Don Smith

Great article about the Tan Tax.

"The Joint Committee on Taxation projected that the “tanning tax” would raise $2.7 billion in revenue; however, both the Internal Revenue Service figures and the White House‘s own Office of Management and Budget show it garnered only $86 million in its first year (2011). In subsequent years, it raised only $91.5 million (2012) and $92 million (2013). I say it “only” raised millions but, quite frankly, a tax should have never been targeted toward this law-abiding industry in the first place."

"The American Suntanning Association reports that their workforce in 2009 consisted of 164,218; in 2014 it was 100,721 — that represents a loss of more than 60,000 jobs."

"As for enforcement and collection of the “tanning tax” to help pay the nearly $1 billion pricetag for Obamacare, there is no word yet exactly how much the government is spending to collect the tax. When asked by Rep. Lynn Jenkins (R-Kan.) how much it is costing to enforce, the IRS responded in a letter on September 2, 2014, stating, “We do not track the cost of collecting the indoor tanning tax.”

"In the meantime, a growing percentage of Americans want government out of their beds — including ones in which they tan."

http://www.theblaze.com/contribution...-tax-for-that/

Robert K

Thanks Don

__________________
Robert Klem
Superior UV Technologies
(888) 526-7712 x77
robertk@superioruv.com

tanu01

Just as every one thought the out come would be
Thanks Don

Don Smith

The dermatologists and the BoTox industry "convinced" them that imposing the Tan Tax would yield the same amount in taxes ($2.7B) as the proposed BoTax (a tax on the rich clients of dermatologists). The government fell for it and now have only themselves to blame for the shortfall.

So here is a solution : Congress should go back and impose the BoTax.

uv2021

They should also make it retroactive on the derms.They were the ones who lied,as usual.

tanu01

OH WHAT A BATTLE THERE WOULD BE

Don Smith

An interesting article discussing the Botox Tax before the derm's and the botox industry convinced Congress to substitute the Tan Tax for the Botox Tax. Please note that the estimate was $6.0B for the Botox Tax. Also please note the role Pelosi played.

"It’s not a sure bet the Botox tax will make it in the final bill. Botox enthusiasts have Nancy Pelosi in their corner–she left the tax out of the House version, which relies much more heavily on income tax increases for rich people."

http://www.forbes.com/2009/12/07/hea...osh-barro.html

And here is how the derm's fought against the Botox Tax.

http://www.stopbotax.org/

http://content.time.com/time/busines...947841,00.html

And this "smoking gun" NY Times article shows how the derm's used the fear of skin cancer to (successfully) promote a "switcheroo" to replace the Botox Tax with the Tan Tax. The rest is history.

"Dr. David M. Pariser, the president of the American Academy of Dermatology, said his association proposed that an indoor-tanning tax be considered in place of the cosmetic tax, and that it contacted the offices of senators. “We made the case this will reduce health care costs by hopefully reducing skin cancer in the future — that’s the point — and also raise a little revenue now,” Dr. Pariser said."

http://www.nytimes.com/2009/12/24/fa...Skin.html?_r=0

http://www.reuters.com/article/2009/...24186720091221

Turbo Girl

When asked by Rep. Lynn Jenkins (R-Kan.) how much it is costing to enforce, the IRS responded in a letter on September 2, 2014, stating, “We do not track the cost of collecting the indoor tanning tax.”

And....we wonder why our country has a deficit?

__________________
[SIGPIC]