UNION-TRIBUNE EDITORIAL
Botox tax? Bah!
State board should heed public opposition
December 24, 2005
Shades of Proposition 13. We could soon hear rumblings of a possible tax revolt in 2006 by Californians – at least among those with heavily lined faces. Despite what a Sacramento Bee report described as unanimous public opposition, the rapacious sorts at the Board of Equalization may soon decide to impose a tax on, yes, Botox.
The rationale for such a levy is that state regulations exempt medicines from the sales tax, but only if they are used to treat disease. This has a certain logic, to be sure. But while Botox is mainly sold as a wrinkle remover, the fact remains that it is an FDA-approved drug used to treat a long list of ailments – migraines, neck pain, cerebral palsy, muscle spasms, jaw disorders, etc. Do we really want the state to set up a regulatory process to evaluate which Botox purchases should be taxed and which should go untaxed?
And there's no reason to assume bureaucrats would draw the line at Botox. There is considerable evidence that many tens of thousands of people use prescription antidepressants not because of mental illness but because they like the cheerful feeling these drugs yield. Would this qualify as a taxable use? No wonder all 36 of the public comments the Board of Equalization received on the Botox tax opposed it.
(snip)
Find this article at:
http://www.signonsandiego.com/uniontrib/20051224/news_lz1ed24middle.html