In July 2018, Burger King’s several outlets in Miami, New York and other cities in the US sold a different variety of regular chicken fries to female customers. The only difference was that it was sold in pink packaging and was labelled ‘Chick Fries’. These ‘Chick Fries’ were priced at $3.09 whereas the regular box was priced at $1.69. In order to create awareness among consumers regarding the pink tax a video surfaced on the official account of Twitter highlighting the difference between prices arising due to gender, on the other hand, gender doesn’t have any role to play with food items.
The Legal Service India Journal notes that the term “Pink Tax” describes the invisible price that women must pay for goods that are created and advertised only for them. The Wikipedia defines it as the tendency for products marketed specifically toward women to be more expensive than those marketed for men.
This phenomenon is often attributed to gender-based price discrimination, with the name stemming from the observation that many of the affected products are pink, the difference between the price paid by female and male customers for essentially the same goods and services. The pink tax is present in a variety of industries, from children’s toys and services to clothes and personal care goods. for the same/similar thing, women are charged more than males.
Gender-based pricing that disadvantages women extend beyond the pink tax. Women have historically paid higher health insurance premiums in part because of the expected costs related to pregnancy. The Affordable Care Act specifically eliminated the disparity in health insurance premiums between women and men.
The term ‘pink tax’ is often attributed to price-based discrimination, with the name stemming from the prejudice that many of the affected products for women are pink. It is basically the extra amount women are charged on products explicitly marketed toward them by making them more expensive than those for men. In other words, we can also consider it as an influence over women being paid lesser remuneration. In economic terms, “pink tax” refers to firm pricing strategies or government policies that raise transactional costs (usually higher taxes or higher prices) for women. The firms use the selling tactic called price discrimination to maximize their profit.
According to the International Labour Organisation (ILO), women work more and are paid less. The gender divide is already prevalent in workplaces with a limited number of women participating in leadership roles across sectors. The international organisation mentioned that the gender gap exists in all the countries worldwide, and globally it has narrowed only by a bit in the past decade.
As per the Global Gender Gap Report 2022, there is a 19% pay gap between women’s and men’s salaries in India for the same amount of work or responsibility, especially in the agricultural sector where women undertake 80% of the work.This disproportionate distribution of income highlights inequality as an indicator of how women’s work is undermined and unresolved.
A few years ago, the New York State department of consumer affairs did a study of over eight hundred products and found that the products used specially by a woman cost 7% more than the one made for men or are general neutral. This price difference rose to 13% when it came to items of personal care for women care. Although, there has not been much research about the pink tax in India but the survey shows the price differences of the products for women and men.
Everyday products marketed to women often come with a higher price tag when compared to nearly identical versions marketed to men. Some of the most widely cited examples include higher prices for pink razors and pastel-coloured pens. Even toys marketed to girls are also priced higher.
Presently, women are heavily exploited by vegan products and non-animal-tested cosmetics that are significantly more expensive, a form of taxation.
It is quite clear that no one has ever taken the matter of the pink tax seriously enough, as in the era where women are given special facilities to ease down their lives by introducing maternity benefits, insurance, and tax benefits by the end of the government, at the same time, corporates didn’t get a chance to modify their pricing strategy.
The Price for Being a Female in India
In 2018, the Government of India slashed the 12 per cent GST on menstrual sanitary products but what we have to remember is that this harsh and severe tax on necessary products because it only adds to the monetary burden of the pink tax, which is uncalled for.
According to a survey, up to 67% of Indian citizens have never even heard of the pink tax. The fight against the 12–14% GST imposed on taboo feminine hygiene items like sanitary napkins and other products for women’s use in India initially brought this gendered pricing to the general public’s attention.Contraceptives, which are still exempt from taxes and are regarded as essential goods, were subject to a “tampon tax” because they were viewed as luxuries rather than necessities. Social media was flooded with demonstrations as a result.
The Central Government subsequently repealed this “tampon tax” in 2018 after receiving more than 4,00,000 signatures on online petitions against it from activists, celebrities, politicians, and performers. The pink tax is still largely hidden in the marketplace and is accepted as an unquestioning social norm, even though the “tampon tax” movement in India helped raise some awareness about it.
Concern about “period poverty” has fuelled campaigns globally calling for the end of the so-called tampon tax, which refers to consumption levies such as value-added tax (VAT) that most countries charge on items such as sanitary pads, tampons, panty liners and menstrual cups.
The gender-neutral way ahead
Businesses should strive for transparency in pricing and adopt fair practices by avoiding gender-based price discrimination. They can play a vital role in challenging gender norms and revaluating their marketing strategies to promote inclusivity.
Policymakers have a significant role to play in combating the pink tax and can implement regulations that promote gender-neutral pricing and prohibit discriminatory practices. By enacting laws that ensure equal pricing for comparable products and services, policymakers can create a more level playing field for women consumers. Imposing high costs for products targeted to women deepens the gender divide and reinforces a particular idea and standard of beauty. Being away with the existing such beauty standards can harm people’s mental health, making them more vulnerable to incurring social anxiety etc. Moreover, the association of colours with genders even deepens the divide. The notion of associating pink to girls and blue to boys not only limits the choices of the two genders and conforms them to social beliefs, but it also outcasts other genders.
Support our journalism by subscribing to Taxscanpremium. Follow us on Telegram for quick updates
