NCFM sends letter to legislators supporting legislation against taxes based on one’s sex – NO MAN TAX

January 10, 2016

man tax


Taxing people just because of their sex is so wrong!  Thankfully, California Assembly Member Ling Ling Chang and Cristina Garcia agree, and they have proposed legislation that addresses sex-based taxes – California Assembly Bill 15611, which will exempt sanitary napkins and tampons from sales taxes.

Ms. Garcia is vice chair of the California Legislative Women’s Caucus, and the Sacramento Bee reported Ms. Garcia as saying, “I feel this is an important issue of social justice for all women out there.”  Garcia said AB 587 “Will help close the wage gap between men and women . . . we are underpaid, every penny really matters, and every month we have a necessity we can’t control.”  She argued, “We are being taxed for being women.”

NCFM has sent Ms. Chang and Ms. Garcia a letter of conditional support for AB 587, which you can read by clicking here or on the link below.  NCFM’s support is conditioned on the Bill being amended to add items that only men, or mostly only men, wear, specifically, neckties, jockstraps, and condoms.  Because if these men-specific items remain subject to sales taxes, then men are being taxed just for being men.

Our proposed amendment will help men close the wage gap between men and women for those many jobs for which women earn more than men.  The amendment will also especially help fathers close the child support and alimony gaps between men and women.

Many men and non-custodial fathers can barely afford rent because of unreasonable and confiscatory alimony and child support orders. Many men lose their jobs for falling behind in child support, and some men are even imprisoned for reasons beyond their control after losing everything through divorce, including their children.   Legislation like this will save men money they are paying into the State of California’s rich coffers, and can help men from being taxed or otherwise punished by our culture, society and judicial system just for being men

Assembly Members Chang and Garcia, as elected officials, likely know very well that any overall wage differential between men and women is miniscule, and rarely because of sex discrimination.  Instead, any slight wage differential is because women have more life choices than men, many women are absent from the workforce for years, and women generally chose less dangerous jobs and jobs that demand less travel, less overtime, and less stress – the so-called “soft jobs.”

NCFM is calling on our readers to also support this legislation.  Please send Ms. Chang and/or Ms. Garcia, as well as your State senator or assembly member if you live in California, a letter of support for Assembly Bill 1561, as long as it also includes sales taxes exemptions for neckties, jockstraps, and condoms.

NOTE: Salaries for California Assembly Members are not based on sex, male or female. In 2014, Assembly Members received the same salaries ($97,197), four of 80 members (three men and one woman) received a bit more than the others because they held leadership positions. Hence, Ms. Chang and Ms. Garcia are paid equally with their male peers. One would think, anyone earning just under $100,000 per year (plus benefits) could afford their own tampons, sanitary pads, neckties, condoms, and jockstraps, regardless of sex.

Recommended reading: Why Men Earn More – the Startling Truth Behind the Wage Gap – and What Can Women Do About It, by Warren Farrell. And, watch the six part video series of Mr. Farrell explaining the wage gap myth. Below is the first of the series of six, the rest follow one after the other on YouTube.

You can read our letter here:

national coalition for men



Share and Enjoy:
  • Digg
  • StumbleUpon
  • Facebook
  • Yahoo! Buzz
  • Google Buzz
  • LinkedIn
  • Orkut
  • Twitter

Tags: , , , , , , , ,

2 Responses to NCFM sends letter to legislators supporting legislation against taxes based on one’s sex – NO MAN TAX

  1. Caleb on January 15, 2016 at 12:56 AM

    I think that jockstraps were a good item and so are condoms, neckties I think hurt the point since skirts and dresses could be a valid response. But I think a great argument could be held for male wigs to deal with male pattern baldness.

  2. Sue Nami on January 10, 2016 at 1:58 PM

    When I read the first media account of this tampon tax bill, I thought I was reading The Onion, but I wasn’t – this is an actual bill. Hopefully, NCFM and others’ actions will cause this bill to be amended to add these male specific items or will cause California’s liberal legislature to see the absurdity of Assembly Bill 1561 and kill it.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *