PDA

View Full Version : Economics Democrats "tan tax" sinking tanning salon industry


Taco John
07-07-2010, 12:32 PM
They're getting their wish. The whole intention here was to sink the industry while trying to raise a little cash on its way down.


Tanning salons feel burned by 10 percent 'tan tax'

By N.C. Aizenman
Washington Post Staff Writer
Wednesday, July 7, 2010; 5:19 AM

The sun hasn't exactly set on Solar Planet, but anxiety over the fate of the Arlington tanning salon has been running high ever since a "tan tax" took effect Thursday.

One of the less publicized measures in the new health-care law, the tax imposes a 10 percent surcharge on the use of ultraviolet indoor tanning beds.

Supporters -- including the Obama administration, congressional Democrats and dermatologists -- have argued that the tax will raise an estimated $2.7 billion toward the cost of expanding health coverage to the uninsured, while discouraging a practice that increases the risk of skin cancer by as much as threefold in frequent users, according to scientific research.

But outraged tanning salon owners worry that the levy could deal a death blow to an industry already reeling from the recession.

"In 26 years of business this is the worst I've seen it," said Scott Shortnacy, owner of the Arlington Solar Planet as well as six other branches in the Washington area. "Normally for people who tan, it's a part of their lifestyle. They keep doing it even in a recession. But everybody has been looking for ways to cut back on those areas. ... Our sales are down 20 to 30 percent."

According to the Indoor Tanning Association, an industry trade group, most of the nation's 19,000 tanning salons are small businesses owned and staffed by women. Shortnacy said all but two of his several dozen employees are women. With business so slow, he opted against hiring the 10 to 15 seasonal workers he normally adds during the spring high season.

Even the Arlington salon, Shortnacy's most successful location because of its proximity to sun-deprived Pentagon workers and Northern Virginia mall shoppers, is suffering. Appointments have dropped from 300 per day to about 160.

How much further the tan tax will drive down those numbers is hard for Shortnacy to predict, however. And the early signs during a recent afternoon at the salon were mixed.

Like many customers, Lisa Haggett, 48, who recently retired from the Air Force and tans several times a week, said she made a point of buying her next package of sessions before July 1 so she could avoid the tax. After she's used up the package, she said, she may need to cut back. Unlimited monthly passes at the salon run about $50, noted Haggett, whose visits have toasted her to a medium shade of brown.

"This is something that makes me feel good," Haggett said. "The reality is it's a luxury. It's not a need."

Dane Ellington, 49, a health-care consultant whose deep bronze color spoke to a lifetime of indoor tanning, expressed annoyance at being singled out. Why not tax people who sunbathe outdoors? Or binge on cheeseburgers? Or, for that matter, who use Botox injections -- which were originally slated to be taxed under the law until a last-minute frenzy of lobbying prompted lawmakers to substitute the tan tax.

"I understand that the money [for the health-care overhaul] needs to come from somewhere," Ellington said. "But this doesn't seem like the appropriate place. It's just silly."

Still, plenty of other customers said they had no quarrels with the tax -- particularly those who supported the health-care law in general.

"I know I shouldn't be tanning, but I do it because it makes me feel better," said Karie Apicella, 34, a patent examiner whose fair skin had acquired a honey-hued glow. "So I guess I understand the idea behind the tax, and I'm willing to pay it."

"It's almost like when your parents tell you that you shouldn't drink and you sort of know it's true, but you do it anyway," said a laughing 29-year-old Marine officer who declined to give her name because she felt sheepish about divulging her tanning habits to those under her command.

"Some people pay $6 for a latte because it's their way of relaxing or treating themselves," added the officer. "Well, this is my latte, and I'm not going to stop ordering it."


http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2010/07/07/AR2010070701076.html

'Hamas' Jenkins
07-07-2010, 12:34 PM
Correlation = Causation

petegz28
07-07-2010, 12:34 PM
And the tax isn't even just on UV tanning. MY wife gets that spray tan shit done because she was diagnosed with skin cancer and she had to pay the tax on that.

So much for not raising taxes on people making under $250k, again.

bkkcoh
07-07-2010, 12:35 PM
Unintended consequences!

Will they wonder why that industry is going to have issues?

petegz28
07-07-2010, 12:48 PM
Obama the job creator...

small businesses are struggling, so lets raise their taxes!!!!!

'Hamas' Jenkins
07-07-2010, 12:48 PM
I'm also verklempt that tanning salons aren't able to hire the 10 to 15 extra employees that they normally don't pay and just give free tanning to.

orange
07-07-2010, 12:50 PM
All those points you highlighted - they were all BEFORE the tax went into effect (just last Thursday). So how did the tax cause them again?

'Hamas' Jenkins
07-07-2010, 12:52 PM
The best part:

You fuckers are so stupid that you didn't even read the article and realize that the tax didn't take effect until 6 days ago.

These drops in attendance weren't caused by the tax.

But like I said, correlation=causation...for retards.

"How much further the tan tax will drive down those numbers is hard for Shortnacy to predict, however. And the early signs during a recent afternoon at the salon were mixed. "

Key word in there: "further".

dirk digler
07-07-2010, 01:24 PM
To bad Taco John wasn't in Bhopal right Hamas?

petegz28
07-07-2010, 01:25 PM
The best part:

You ****ers are so stupid that you didn't even read the article and realize that the tax didn't take effect until 6 days ago.

These drops in attendance weren't caused by the tax.

But like I said, correlation=causation...for retards.

"How much further the tan tax will drive down those numbers is hard for Shortnacy to predict, however. And the early signs during a recent afternoon at the salon were mixed. "

Key word in there: "further".

JFC, the OP says the recession is hurting their business, not the tax. It is saying the tax is going to make it worse.

Donger
07-07-2010, 01:26 PM
All those points you highlighted - they were all BEFORE the tax went into effect (just last Thursday). So how did the tax cause them again?

You don't know that, do you?

Nevermind, just found the pertinent sentence.

petegz28
07-07-2010, 01:27 PM
The best part:

You ****ers are so stupid that you didn't even read the article and realize that the tax didn't take effect until 6 days ago.

These drops in attendance weren't caused by the tax.

But like I said, correlation=causation...for retards.

"How much further the tan tax will drive down those numbers is hard for Shortnacy to predict, however. And the early signs during a recent afternoon at the salon were mixed. "

Key word in there: "further".



But outraged tanning salon owners worry that the levy could deal a death blow to an industry already reeling from the recession.

"In 26 years of business this is the worst I've seen it," said Scott Shortnacy, owner of the Arlington Solar Planet as well as six other branches in the Washington area. "Normally for people who tan, it's a part of their lifestyle. They keep doing it even in a recession. But everybody has been looking for ways to cut back on those areas. ... Our sales are down 20 to 30 percent."

I read it just fine. You're the one making stupid assumptions that people didn't read it.

dirk digler
07-07-2010, 01:28 PM
JFC, the OP says the recession is hurting their business, not the tax. It is saying the tax is going to make it worse.

"tan tax" sinking tanning salon industry

petegz28
07-07-2010, 01:30 PM
"tan tax" sinking tanning salon industry

I'll agree the thread title is slightly vague on the situation.

mlyonsd
07-07-2010, 01:30 PM
The whole idea of this tax is absurd and is just another in a long line of examples of why our new HC system is flawed and F'd up from Day 1.

dirk digler
07-07-2010, 01:35 PM
I'll agree the thread title is slightly vague on the situation.

Slightly?

BTW why did your wife have to pay an extra tax it says it is only for the tanning beds?

And is she alright and cancer free? I am worried I probably will end up with skin cancer. I have sun spots all over my shoulders.

Taco John
07-07-2010, 01:37 PM
Correlation = Causation

ROFL

Weaksauce = You

Brock
07-07-2010, 01:40 PM
It's the same problem as taxing cigarettes. If it's to raise money AND discourage use, it's at cross-purposes with itself.

petegz28
07-07-2010, 01:44 PM
Slightly?

BTW why did your wife have to pay an extra tax it says it is only for the tanning beds?

And is she alright and cancer free? I am worried I probably will end up with skin cancer. I have sun spots all over my shoulders.

Cancer free? Yes for the time being. Had to pay the tax? Yes.

Brock
07-07-2010, 01:45 PM
Cancer free? Yes for the time being. Had to pay the tax? Yes.

It isn't supposed to apply to spray tans.

dirk digler
07-07-2010, 01:47 PM
Cancer free? Yes for the time being. H

That is good to hear.

mlyonsd
07-07-2010, 01:48 PM
It's the same problem as taxing cigarettes. If it's to raise money AND discourage use, it's at cross-purposes with itself.

Revenue based on diminishing returns. Revenue that is used for many more things than just lung cancer victims.

Stupid way of doing business. But as we all know, stupidity runs rampant in congress.

chiefsnorth
07-07-2010, 01:52 PM
Sounds like a business that needs to "take out loans to expand their payroll"

dirk digler
07-07-2010, 01:52 PM
Revenue based on diminishing returns. Revenue that is used for many more things than just lung cancer victims.

Stupid way of doing business. But as we all know, stupidity runs rampant in congress.

They also are trying to entice people not to use things that are considered bad for them.

Though in the case of smoking I actually wonder how many smokers stopped because it was costing them more money. All the smokers I know they would probably chop off their arm to pay for cigarettes.

orange
07-07-2010, 01:54 PM
It's the same problem as taxing cigarettes. If it's to raise money AND discourage use, it's at cross-purposes with itself.

Don't worry. If everybody quits smoking/tanning, they'll find another way to get the money.

mlyonsd
07-07-2010, 01:54 PM
They also are trying to entice people not to use things that are considered bad for them.

Though in the case of smoking I actually wonder how many smokers stopped because it was costing them more money.

Yes I know, social engineering. Awesome.

Cheeseburgers aren't good for you either so why not tax them?

F'd up I tell'ya.

Donger
07-07-2010, 01:55 PM
And soon, all restaurants will be Taco Bell.

petegz28
07-07-2010, 02:03 PM
It isn't supposed to apply to spray tans.

I know that. But it is.

dirk digler
07-07-2010, 02:08 PM
Yes I know, social engineering. Awesome.

Cheeseburgers aren't good for you either so why not tax them?

F'd up I tell'ya.

Don't give them any ideas.

Brock
07-07-2010, 02:10 PM
Don't worry. If everybody quits smoking/tanning, they'll find another way to get the money.

I prefer they figure out how not to spend it.

'Hamas' Jenkins
07-07-2010, 02:15 PM
And soon, all restaurants will be Taco Bell.

If they can clone Dan Cortes to play "Jolly Green Giant" on the piano at every one, sign me up.

ClevelandBronco
07-07-2010, 02:25 PM
I was wondering when they were going to figure out a way to tax only white people.

Chocolate Hog
07-07-2010, 02:35 PM
I'm ok with this tax.

ClevelandBronco
07-07-2010, 02:40 PM
I'm ok with this tax.

Oh, thank God.

RJ
07-07-2010, 02:42 PM
I was wondering when they were going to figure out a way to tax only white people.


:LOL:

Chocolate Hog
07-07-2010, 02:50 PM
Oh, thank God.

You suck at trolling.

dirk digler
07-07-2010, 02:52 PM
I was wondering when they were going to figure out a way to tax only white people.

They should figure out howjust to tax Bronco fans they are all idiots anyway so it is not like they would figure it out. :)

Chiefspants
07-07-2010, 02:56 PM
I fully expect John Boehner to launch a tanning salon bailout in the next seven days.

ClevelandBronco
07-07-2010, 02:56 PM
You suck at trolling.

Perhaps, but I'm mildly amusing on occasion, so they allow me to stay on as a pet around here as long as I remember whose legs I'm allowed to piss on.

Sorry about your socks, sport.

ClevelandBronco
07-07-2010, 02:57 PM
They should figure out howjust to tax Bronco fans they are all idiots anyway so it is not like they would figure it out. :)

Why do you think spray-on tan turns people orange?

WoodDraw
07-07-2010, 03:03 PM
Wait, how much does it cost for a tanning session?

ClevelandBronco
07-07-2010, 03:11 PM
Wait, how much does it cost for a tanning session?

I did a search and I'm trying to sort through it all here. What's a "happy ending?"

Saul Good
07-07-2010, 04:20 PM
I did a search and I'm trying to sort through it all here. What's a "happy ending?"

Don't try changing the subject to Al Gore.

RJ
07-07-2010, 04:37 PM
Even the Arlington salon, Shortnacy's most successful location because of its proximity to sun-deprived Pentagon workers and Northern Virginia mall shoppers, is suffering.


I always assumed most tanning salon customers were strippers. Shows how much I know.

HonestChieffan
07-07-2010, 04:47 PM
And soon, all restaurants will be Taco Bell.

The good news is that the staff at the TB's will likely have a degree.

banyon
07-07-2010, 05:26 PM
I'll agree the thread title is slightly vague on the situation.

Vague? How about misleading? Or at a minimum a misreading of the article?

|Zach|
07-07-2010, 05:29 PM
My best friend's wife owns two Salons in Blue Springs...they just invested in some new crazy machine that for some reason is really good. I didn't really want to hear the details because I have never been tanning but they are doing quite well. It is mostly high school girls with disposable income it seems.

WoodDraw
07-07-2010, 07:05 PM
And the tax isn't even just on UV tanning. MY wife gets that spray tan shit done because she was diagnosed with skin cancer and she had to pay the tax on that.

So much for not raising taxes on people making under $250k, again.

Jobs on the line
The tanning tax will go into effect July 1 and will apply to electronic products designed for tanning that use one or more ultraviolet lamps with wavelengths between 200 and 400 nanometers. Other sunless tanning options such as spray tans and tanning lotions are not included in the tax.



http://money.cnn.com/2010/03/24/news/economy/tanning_tax/

BucEyedPea
07-07-2010, 07:42 PM
Correlation = Causation

In this case yes, it plays a role. It just isn't always true. Kinda like the luxury tax on boats that destroyed that industry which put a lot of the small folk who also depended on it out of work. The other factor here is the economy too. The D congress has been in power for how long now?

WoodDraw
07-07-2010, 08:52 PM
In this case yes, it plays a role. It just isn't always true. Kinda like the luxury tax on boats that destroyed that industry which put a lot of the small folk who also depended on it out of work. The other factor here is the economy too. The D congress has been in power for how long now?

Can you translate that out?

Are you talking about the Missouri break on yachts? Or a federal break?

ForeverChiefs58
07-07-2010, 09:14 PM
My wife does the spray tan a lot too and pays a monthly fee $59 (it is now $89 but she is grandfathered from last two years) and they told her the monthly fee would increase now because of the tax. she just wants some damn color. why are they against tan people?
i am thinking it might be cheaper to buy a damn spraytan booth esp with so many places going under and having to sell off equipment.

WoodDraw
07-07-2010, 09:25 PM
I agree that taxes will be passed on from UV tanning to spray tanning. But it won't be in the form of higher taxes...

You know what will happen? Spray only shops will open up that will cater solely to spray tans... Or they'll start charging less for spray tanning than UV tanning.

It's like aruging that gas stations shouldn't increase their margins to make up for increases in cigarette taxes. Of course they do...

Guru
07-07-2010, 10:18 PM
The whole idea of this tax is absurd and is just another in a long line of examples of why our new HC system is flawed and F'd up from Day 1.Just wait for that sugar tax to kick in.

chasedude
07-08-2010, 01:50 AM
And soon, all restaurants will be Taco Bell.

Guess it's better than eating rat burgers in a sewer

chasedude
07-08-2010, 01:51 AM
Just wait for that sugar tax to kick in.

Yup it'll be here soon enough!

chasedude
07-08-2010, 01:55 AM
My mother tans and she's mentioned to me how it helps keep her acne in control. She's been cursed with cystic acne since childhood and swears it does wonders. Plus she's Vitamin D deficient but hates milk. Isn't here a correlation with UV radiation on the skin making Vit D? I'm not a dermatologist but I'm sure there's someone on here that knows about this.

orange
07-08-2010, 02:07 AM
Just wait for that sugar tax to kick in.

Yup it'll be here soon enough!



Why bother taxing it? They can save a billion tax dollars just by eliminating the subsidy.

chasedude
07-08-2010, 02:22 AM
Why bother taxing it? They can save a billion tax dollars just by eliminating the subsidy.

My eyes were opened a bit wider about subsidies not long ago after I saw this
http://ia.media-imdb.com/images/M/MV5BMzIyMDk4MDE4NF5BMl5BanBnXkFtZTcwODc4MDU1MQ@@._V1._SX97_SY140_.jpg
Made me wish now I picked up the family farm after my Grandfather passed on. That's some easy money to be made right there!

Velvet_Jones
07-08-2010, 07:57 AM
Why bother taxing it? They can save a billion tax dollars just by eliminating the subsidy.

How about just eliminating the tariffs for imports on sugar so we can buy cheaper from Brazil? The subsidies would either go away on their own or the southern sugar companies would become more efficient.

Or - option 2 - we can make a law that basically takes over the sugar industry with the intent to completely fuck up the industry, put thousands of people out of work and make sugar harder to get for everyone. Just like the healthcare bill.

HonestChieffan
07-08-2010, 08:23 AM
Sugar program is sweet for dems...
According to the Center for Responsive Politics, the top beneficiaries of big sugar's influence for the current election cycle include Senate Agriculture Committee Chairman Tom Harkin, D-Iowa ($35,400), House Agriculture Committee member Tim Mahoney, D-Fla. ($33,923) and committee chairman Collin Peterson, D-Minn., ($28,900).

The U.S. Department of Agriculture says roughly 54% of total U.S. sugar-beet acreage is in the Red River Valley between Minnesota and North Dakota. North Dakota's sole Congressman, Democrat Earl Pomeroy, has been the greatest beneficiary of donations from sugar-related political-action committees for the 2008 election cycle, taking in $26,500, the Center for Responsive Politics says. Peterson, whose district in western Minnesota stretches along the Red River Valley, is No. 2, with $26,400 in PAC money.

Bob Dole
07-08-2010, 09:10 AM
Wah. Funny how taxing "unhealthy habits" is all well and good and a great revenue generating idea when it's not YOUR unhealthy habit.

Too bad all the happy assholes who cheer every time there's a liquor or tobacco tax didn't bother to listen when we told you they'd come after your vice eventually.

Fuck off.

Gracie Dean
07-08-2010, 09:25 AM
Wah. Funny how taxing "unhealthy habits" is all well and good and a great revenue generating idea when it's not YOUR unhealthy habit.

Too bad all the happy assholes who cheer every time there's a liquor or tobacco tax didn't bother to listen when we told you they'd come after your vice eventually.

**** off.

this

BigChiefFan
07-08-2010, 10:48 AM
Wah. Funny how taxing "unhealthy habits" is all well and good and a great revenue generating idea when it's not YOUR unhealthy habit.

Too bad all the happy assholes who cheer every time there's a liquor or tobacco tax didn't bother to listen when we told you they'd come after your vice eventually.

**** off.That absolutely right, man. If one of us loses a constitutional right, all of us lose.

ForeverChiefs58
07-08-2010, 11:35 AM
a lot of money could be made taxing air

ClevelandBronco
07-08-2010, 12:39 PM
I'm also verklempt that tanning salons aren't able to hire the 10 to 15 extra employees that they normally don't pay and just give free tanning to.

Not all industries can be run as inefficiently as the education industry, I suppose.

WoodDraw
07-08-2010, 08:02 PM
That absolutely right, man. If one of us loses a constitutional right, all of us lose.

I've always been a big fan of the tanning without taxation amendment.