Pink Tax in India: Meaning, Examples & Impact on Women

Have you heard about the "pink tax." What exactly is it? The pink tax meaning is when products targeted at women cost more than similar ones aimed at men. It's not an official tax you pay to the government or anything like that. Instead, it's more like an extra charge women often face just because they're buying something designed for them. This means women might end up spending more money for the same product that men get for less.

Is the Pink Tax real?

Pink tax is not real. Governments do not enforce the pink tax on women's products. It is a term used to describe the extra cost that some companies charge for products marketed to women compared to similar products marketed to men. When companies charge more for pink (female) products compared to blue (male) versions, the extra revenue does not go to the government but benefits the companies themselves.

What is the Pink Tax in India?

The "pink tax" is not prohibited by law in India, and there are no set government regulations on this pricing practice. Female-targeted goods and services prices are determined based on market dynamics and demand. While there is limited research on the pink tax in India, surveys indicate price variations between products for women and men.

This pricing discrepancy is not unique to India. New York State Department of Consumer Affairs found in a study that items marketed towards women were priced 7% higher than those for men or gender-neutral items, with personal care products for women showing a 13% price disparity. Similarly, investigations in the UK revealed price differences, such as women's deodorant being 8.9% pricier than men's and women's facial moisturizer costing 34.28% more.

Example of Pink Tax 

The World Economic Forum (WEF) notes that products marketed to women can be pricier than similar ones for men. Items like cosmetics, shoes, and clothes often cost more when designed and advertised specifically for women. For instance, products in pink packaging targeted at women may have higher prices than gender-neutral alternatives. Women's razors and perfumes are examples.

It's not just a pink tax on products only; services can also have this inequality. For instance, a woman's haircut often costs 60% more than a man's. Sometimes, there are explanations for this price difference. Take haircuts, for example. The reasoning usually given is that women typically have longer hair, so there's more to cut and style. Also, extra care is needed for hygiene, and sometimes, the training for hair styling differs for women's hair.

Impact on women of Pink Tax

The pink tax continues to place a heavy financial burden on women worldwide, mainly as they still earn less than men. In India, this economic strain is evident as women often face higher expenses while being paid less than men due to the gender pay gap. According to the Global Gender Gap Report 2022, there's a 19% pay disparity between men and women in India, even for equal work, with women bearing the brunt, especially in sectors like agriculture, where they do 80% of the work. This wage gap persists across various industries, from agriculture to IT, driven by multiple socio-economic factors.

A United Nations report highlighted that globally, women earn just 77 cents for every dollar men earn. The World Economic Forum's Global Gender Gap Report 2022 reveals that only five out of 146 countries analysed have achieved scores higher than 0.80 in wage equality, with 129 countries reporting a decline in women's labour force participation compared to men's.

In California, research by the Senate Committees on Judiciary and Women, Work & Families in 2020 revealed that women pay an average of $2,381 more annually for the same goods and services as men. Over a lifetime, this could accumulate to around $188,000 in pink tax. This combination of higher expenses and lower earnings increases women's financial vulnerability and diminishes their purchasing power.

History of Pink Tax?

The history of the pink tax traces back several years, but the term itself was coined in 1994 in California. It emerged following the realisation that brands in various cities consistently charged women higher prices for goods and services than men. This marked the formal recognition of a phenomenon that had long been observed—an unfair pricing disparity based on gender.

Pink Tax in the fashion industry?

According to a study by Businessoffashion.com, there were seventeen instances where the same style of clothes had different prices for men and women. These instances were observed on the e-commerce platforms of renowned brands such as Saint Laurent, Valentino, Gucci, Dolce & Gabbana, Balmain, and Alexander Wang. In most cases, the women's version was priced higher, with women sometimes paying up to $1,000 more.

Among the brands examined by BoF, Saint Laurent showed the most price discrepancies between similar men's and women's styles, totalling eight instances. For example, a striped sweater was priced at $950 for men and $1,190 for women, while a black short-sleeved silk t-shirt cost $490 for men and $590 for women. Remarkably, both the men's and women's versions featured identical designs, colours, and materials.

Conclusion

Indeed, the Pink tax is not a formal tax introduced by Governments. Still, the bigger truth is this practice by companies of charging more from women has been in place for decades and results in women paying more for the same products and men paying less despite the negative wage gap between men and women. By fostering awareness and driving meaningful change, we can dismantle the systemic inequalities perpetuated by the pink tax, paving the way for a more equitable and inclusive society for future generations.