Amazon.com Widgets

Do you think it's fair for the United States to impose a 10% tax on indoor UV tanning salons in the new healthcare bill?

  • I believe it is fair for the United States to impose a 10% tax on indoor UV tanning salons, because they have been shown to cause skin cancer.

    The use of tanning salons has led to a dramatic increase in skin problems, such as premature wrinkling and aging. But, it has also increased the incidents of skin cancer, especially among teenagers. Young people may think they look better being tanned, but they are at great risk for melanoma. The United States has a right to impose a tax on those who provide activities that lead to greater medical costs.

    Posted by: ShiveringGerard
  • Tanning is a luxury service, and it is not important to daily life.

    Unlike food or school supplies, indoor tanning is not a necessity for everyday life. It is a luxury service, and it is one that could pose some health drawbacks. The tax is just as fair as taxes on cigarettes and alcohol are. While there are some unfair tax proposals out there, this is not one of them.

    Posted by: MarriedRudy
  • Yes, since the government taxes cigarettes, which cause cancer, they should also tax tanning salons.

    I believe that, since the government taxes cigarettes, then they should also be able to tax tanning salons. It has been proved that there is no such thing as safe indoor tanning, and that the use of these salons causes serious damage to the skin. Therefore, the government should tax these salons due to the negative effect they have on people's health.

    Posted by: SilentIgnacio
  • As tanning salons are an unnecessary luxury, and potentially highly cancerous, it is fair to impost a 10% tax to compensate later health costs.

    Tanning salons are an unnecessary luxury, and can contribute heavily to skin cancers, such as melanoma. It is, therefore, fair to impose a 10% tax on them, in order to help cover the costs of treating skin diseases and cancer caused by frequent tanners, when they develop problems later in life.

    Posted by: EminentBennett93
  • I do believe that imposing a 10% tax on indoor UV tanning salons is fair because it's unnatural and unnecessary.

    When you use a UV tanning salon, it's just a quick solution to vanity. People are just looking for the fastest way to tan, which isn't a need- it's a want. There's nothing wrong with sitting outside and catching a few rays of natural sun! UV tanning has also been linked to cancer.

    Posted by: 5hm03Hans
  • I support a tax on indoor tanning because it would help to pay for medical costs incurred by the use of tanning beds.

    UV light and indoor tanning have been linked to increased incidences of skin cancers. The money raised from the tax on tanning beds would help to offset costs incurred in treatment of these cancers. Also, tanning is done for purely cosmetic purposes; there is no medical reason for it. People who engage in an activity with known medical risks purely to improve some aesthetic ideal should have to bear some of the burden that their choice engenders.

    Posted by: everthedev
  • Yes, if people are knowingly exposing themselves to a harmful environment.

    The risks from tanning bed and salons are huge, and people are made aware of this fact. So, if people are going to knowingly expose themselves to these dangers, then they ought to be taxed, just like smokers are taxed when they buy cigarettes. It increases the likelihood of getting skin cancer, it would be like a Sin Tax.

    Posted by: PinkMych
  • A 10% tax on indoor UV tanning salons is totally warranted when the cancer risks are factored in.

    The best way to stop people from doing something that is unhealthy for them is to raise the price of that product or service. UV indoor tanning beds are a proven cancer risk and the 10% tax on them is a small way to recoup some of the health care costs that the indoor UV tanning salons cause to their customers.

    Posted by: F Clayton
  • I agree with the addition of a 10% tax on indoor UV tanning salon usage in the new healthcare bill because these salons cause known health risks in their users.

    There are many scientific reports stating the health risk of using UV tanning beds particularly to children and teenagers. These risks include an increased risk for skin cancer, as well as other skin diseases. By using a tanning bed individuals are greatly increasing their risk of developing these diseases. Imposing the 10% tax on these services is helping to pay for the benefits these same people will need in the future due to the damage they are causing to themselves. Therefore I think it is fair to charge a tax just as we do on cigarettes and other carcinogenic products to help offset the cost of future care.

    Posted by: VampireShu
  • Since it is a known cancer risk, then by all means tax it.

    Because it is a known skin cancer risk, commercial indoor tanning should be taxed if not prohibited. It only makes sense to target the known causes of health problems, whether that is a chemical plant spewing poisons, a drug maker selling something with dangerous side effects, or a tanning salon whose products increase the incidence of a preventable cancer. Plus is is a source of tax revenue for health care.

    Posted by: Th4Fire
  • No more taxes

    The sun causes cancer, are we going to tax the sun? There are warning signs up all over most tanning salons. When I was growing up I was sunburnt many times, who's to say that I could get cancer from years ago, or from a tanning bed. I believe that tanning beds if used properly can help individuals from getting burnt. Also the government needs to worry about other things, than how much can we tax AMERICANS/

  • No Tax but education is needed.

    People should make their own decisions. We didn't have the choice in Australia they were just banned. We had to change our whole business and it cost us tens of thousands of dollars. We have now moved to spray tans only http://nakedandbeautiful.com.au/ but as an industry we should have been made to put up warnings signs and then let people decide. At the very least USA gets a tax, Australian government just took the decision from us!

  • Normal sales tax is ok

    I don't think that there should be special tax for tanning. Tanning is just a service that one uses, it is only for one individual. If someone can afford tanning then they should be able to receive it. I don't think it is fair to people who want to get tan.

  • It is un-American for the US government to impose a tax for tanning.

    The government should stop infringing on the rights of individuals and businesses. If it is known that tanning (in any form) causes skin cancer than people should be personally responsible for their actions and suffer consequences if they do not take precautions to protect themselves. The government needs to stay out of the lives of individuals and allow people to live without conforming to these ridiculous laws! Imposing a tax will not cure cancer, just give the government more money to spend on lavish trips to Las Vegas using our money.

  • I feel that Americans should not get penalized by this tax, simply for doing something that they have a right to do, even though it is not good for their health.

    I do not like indoor tanning booths, but do not think people should get penalized by higher taxes if they like to use them. It is dangerous and can cause skin cancer, but the outdoor sun can also cause skin cancer, if the person does not have sunscreen on. They can not tax Americans for going outside in the sun, which poses the same risks of getting skin cancer as an indoor UV tanning bed.

    Posted by: SneakyBryant
  • Tanning booths should not be subject to a tax.

    It is not fair for the United States to impose a 10% tax on indoor UV tanning salons as part of the new health care bill. There are many unhealthy behaviors that people take part in that cause many of the health care costs. Yes, tanning is a cause of skin cancer which leads to medical bills and death. But obesity is also a serious health risk, and there is no tax on ice cream.

    Posted by: TedieDelight
  • We get to choose how we destroy ourselves.

    I believe in flat rate taxes. Tanning salons do indeed cause skin cancer. I would never go tanning, nor suggest anyone else do it. However the government does not get a say in how I treat my body. I shouldn't be punished financially because of the choices I make. Many things are extremely hazardous to my health. They are not additionally taxed. The government cannot pick and chose what they want to tax and what they don't.

    Posted by: KKinney
  • It is not fair to impose a 10% tax on indoor UV tanning salons as it may reduce the number of their customers.

    The cosmetic methods involved are usually not related to the healthcare industry. This new tax policy will increase the bill amount of many customers and hence will decrease the frequency of their visits. If needed, 5% of tax will be acceptable. Although it is estimated that this policy will be able to collect 2.7 billion dollars within the next ten years, it will definitely decrease the tanning salon customers to a great extent.

    Posted by: ShowIand
  • It's not the salons' fault that people are ridiculous and want to suck up cancerous UV rays.

    People who get the tans should be taxed instead. All the salons are doing is exploiting people's stupidity, and good for them. They should not be punished for making money off people's obsession with tanning. Ridiculous people getting cancer from this stupid practiced should be punished instead. Maybe shipped to Australia.

    Posted by: 4uncLife

Leave a comment...
(Maximum 900 words)
No comments yet.