Womxn// The Tampon Tax: A Pro-Brexit Fallacy?

By Bethany Barrett
17 January 2021

Periods. A word that can conjure up a thousand connotations: everything from the bodily process which gives rise to life, to the symbolic metronome by which so many women’s lives are regulated. They can be messy, they can be painful, they can be a relief. You know what they are not? A luxury. Yet for years, they have been taxed as such. As of 1st January 2021, however, this is no longer the case in the UK, with VAT no longer being charged on the sale of sanitary products. Surely this is a cause for celebration? Well, in short, yes. But before we all go praising Rishi Sunak unreservedly for being the taxman who cut the Tampon Tax, it is worth noting the wider background behind these jubilant headlines.

The so-called ‘Tampon Tax’ has increasingly hit the headlines in the UK as awareness around period poverty has grown. An average British woman is estimated to spend £40 in VAT alone buying the sanitary products needed across her life. In removing VAT on such items, this money is saved, and the problem of period poverty alleviated (though certainly not solved). But there is a much wider impact here than simply a financial one. Ask any woman, probably any person, and they will confirm that periods are not a ‘luxury’, and that period products are therefore ‘essential’. But in adding VAT- a tax applied only to non-essential, luxury products- we are being told the opposite. Acting as a symbol of women’s lesser standing in society, the Tampon Tax highlights how women’s needs are not seen as such, despite the fact that this particular need actually relates to the very process through which society is continued. So why has it taken us so long to remove VAT from period products?

Whilst individual VAT rates are set by national governments, for members of the EU these rates must fall within the framework set out in the EU VAT Directive 2006/112/EC. Following campaigns such as those led by MP Anne Taylor, in 2001 the UK Government set VAT on period products at the reduced (rather than standard) level of 5%, the lowest permitted under Article 99 of the EU Directive. Fast forward 20 years, and this is still the case. A fully reduced rate (of 0%) simply is not allowed under the EU regulations unless the Directive itself is changed- and to do this takes years and the unanimous approval of all Member States.

Enter: the Brexiteers. Suddenly, this matter concerning women’s health rights had the opportunity to become something far more contentious: the Tampon Tax became a reason to leave the EU. The issue became a microcosm for the Brexit dilemma as a whole, starting in 2015 when MPs voted against an end to the tax. Peppered amongst the talk of women’s health rights and equality, the Brexit rhetoric we would later come to know so well stands out: ideas of ‘taking back control’, how the bureaucratic EU was holding us back, how we would be able to make better changes on our own. The proponents of the proposed legislation ending the Tampon Tax argued that it would be a symbol to the EU of the UK’s commitment to this issue. Equally, on a practical level, passing the requisite national legislation at this point would allow for a quicker end to the tax once such changes came about at an EU-level, as this legislation could then simply be brought into force rather than needing to pass through Parliament again first. On the other hand, the Brexiteers brought a characterisation of the EU as being the body personally responsible for harming British women through the tax, arguing that there was no point legislating nationally for the eventuality that the Directive might be changed when instead we could just leave the EU and no longer be confined by the Directive in the first place.

At this point, it is perhaps interesting to note that the UK was already taxing period products prior to joining the EU. The UK could not cut the Tampon Tax whilst still being in the EU because they were taxing period products upon their ascension to the Common Market (which later became the EU) in 1973. Ireland, for example, had already specifically made such products exempt from tax, and this exemption remained after the EU rules on VAT came into place. But of course, it was far more convenient to paint this as an issue that the EU caused and thus was best solved through leaving the block. Brexiteers believed that they had found a golden egg: nobody could say they did not want equality for women, so if the Tampon Tax could be portrayed as an issue solvable only upon leaving the EU, the case for Brexit was considerably strengthened. In addition, the type of people most likely to care about the end of the Tampon Tax- younger women- fell outside of the core demographic of Brexit voters, meaning that this was a whole new group of potential ballot papers to win.

This opportunity to give a practical demonstration of the impact of being in the EU was not easily let go by EU supporters. One of the advantages of being in the EU is strength in numbers, and the ability to instigate change beyond our national borders. Following the 2015 debate, the UK Government took two firm actions. First, it announced the creation of the Tampon Tax Fund, through which the funds raised from VAT levied on period products was distributed to a variety of women’s charities. To date, it has awarded £47 million to causes tackling issues such as period poverty, domestic abuse and more. Secondly, as part of then-Prime Minister David Cameron’s fated talks with the EU just two months before the 2016 Referendum, all 28 Member States agreed to take action to cut the Tampon Tax. The Government portrayed this as a personal victory for the UK, evidence that change was easier and better made from within the EU than outside of it.

Just two months later, this agreement ceased to directly impact UK citizens. With the course for Brexit set, Section 126 of the Finance Act 2016 (legislating for the end of the Tampon Tax) was passed by the UK Parliament, and lay waiting to be brought into force once the UK had formally left the EU. This time has now come, and UK women are finally free of the Tampon Tax. But at what cost? Now, the Brexit debate is for another day, but as politicians and headlines alike proclaim the end of the tax as a victory for both women’s equality and Brexit, it is important to remember that these two things need not be intertwined. Since 2015, the Tampon Tax and the women’s issues surrounding it have been twisted into a wider debate surrounding sovereignty and our duty to a wider community- precisely the opposite ethos of the campaigns fighting to end period poverty globally. Women across the EU still face the Tampon Tax with the financial and symbolic repercussions it brings. EU progress on abolishing it has stalled, with the last draft proposals being published in 2018 and still facing disapproval from several Member States.

Equally, this is not a total victory for British women. A total victory would be the free provision nationwide of period products, just as condoms are. Whilst this is now available in schools, colleges and hospitals, we must hope that progress on the issue does not slow now that the political clout of abolishing the Tampon Tax has lessened. The UK Government would do well to note the devolved Scottish Government’s approach- they pledged to provide free period products to all who need them in 2020, after having been the first country in the world to start providing them free in schools and hospitals. This pledge, detailed in the Period Products (Free Provision) (Scotland) Bill 2020, was made even before the departure of the UK from the EU and the subsequent abolition of the Tampon Tax in the UK- further proof that the two concepts of Brexit and the Tampon Tax need not ever have been conflated.

The ending of the Tampon Tax in the UK is clearly a thing to be celebrated. But to quantify this success accurately, the wider context surrounding the cut must be considered. This issue was meant to be far bigger, far more impactful, than the Brexit arguments framing it. Whilst we should honour the tireless work of campaigners such as Laura Coryton (of the ‘Stop Taxing Periods’ campaign), we must also acknowledge and be wary of the large effect the Brexit fallacies on this issue had. Women’s issues should not simply be viewed as political footballs; we should not lose sight of the fact that the end goal is equality for all, not just some, women.

Bethany is a third-year law student studying in Bristol but originally heralding from the Midlands. After she leaves University, she is going to be a solicitor in Manchester. Outside of studying, you'll find her baking or at the gym, and she is hardly ever without a cup of tea in her hand...