ETS Tanning Bed Blog

On Christmas Eve, the Senate passed the latest version of its health-care reform bill, which is predicted to cost approximately $871 billion in the course of the first 10 years. The bill includes the “11th hour” addition of a 10 percent tax on indoor tanning services. The approval process took just 15 minutes, resulting in a “yes” vote of 60-39.
The House passed its $1.05 trillion version of the bill back in November. The next step is for the Senate and House versions to go to conference committee so the major differences can be reconciled. Besides the tanning tax discrepancy, there are also conflicts regarding the consequences of not participating, the costs – both overall and to the public, the level of government involvement, the funding of abortions, and coverage for illegal immigrants.

It’s estimated that the parties will work through the process in January, then sending the agreed-upon version to the president to sign in February. However, based on the conflicting views seen largely between Republicans and Democrats concerning the legislation, there’s no guarantee that the process will occur quickly or smoothly.

For information on how to make your voice heard in Washington, visit the article below; or for more information regarding the Senate bill, stop by the source links.

Sources:

Article source: Looking Fit

NowPublic: U.S. Senate Vote On Health Care Reform: New Health Bill Passed

Los Angeles Times: About the Senate's healthcare vote

Fox News: RAW DATA: House and Senate Health Care Bills Contain Vast Differences

Over the weekend, U.S. Senate Democrats removed a proposed 5% tax on all elective cosmetic surgery, replacing it with a last-minute provision that would tax the use of tanning beds. Senate Democrats cite the reasoning for the “Tan Tax” is the increased risk of skin cancer associated with the use of indoor tanning beds. Under the new proposal, individuals purchasing tanning services would be requires to pay the 10% Tan Tax. Over a 10-year span, this new tax is projected to produce $2.7 billion to help fund health care reform. The previously proposed elective cosmetic surgery tax, affectionately called the “Bo-Tax” was projected to contribute over twice that amount in the same 10-year span.

Allergan, the California-based maker of Botox and other firms that were to be affected by the “Bo-Tax” lobbied together to remove the proposed tax. Representative cosmetic surgeons also lobbied against the tax arguing that the tax was discriminatory, specifically against middle-class women.

In a statement released by John Overstreet, executive director of the Indoor Tanning Association said, "It is not surprising that one primarily cosmetic business is trying to throw another under the bus by transferring a tax from rich doctors and their wealthy customers to struggling small businesses," Overstreet said. "The irony is that ultraviolet light at least has proven health benefits where botox treatments have none."

On their website, the Indoor Tanning Association states that a well-known side effect of exposing the skin to ultraviolent (UV) light is the production of Vitamin D.

Source: Examiner