
The tanning tax is a 10% excise tax on tanning bed customers, on top of any state sales taxes and income taxes paid by the tanning bed business owner.
No, the tanning tax has been deemed a failure. It has not raised the revenue it was intended to collect and has resulted in thousands of lost jobs and empty storefronts across America.
