Botax causes frowning
What’s next-additional taxes on getting haircuts, getting a manicure, or buying designer clothes? In an effort to fund President Obama’s 1 trillion dollar new health care revamping, a 5% tax on cosmetic surgery was been introduced on Nov 18th as part of the new health care reform bill. According to IRS Publication 502, that includes "any procedure that is directed at improving the patient's appearance and does not meaningfully promote the proper function of the body or prevent or treat illness or diseases."
We have heard it time and time again, “those who cannot learn from history are doomed to repeat it”. Taxing cosmetic procedures is an unreliable non profitable concept. In 2004, New Jersey was the first state to invoke a tax on cosmetic surgery. It was predicted to generate $24 million its first year, but only generated $6.8 million. There is a grey area in procedures that are cosmetic that could be considered medically necessary. It is estimated that $3 are spent for every $1 generated in discerning the difference between cosmetic procedures and those that are reconstructive in nature.
Cosmetic surgery is not just for the rich and famous. Perhaps that how it is depicted on shows like Nip Tuck, Dr. 90210, or Addicted to Beauty? This is not the case. In our practice we do have a fair share of celebrities and the super wealthy, but more often we have the school teacher that has been saving for the past 5 years to have a breast augmentation, or the average hard working person who wants a little refresher with Botox or filler. National statistics show that one-third of the people who are getting cosmetic surgery make under $30,000. Eighty six percent make less than $90,000. Additionally, 85 percent of procedures are paid for by credit. So the tax would hit lower income people the hardest.
Implementing this tax to fund the health care reform is not only an already failed concept, but a grave mistake targeted at the wrong population. Working women is the most common population of patients seeking these procedures. In today’s economic environment, when everyone is looking for the best bargain, I fear people will turn to dangerous alternatives. Unlicensed physicians, or non FDA approved treatments from other countries may be sought. People often consider having surgeries overseas to save money. Adding this tax is just another reason a person may make a poor decision to do so.
Cosmetic surgery does not only address the outward appearance of a patient, but also their self esteem. There have been studies that have proven more attractive people do better in the workplace. Changing one’s appearance can also help them live a healthier lifestyle. So many of liposuction patients change their diets and exercise lifestyles after losing a few inches off of their waste after liposuction. A tax on these cosmetic procedures will not have a counterproductive effective effect on the economy, but its wake will be felt in all the wrong places.
We have heard it time and time again, “those who cannot learn from history are doomed to repeat it”. Taxing cosmetic procedures is an unreliable non profitable concept. In 2004, New Jersey was the first state to invoke a tax on cosmetic surgery. It was predicted to generate $24 million its first year, but only generated $6.8 million. There is a grey area in procedures that are cosmetic that could be considered medically necessary. It is estimated that $3 are spent for every $1 generated in discerning the difference between cosmetic procedures and those that are reconstructive in nature.
Cosmetic surgery is not just for the rich and famous. Perhaps that how it is depicted on shows like Nip Tuck, Dr. 90210, or Addicted to Beauty? This is not the case. In our practice we do have a fair share of celebrities and the super wealthy, but more often we have the school teacher that has been saving for the past 5 years to have a breast augmentation, or the average hard working person who wants a little refresher with Botox or filler. National statistics show that one-third of the people who are getting cosmetic surgery make under $30,000. Eighty six percent make less than $90,000. Additionally, 85 percent of procedures are paid for by credit. So the tax would hit lower income people the hardest.
Implementing this tax to fund the health care reform is not only an already failed concept, but a grave mistake targeted at the wrong population. Working women is the most common population of patients seeking these procedures. In today’s economic environment, when everyone is looking for the best bargain, I fear people will turn to dangerous alternatives. Unlicensed physicians, or non FDA approved treatments from other countries may be sought. People often consider having surgeries overseas to save money. Adding this tax is just another reason a person may make a poor decision to do so.
Cosmetic surgery does not only address the outward appearance of a patient, but also their self esteem. There have been studies that have proven more attractive people do better in the workplace. Changing one’s appearance can also help them live a healthier lifestyle. So many of liposuction patients change their diets and exercise lifestyles after losing a few inches off of their waste after liposuction. A tax on these cosmetic procedures will not have a counterproductive effective effect on the economy, but its wake will be felt in all the wrong places.
posted by Dr. Scott M Blyer at
8:47 AM
0 Comments:
Post a Comment
Subscribe to Post Comments [Atom]
<< Home