A new academic study has revealed that when it comes to import tariffs on clothing, it is it is as often as not men, not women, who face higher taxes, challenging the perception of a 'pink tax'.
However, the study also found a shift towards higher tariffs on women's items in recent years and an overall picture distorted by outlier nations.
The analysis by Dr James Scott, of King's College London, investigated tariff schedules across 81 countries initially (1996/97) and then 152 World Trade Organisation (WTO) members (2022).
Dr Scott found up to 80 per cent of countries charged identical tariffs on comparable men's and women's clothing items. However, among the minority, about 20 per cent, of countries that did implement different tariffs, the overall average tariff burden fell more heavily on men's clothing.
While the overall number of discriminatory tariff lines decreased between 1996 and 2022, the pattern of discrimination has started to shift. The average tariff difference favouring women (higher men's tariffs) decreased, while the average difference favouring men (higher women's tariffs) increased significantly.
The overall picture is skewed by a small number of countries with very high discriminatory tariffs, such as Angola (briefly applying 30 per cent higher tariffs on men's items in 2022, since reversed), Barbados (differences up to 40 percentage points favouring either gender on specific items), and the United States.
The ability to discriminate stems from the nearly universal Harmonized System (HS) product classification, which splits clothing into men's and women's categories - a practice dating back to 1931 League of Nations agreements. Dr Scott argues this division enables discriminatory tariffs.
To remedy this, the study argues for the removal of the gender split from the HS classification or integrating gender discrimination analysis into the WTO's Trade Policy Review Mechanism.
Ultimately, tariffs are changed at the stroke of a legislator's pen. That states do not eliminate these differences is an indictment of claims to take gender discrimination seriously in trade policy."
Dr James Scott
