Say No To Tan Tax
Public Comments (5,274)
-
Jul 7th, 2010Someone from Boonville, MO signed.
Jul 7th, 2010Someone from Jasper, MO signed.
Jul 7th, 2010Someone from Joplin, MO signed.
Jul 7th, 2010Someone from Bradenton, FL signed.
Jul 7th, 2010Someone from Napoleon, OH writes:
This tan tax is another financial weight on small business, female owned business and the working class people. To tax us on a product that stimulates the production of vitamin D (creating all sorts of health benefits)while allowing the wealthy to be injected with physician administered poison without taxing that proceedure shows how the wealthy rule the world. "Tax the stupid working class and sell them the idea we are saving them from certain future melanoma, they'll buy it, they buy anything we put the right spin on!" Come on people, stand up, make some noise, don't be bulldozed by the overcharging dermotologists who have some congressmen in their hip pocket! UVA is healthy when administered by them, but unhealthy when administered by a licensed tanning salon? REALLY!? And of course we all know if we exercise in a fitness facility and then tan, it will definately prevent any possibility of melanoma. Melanoma is caused by burns, usually gotten as a child, outside and manifested later in life. We can prevent it by not getting burned by the sun and by safe, regulated tanning indoors. Do we avoid drinking water because water drowns people? Use your brain and your voice, stop the bulldozer owned and operated by the wealthy, shifting all the "s**t" on the working class. They expect us to keep taking it like we always have. Put on the gloves, start fighting Goliath.Jul 6th, 2010Someone from Bolingbrook, IL signed.
Jul 6th, 2010Someone from Prattville, AL writes:
This is a racist tax. The only people it will affect is the white race. Hopefully things will change for the better in NovREPORT COMMENTS
Do you want to report these comments to the moderator for removal? They should be offensive, threatening, a duplicate submission, or spam.
No, CancelJul 6th, 2010Someone from Southaven, MS signed.
Jul 6th, 2010Someone from Monroeville, PA writes:
To tax tanning salons, and not gyms is just not fair. Can't wait until the fall elections!REPORT COMMENTS
Do you want to report these comments to the moderator for removal? They should be offensive, threatening, a duplicate submission, or spam.
No, CancelJul 6th, 2010Someone from East Peoria, IL writes:
To take away a 5% tax on elective cosemtic surgery (which is primarly for the wealthy) and put a 10% tax on struggling small businesses is wrong! If your argument is that tanning beds cause skin cancer, and that is the reason for the tax, then why are tanning beds in gyms, & hair salon excluded? Are their tanning beds less dangerous? Maybe people should do their homework, for years we have been told by big pharm companies, cosmedic companies, dermatologists to stay out of the sun, buy their sunscreen, take a pill for this, take a pill for that, We have light therapy for that (using UV bulbs at $150 a session), and now look at the vitamin D deficiencies, growing up there were never as many sick people as there are today, almost everyone I know takes a pill for something....Me? I haven't been sick in 20+ years and YES I TAN!!REPORT COMMENTS
Do you want to report these comments to the moderator for removal? They should be offensive, threatening, a duplicate submission, or spam.
No, CancelJul 6th, 2010Someone from Peoria, IL signed.
Jul 6th, 2010Someone from Canton, IL signed.
Jul 6th, 2010Someone from Columbus, GA signed.
Jul 6th, 2010Someone from Tremont, IL signed.
Jul 6th, 2010Someone from Washougal, WA signed.
Jul 6th, 2010Someone from Hixson, TN signed.
Jul 6th, 2010Someone from Dunlap, IL signed.
Jul 6th, 2010Someone from Killen, AL signed.
Jul 6th, 2010Someone from Florence, AL writes:
As females, tanners and business owners we must stand-up and fight against this!REPORT COMMENTS
Do you want to report these comments to the moderator for removal? They should be offensive, threatening, a duplicate submission, or spam.
No, CancelJul 6th, 2010Someone from Killen, AL writes:
if you're gonna tax people who tan, throw an extra tax on breathing too, you get more illnesses from breathing the toxins in our air than you do from tanning!!!!!REPORT COMMENTS
Do you want to report these comments to the moderator for removal? They should be offensive, threatening, a duplicate submission, or spam.
No, CancelJul 5th, 2010Someone from Corvallis, OR signed.
Jul 5th, 2010Someone from Placentia, CA signed.
Jul 5th, 2010Someone from Placentia, CA signed.
Jul 5th, 2010Someone from Watford City, ND signed.
Jul 5th, 2010Someone from Corvallis, OR signed.
Jul 5th, 2010Someone from Corvallis, OR signed.
Jul 5th, 2010Someone from Cedar Park, TX signed.
Jul 4th, 2010Someone from Lufkin, TX signed.
Jul 4th, 2010Someone from Knoxville, TN signed.
Jul 4th, 2010Someone from Dallas, TX signed.
Jul 4th, 2010Someone from Fortson, GA signed.
Jul 4th, 2010Someone from Atlanta, GA writes:
This tax is rediculous and completely unfair. It unfairly targets an industry that has proven health benefits when used in moderation. Moderate indoor UV tanning doesn't cause cancer... BURNING causes cancer. There was no debate about inserting this tax, most in Congress didn't even know it was in the bill. It was ill-conceived and poorly written, and the IRS has been hard pressed to implement and will be even harder pressed to collect it.REPORT COMMENTS
Do you want to report these comments to the moderator for removal? They should be offensive, threatening, a duplicate submission, or spam.
No, CancelJul 3rd, 2010Someone from Lufkin, TX writes:
People are either going to tan indoors and limit their exposure and know what they are doing and the amount of exposure, or they will lay in the sun, not knowing how much UVA or UVB they are being exposed to and thinking they are just not dark enough or they are not getting enough sun, which in turn leads people to over-exposure and more doctor visits or hospital visits for serious burns. Come on.... At least if we are tanning in beds, we can only lay once every 24hrs, which means it is already regulated by the government!!! How are you gonna do this if they force the price too high. Common sense is common sense.... Let us choose!REPORT COMMENTS
Do you want to report these comments to the moderator for removal? They should be offensive, threatening, a duplicate submission, or spam.
No, CancelJul 3rd, 2010Someone from Bakersfield, CA writes:
nooooooo! Definitely targeting females!!REPORT COMMENTS
Do you want to report these comments to the moderator for removal? They should be offensive, threatening, a duplicate submission, or spam.
No, CancelJul 3rd, 2010Someone from Cupertino, CA writes:
That's just rediculous. Maybe this is their way to get people to not tan in beds? Go ahead and tax us, we will still get our tan on. Oh and I don't tan a lot, I Mystic too. People forget that. :-PREPORT COMMENTS
Do you want to report these comments to the moderator for removal? They should be offensive, threatening, a duplicate submission, or spam.
No, CancelJul 3rd, 2010Someone from Pueblo, CO signed.
Jul 2nd, 2010Someone from Tampa, FL writes:
This tax is foolishness. I have the right to tan. This tax is sexist against mostly women tanning business owners and clients. I work in healthcare and most of my patients are suffering the effects of street drugs, not tanning. Perhaps, there should be a street drug tax.REPORT COMMENTS
Do you want to report these comments to the moderator for removal? They should be offensive, threatening, a duplicate submission, or spam.
No, CancelJul 2nd, 2010Someone from Bakersfield, CA writes:
This is a stupid tax! Thank you Obama for screwing up America!REPORT COMMENTS
Do you want to report these comments to the moderator for removal? They should be offensive, threatening, a duplicate submission, or spam.
No, Cancel
Do you want to report these comments to the moderator for removal? They should be offensive, threatening, a duplicate submission, or spam.