Is the EU to blame for the “tampon tax”?

Earlier this year it was announced in the Government’s Budget that the controversial Tampon Tax will be abolished when the transition period for the UK’s departure from the EU ends on 31 December. The tampon tax is a Value Added Tax (VAT) on all feminine hygiene products, where the current rate is 5% VAT. The decision to scrap the tax follows decades of campaigning by various women’s groups for feminine products categorised by the European Union as “luxury” items, to be considered necessities.  

The Value Added Tax (VAT) was adopted by the UK in 1973 following its entry into the European Economic Community. Member states have been co-ordinating their VAT rate since 1992 as a part of a wider programme to create a single market. Initially, the standard VAT rate was 10%, however, in January 2001, the Labour government reduced the VAT rate for feminine hygiene products to 5%. 

In the 2019 election cycle, in an attempt to garner support for his  “Get Brexit Done” campaign, Boris Johnson claimed that the UK “could take back control of our VAT” following Britain’s departure from the EU, signalling that European Union law was an obstacle in ending VAT for feminine products.  However, the EU tax regime is more complicated than this. While member states are required to implement common rules set in the EU VAT Directives, its implementation varies from country to country. So while EU law mandates that members levy a 15% standard the UK VAT rate is a standard 20%. Hence, VAT could have been reduced by 5% without overriding the primacy of EU law. In light of this, claims by Brexit campaigners that EU regulations were solely to blame for the maintenance of high VAT seem disingenuous. If the political will to eliminate the “tampon tax” existed, then surely the government could have at minimum lowered the rate. 

The duplicity of such claims are reinforced by the circumstances of the 2016 referendum. Ahead of the vote, Prime Minister David Cameron secured a promise from the EU Commission that it would modify its VAT directives to allow for a zero VAT rating on more products, including sanitary goods. Given the size of EU bureaucracy, it was not until 2018, two years after the historic Brexit vote, that proposals were published, with implementation set for 2022 at the earliest. Thus, Brexit and abolishing the tampon tax was always a false dichotomy; the UK could have both remained in the EU and eliminated the “tampon tax”. In fact, had the UK not lost its influence in the institution it could have championed this policy change and moved it up on the agenda across all the member states.

An attempt to reduce the VAT through legislation was proposed in 2015 by the Labour MP Paula Sherriff, with support from former Shadow Chancellor John McDonnell. The Finance Bill Amendment which would have led to a negotiation with the EU on a further reduction in the 5% VAT rate, was rejected by 305 to 287 votes. This was in spite of a petition signed by 250,000 people calling for the government to axe the tax. The rejection of the bill caused outrage among women MPs, with SNP MP Alison Thewliss describing it “absurd” that whilst Jaffa cakes and exotic meats are exempt from VAT, feminine hygiene products are not. 

Claims that leaving the EU was the only means of abolishing the tax are simply wrong. The UK could have explored alternative avenues. For example, they could have followed in the steps of the Scottish Parliament by introducing legislation to make all period products free. Scotland is set to make history with The Period Products (Free Provision) (Scotland) Bill which would create the legal obligation for the Scottish government to provide period products for free.

Regrettably, the political consequences of Brexit have lessened the achievement that is removing the tampon tax, and a step towards eliminating period poverty. The narrative that the EU is to blame for the maintenance of tampon tax undermines the efforts of campaigners to abolish the tax, and allows the architects of Brexit to claim a further victory. Nonetheless, the removal of this will save the average woman £40 throughout her life. Though this may not seem like much the symbolic nature of the act is enormous. This change in policy marks a step forward in promoting a healthy perspective of feminine products, as well as finally implementing policies that advocate for a woman’s agenda in politics.