Wednesday, March 24, 2010

The first ripples in the health care pool ...

I went to my gym this morning to swim.  There is a tanning bed there - but not for long.  It is being discontinued as of May 15th.  The new health care law puts a 10% tax on individuals receiving indoor tanning services.  The tax has to be explained, collected, reported, and the cost of the tax flows directly to the user - the price paid for the service must be increased.  Much easier for a gym like mine, offering it simply as an additional service, to discontinue it.   But what about a business set up solely for tanning?  Will all tanners continue to pay the higher price?  Basic economics principles say no - elasticity of demand as a function of price - and so use will decline, and the businesses on the margin will close.  The tax primarily affects female business owners, who own about two-thirds of tanning salons in the U.S.  Fewer businesses in the industry mean fewer suppliers and manufacturers.  A net loss of jobs at both the retail and wholesale level.  This provision is a tiny little piece of the entire bill - one sentence in the  thousands of pages, but already it has a ripple effect.  It is easy to see the loss here.  What is gained?  And that is the real question that is overlooked in the loud and angry debate - what will the actual effects of the bill be when the laws of economics and individual behavior kick in?  The only thing certain is that no one knows.  

1 comment:

Doug Humes said...

Unintended - or perhaps intended - consequences three years out: as of 12-2013: "Since 2009, more than 4000 businesses representing 20% of the industry have closed, resulting in thousands of lost jobs in the private sector. The tan tax has only compounded the problem. We estimate 10% of the businesses have closed nationwide as a direct result of the tan tax and data released by the IRS bears this out."

http://www.theita.com/news/128450/Indoor-Tanning-Associations-statement-on-the-IRSs-final-regulations.htm