Democratic Underground Latest Greatest Lobby Journals Search Options Help Login
Google

Senate Bill Would Tax Cosmetic Surgery

Printer-friendly format Printer-friendly format
Printer-friendly format Email this thread to a friend
Printer-friendly format Bookmark this thread
This topic is archived.
Home » Discuss » Archives » General Discussion (1/22-2007 thru 12/14/2010) Donate to DU
 
ecstatic Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Nov-23-09 01:51 PM
Original message
Poll question: Senate Bill Would Tax Cosmetic Surgery
To raise money for the health overhaul, Democrats are proposing a new 5% tax on elective cosmetic procedures. The tax was a surprise addition to the sweeping 2,074-page bill that Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid unveiled late Wednesday. It generates $5 billion over a decade for the plan, which is expected to cost $849 billion over a decade.

The tax would fall on the individuals who undergo the procedures. If they don’t pay it when they’re billed for their surgery, then it falls to the provider who performed the procedure.

Not all cosmetic surgeries would get taxed. According to the bill, the tax would only apply if the surgery “is not necessary to ameliorate a deformity arising from, or directly related to, a congenital abnormality, a personal injury resulting from an accident or trauma, or disfiguring disease.” It would take effect Jan. 1.

So what do plastic surgeons think of this? We called the American Society of Plastic Surgeons three times Wednesday night. The line was busy each time.


http://blogs.wsj.com/washwire/2009/11/18/senate-bill-would-tax-cosmetic-surgery/
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
fasttense Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Nov-23-09 02:08 PM
Response to Original message
1. Just tax dividends and interest as much as they tax wages.
Why should making money off of money not be taxed as much as working for a living?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Lance_Boyle Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Nov-23-09 02:57 PM
Response to Reply #1
13. the theory is that the money invested that earns dividends has already been taxed
as income. While true in some (probably most) cases, it is not true in others (such as inherited wealth generating dividend checks, although that inherited wealth was presumably taxed when it was earned, before it was passed on).

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Eric J in MN Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Nov-23-09 03:21 PM
Response to Reply #13
30. The same could be said about all taxes.
A company pays corporate taxes before it pays its workers.

The wokers pay income taxes before they buy things and pay sales tax, etc.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
bluestateguy Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Nov-23-09 02:13 PM
Response to Original message
2. I'll be interested what Henry Waxman's position on that is
Seeing as how his district is chock full of Hollywood celebrities, trophy wives, Stepford wives and numerous plastic surgeons.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
no_hypocrisy Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Nov-23-09 02:18 PM
Response to Original message
3. From Botox to Botax.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
frebrd Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Nov-23-09 02:21 PM
Response to Original message
4. Good!
It'll give the vain, pathetic, insecure plastic surgery addicts something more to feel insecure about.

:rofl:
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
enlightenment Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Nov-23-09 02:27 PM
Response to Original message
5. Bad.
It's a sin tax - with the 'sin' determined in an arbitrary fashion.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
ecstatic Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Nov-23-09 02:31 PM
Response to Reply #5
8. I don't like it either. Regular middle class people get a lot of
cosmetic surgery, especially weight loss surgery. Why make it even further out of reach for so many people?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Spider Jerusalem Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Nov-23-09 02:51 PM
Response to Reply #8
12. Sorry, but I have no problem with shallow, self-absorbed twits having to pay a tax on facelifts.
Gastric band surgery isn't 'cosmetic' especially if you're talking about morbidly obese individuals.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
krabigirl Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Nov-23-09 03:15 PM
Response to Reply #12
25. Same here.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Lance_Boyle Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Nov-23-09 02:59 PM
Response to Reply #8
14. bariatric surgery is not cosmetic
liposuction is (or can be). I say tax the fuck out of 'em. My sins are taxed - let's hit those half-plastic gorgonstrosities in the pocketbook, too.

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Eric J in MN Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Nov-23-09 02:28 PM
Response to Original message
6. It's better than some taxes, but...
Edited on Mon Nov-23-09 02:30 PM by Eric J in MN
...there is a question of why cosmetic sugery should be federally taxed instead of just raising upper-income taxes.

Is it worse for people to spend money on cosmetic surgery than other luxuries?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
kenny blankenship Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Nov-23-09 03:16 PM
Response to Reply #6
26. I agree. I don't like the idea of any medical treatment being taxed
Some cosmetic surgery is done to reconstruct people's appearance after injuries or diseases.

But that's almost beside the point. The appropriate point to levy tax, if a tax must be raised to pay for new services, is on income.

Actually, if we would just approach this problem HONESTLY and get the profit skimming middleman completely out of the basic health care market we could lower the overall expense of our health care "system". There's no reason --except the endemic bribery and corruption of our political leadership-- that we should not be setting our goal at reducing our total expenses by one half. The tax on citizens would represent a savings to them (compared with their insurance costs which as we all know are no guarantee of service) instead of a burden.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Johonny Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Nov-23-09 03:57 PM
Response to Reply #6
36. I think it's seen as a luxary tax and this another way to tax wealth
The problem I see is I know a lot of people in LA that got nothing in any form of wealth, but have fake * of one kind or another. It's not only the wealthy that do this stuff (at least here). Some people scrimp and save (or worse) just to get this stuff done. So it's possible that it's slightly more regressive than escalating car taxes or property taxes or income taxes in taxing real wealth.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Barack_America Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Nov-23-09 02:31 PM
Response to Original message
7. I sense a huge upswing in "deviated septum" diagnoses on the horizon. nt
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
bluestateguy Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Nov-23-09 02:37 PM
Response to Reply #7
9. Is that how you could get around the tax to pay for a nose job?
nt
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Barack_America Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Nov-23-09 02:48 PM
Response to Reply #9
10. Yep. nt
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
taught_me_patience Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Nov-23-09 02:49 PM
Response to Original message
11. Hello Thailand
Medical tourism is just going to get bigger.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Barack_America Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Nov-23-09 03:03 PM
Response to Original message
15. I voted "no".
I don't see a reason for taxing people with poor self esteem for wanting to change the things they hate about themselves.

Some people really fixate on a particular body part as being the root of all of their unhappiness.

They don't need to be taxed, they need therapy.

If this money were going to provide Americans better access to mental health care, then maybe I'd agree with it.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
ecstatic Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Nov-23-09 03:08 PM
Response to Reply #15
17. Someone on The View said that!
I forget which one.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Barack_America Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Nov-23-09 03:12 PM
Response to Reply #17
21. Please tell me it wasn't Elizabeth.
I may have to go walk out in traffic.

;)
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
krabigirl Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Nov-23-09 03:17 PM
Response to Reply #15
27. Hmmm..where I live, women mainly get surgery/botox just to compete . Tax it all.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
tova Donating Member (13 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Nov-23-09 03:07 PM
Response to Original message
16. breast reconstruction
I had to have bilateral masectomies because I am BRCA2 positive. Would my breast reconstrucion after the surgery have been considered cosmetic surgery under this new bill? It was certainly not directly related to a congenital abnormality, personal injury, accident or trauma. Once again I think women may be bring treated unfairly because of our sex.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
ecstatic Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Nov-23-09 03:09 PM
Response to Reply #16
18. Women get the most "cosmetic" surgery
So you're right, this is once again something aimed at controlling and limiting the choices of women.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Lance_Boyle Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Nov-23-09 03:13 PM
Response to Reply #18
22. any opportunity to cry victimhood, eh?
For once I feel totally justified in stating that your opinion is stupid, ugly and wrong.

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
ecstatic Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Nov-23-09 03:18 PM
Response to Reply #22
28. It doesn't affect me personally so I'm not a victim
However, I do know several women who have scraped up savings to get lipo and that 5% tax would put it completely out of reach. What's next? A higher tax on certain vacations? Car models? Where does the sin tax end?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Lance_Boyle Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Nov-23-09 03:24 PM
Response to Reply #28
32. This particular one ends at opting for a treadmill instead of liposuction.
I know lots of people who save up for lots of things, and then pay taxes on their purchases. Or if they find they didn't save enough to cover the purchase and the tax, they do without while saving up a bit more.

Now on the issue of "limiting women's choices" - men consume more beer than women. Does that mean that alcohol taxes are an attempt to control men or restrict their choices?

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
tova Donating Member (13 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Nov-23-09 03:19 PM
Response to Reply #22
29. mesectomy
Victimhood? It was an honest question and I appreciate the direct answers.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
enlightenment Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Nov-23-09 03:31 PM
Response to Reply #22
33. Gee, Lance,
does that mean that all the other times you inform people that their opinions are stupid, ugly and wrong aren't justified?

Never thought I'd see you admit that . . .
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Lance_Boyle Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Nov-23-09 03:12 PM
Response to Reply #16
20. bilateral mastectomy is trauma n/t

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
TwilightGardener Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Nov-23-09 03:23 PM
Response to Reply #16
31. That would fall under "disfiguring disease". Unless prophylactic surgery
is excluded from that category.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
anigbrowl Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Nov-23-09 04:22 PM
Response to Reply #16
37. That would come under disfiguring disease
Indeed, you could argue that BRCA2 is a congenital abnormality.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Naturyl Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Nov-23-09 03:10 PM
Response to Original message
19. Good. Yes it is a sin tax, and finally on one of the right sins.
Sin taxes on vanity are fine with me. We also need more taxes on greed.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
krabigirl Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Nov-23-09 03:15 PM
Response to Original message
23. Good. Unless it's for surgery after a mastectomy or accident.
Otherwise, they are elective and should be taxed.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Ozymanithrax Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Nov-23-09 03:15 PM
Response to Original message
24. If it is a surgery of choice, yeah, tax the hell out of it.
If cosmetic surgery is required to repair another medical issue (such as those done after a mastectomy or a broken jaw) then no.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
damntexdem Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Nov-23-09 03:43 PM
Response to Original message
34. Nip them where they tuck!
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Kingofalldems Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Nov-23-09 03:45 PM
Response to Original message
35. Real Housewive of Orange County will not like this at all!
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
DU AdBot (1000+ posts) Click to send private message to this author Click to view 
this author's profile Click to add 
this author to your buddy list Click to add 
this author to your Ignore list Fri Apr 19th 2024, 03:13 AM
Response to Original message
Advertisements [?]
 Top

Home » Discuss » Archives » General Discussion (1/22-2007 thru 12/14/2010) Donate to DU

Powered by DCForum+ Version 1.1 Copyright 1997-2002 DCScripts.com
Software has been extensively modified by the DU administrators


Important Notices: By participating on this discussion board, visitors agree to abide by the rules outlined on our Rules page. Messages posted on the Democratic Underground Discussion Forums are the opinions of the individuals who post them, and do not necessarily represent the opinions of Democratic Underground, LLC.

Home  |  Discussion Forums  |  Journals |  Store  |  Donate

About DU  |  Contact Us  |  Privacy Policy

Got a message for Democratic Underground? Click here to send us a message.

© 2001 - 2011 Democratic Underground, LLC