Dr. Steven Teitelbaum is in today’s New York Times for his quotes on the proposed tax on cosmetic procedures. Please visit the New York Times to read the entire article.
Photo by Ann Johansson for The New York Times
Update12/1/09 – Dr. Teitelbaum is also mentioned in Allure Magazine
I’m glad NYT ran this story about this ludicrous tax & more importantly I’m glad Dr. T is addressing this issue. As a woman I’m insulted that one group is singled out to carry the burden. Yes, it is true that women are more likely to have cosmetic surgery but not all come from wealth. Not only is this tax sexist but it’s baseless!
It seems like they are making a universal judgment call on all medical procedures. You can’t do that because there are just too many legitimate reasons to get plastic surgery these days.
If you can buy a new suit to help your business or job search and not have to pay an extra tax because the Government says you don’t need it (because you already have 3 in your closet, a 4th would be “Elective”…lol)…then…Do you see how silly this is?
The Government should tax everything the same or they’ll be just like insurance companies…telling us what is and isn’t legit according to their best interests.
It only makes sense when you look at it with a judgmental eye. If you think that these are all elective procedures for unhappy people to feel better…you are wrong and small minded. This tax would support that side of ignorance that pushes people to “Plastic Secrecy” and places an unwarranted stigma on the plastic surgery business as a whole.
I agree with much of what Shango wrote. This is a tricky one as I strongly believe we should have a socialized health plan (yes I am using the ‘S’ word) and I hope it doesn’t get thrown out because of the added ‘botax.’
Elective plastic surgery can honestly be perceived as vanity BUT if there is a strong positive emotional result for the patient, then doesn’t that stand on it’s own and therefore should be valid?
Obviously, there are those who will be obsessive and have procedures done that one may deem unnecessary, but that is between the patient, doctor and ultimately a therapist.
I believe that added taxation should be focused to products/items that can have a greater negative as cigarettes, liquor and if or when the time comes marijuana.
This is what’s wrong with how our political system works. ‘throwing out the baby with the bathwater’ is what comes to mind.
well it passed without the botax! but for those who use tanning salons, sorry. somebody had to fall on the sword.
really? tanning salons?