The Pink Tax - A Comparative Socio-Economic Analysis Of Gendered Pricing In India And Abroad

Author: LawSphereX

Category: Taxation

Published: 2026-08-23T21:26:46.973347+00:00

Updated: 2026-08-26T17:05:30.759+00:00

THE PINK TAX: A COMPARATIVE SOCIO-ECONOMIC

ANALYSIS OF GENDERED PRICING IN INDIA AND

ABROAD

Ishna Deshmukh, NMIMS Kirit P Mehta School of Law, Mumbai

ABSTRACT

Men and women often buy the same type of common products. However, a number of studies suggest that consumer goods marketed to and advertised for women are sometimes priced higher than similar products marketed to men. This disparity is known as a pink tax. This research will study and analyze the socio-economic background of this Pink Tax, in India, of how the concept of gender pricing creates a financial disparity and weighs heavily upon women, especially women from lower socioeconomic strata of the society. In an age where economic disparities in terms of the gender wage gap are extremely prevalent, the pink tax exacerbates the economic burden imposed on women. We will examine India's revenue policies in detail, as they are a key driver of pricing for goods and services that have differential impacts on women and men.

So far, the removal of GST on sanitary pads in 2018 was a step forward, but many other products and services like personal care, clothing, salon services, etc. are priced higher for women. The paper compares India with models across the globe studying regulatory frameworks in countries like France and U. S. and how they have handled pricing by gender through legislative action. This comparative analysis will aid in pinpointing policy voids in India’s consumer protection framework and also helping in drawing reference points for reforms. Additionally this study will also examine how the Pink Tax affects disadvantaged women and especially in more rural areas. This makes sanitary pads and other health-essential products difficult to obtain, thus restricting socio-economic mobility for women in these communities.

This research brings a spotlight to gendered pricing as one of those invisible economic barriers that chips away at women’s purchasing power and advances their financial dependence. This study will also investigate corporate accountability and the role of businesses in perpetuating genderbased pricing. It explores whether Indian brands engage in intentional gendered pricing or if consumer preferences drive the phenomenon.

Ultimately, this paper advocates for policy reforms, including stricter consumer protection laws, taxation revisions, and corporate transparency measures. By addressing the legal, economic, and social dimensions of the Pink Tax, this research aims to contribute to ongoing discussions on genderbased economic inequality and the need for equitable market practices in India.

I. Introduction:

The term "pink tax" refers to the higher costs of goods and services specifically marketed to women versus similar goods and services marketed to men1. There are different definitions for this concept, but I like to focus on the concept of higher pricing based solely on gendered marketing, not a literal tax, but a higher cost as experienced by women over their lifetimes. The "pink tax" is the measurable price differential between products marketed to women, compared to similar products marketed to men, which are frequently similar in function, such as razors or deodorants marketed to women and men.

The concept of the "pink tax" draws attention to the fact that there is a discrepancy in pricing on a product due to the gender associated with the intended consumer of the product and also where marketing and product design result in products being marketed to women at a higher price point than similar marketed products to men. 2 Additionally, some talk about the pink tax in terms of the financial cost to the gender incurred in a lifetime, and this indicates that price differential adds up over time to either an actual financial burden of the gender, or has an impact on overall financial wellbeing of the gender3. This perspective illustrates that the pink tax is essentially a byproduct of businesses exploiting socially acceptable gender characteristics/expectations and marketing products to women at a higher price point largely based on some fluid idea of demand, or willingness to pay.

1.1 Research Question and Research Gap

This research aims to investigate the effects of gender based pricing on women in India, relative to countries like the USA and UK, and the impact on their economic well-being. A number of 1 Spencer Feingold, What is the pink tax and how does it hinder women?, World Economic Forum, (July 14, 2022), https://www.weforum.org/stories/2022/07/what-is-the-pink-tax-and-how-does-it-hinder-women/

2 Sahastranshu Pandey, When pink is a taxing colour, The Telegraph India, (May 21, 2024, 07:06 AM),

https://www.telegraphindia.com/opinion/when-pink-is-a-taxing-colour-ramifications-of-the-pink-tax-extend-farbeyond-economic-disparities/cid/2021262 3 Ulfath Joad, Pink Tax: Meaning & Its Impact on Women, Fi, (Apr. 24, 2022), https://fi.money/guides/personalfinance/pink-tax-meaning-its-impact-on-women

studies have been conducted on this topic in the Western world, however, there is limited investigation that pertains to India. Most literature discusses pricing issues in different product categories but does not extend to the socio-economic differential associated with pricing based on gender. Additionally, there is little comparative literature on how countries address the issue of Pink Tax engagement through policy and consumer activism. Examining this theme is significant because it shines a light on an economic impact on women — even more so, given the relative differential of income between genders. Knowledge of how countries implement regulations and consumer protection positions the intended research to investigate what would be effective in India.

Further, many consumers do not even know/are not aware of the Pink Tax, and knowledge of it can empower consumers to make informed purchasing choices. The proposed research investigates the gap in knowledge, through a primary survey study in India and accompanying secondary data from the USA and UK study, about gendered-based pricing. Overall, the planned research aims to provide a gap analysis of the Pink Tax at an international level that considers consumer protection and gender-based pricing in the USA, UK and India/Indian markets.

1.2 Objectives of Research

1. Analyzing the extent of the Pink Tax in India and comparing it to global trends - This

research assesses gendered pricing across a range of products in India to investigate how the data compares with the global statistics available from the USA and UK and how this might reflect regional differences.

2. Assessing the social economic impact of the Pink Tax on women - This study

investigates the impact of the Pink Tax on women's financial wellness, purchasing power, and economic participation, particularly in India.

3. Understanding consumer awareness and attitudes towards the Pink Tax - Through a

survey of consumers in India, this research assesses the awareness of consumers and their purchasing choices as a factor of gendered pricing.

4. Providing recommendations for policy interventions and consumer advocacy - Based

upon the findings, this study provides recommendations including regulatory processes, awareness campaigns, and approaches to addressing gendered pricing.

1.3. Hypothesis

Null Hypothesis (H0): - There is no significant difference in gender-based pricing (Pink Tax) between India and abroad (USA and UK). - The pink tax does not have a substantial socio-economic impact on women. Alternative Hypothesis (H1): - There is a significant difference in gender-based pricing (Pink Tax) between India and abroad. - The pink tax disproportionately affects women, leading to a measurable socioeconomic impact.

1.4 Historical Background of Pink Tax

The practice of charging more for women-focused products and services than for men's goods - often called the "pink tax" - did not originate with the label itself, even though the concept became popular in the 1990s. The phrase itself gained footing in the mid-1990s, especially around 1994 when some studies in California showed price differentials. However, gender pricing has existed even earlier than this. In the early 20th century, signs of differentiated product pricing emerged for general merchandise as well as for personal care products. 4 By the later decades of the 20th century, gender-based segmentation of consumer markets increased substantially, which was influenced by advertising techniques. Furthermore, as societal norms developed, the practice of placing gender on products and advertising became more prevalent, contributing to solidifying the pink tax.

5For instance, packaging and branding products unique to women's identity often emphasized some qualities of female identity; thus, companies could charge higher prices because there was, in theory, a difference. However, the identification of differences masked the same products produced for male consumers. 4 Atkin, E. N. , 2018. Historical influences on modern America and the pink tax. New York: The College at Brockport.

5 De Beauvoir, S., 2023. The second sex. In Social theory re-wired (pp. 346-354). Routledge.

In the aftermath of World War II, gender roles were solidified, which facilitated this market categorization. Increasingly, marketing and advertising were aimed specifically at women as consumers, often linking certain products with aspirational representations of femininity and domesticity. This was the premise for a consumer atmosphere where women were enticed to spend on items that advertised beauty, self-care, or societal demands in spending, often without consideration of price. The 1990s represented a key time in the history of the pink tax. Consumer awareness and activism began to push the notion of the pink tax to the forefront. Studies and reports, including several in California, provided data-driven evidence of genderbudgeting prices, creating awareness.

There was also a legislative attempt, the Gender Tax Repeal Act in California6, to address the pink tax, although comprehensive legal remedies have continued to be difficult to enact in wider settings. Most recently, the pink tax has gained greater visibility with the rise of social media and heightened awareness of gender equality issues. The New York City Department of Consumer Affairs' 2015 report7 included an analysis of women's products with higher prices compared to men's similar products--adding to larger acknowledgment of the pink tax. The increase in online shopping and price comparison tools has helped consumers recognize and push back against these disparities as well.

8 Although the history of gender-based pricing stems from market segmentation and changing gender roles, discussions and activism is still shaping our understandings, and possibilities for eliminating the pink tax.

1.5 Research Rationale

The investigation of the pink tax is important for a number of interrelated reasons. First and foremost, it raises an issue of economic justice9. The pink tax places a real economic burden on women who display an unequal price, usually, for comparable products and services. Although it may seem trivial with any one product, in the aggregate it is a real expense for women and erodes women's disposable income and purchasing power. Second, this economic burden can be viewed as a compounding disadvantage and, in aggregate, can worsen the effects

6 Gender Tax Repeal Act, Cal. Civ. Code § 51.6.

7 New York City Department of Consumer Affairs Report 2015, https://www.nyc.gov/site/dca/partners/genderpricing-study.page 8 Lafferty, M., 2019. The pink tax: The persistence of gender price disparity. Midwest Journal of Undergraduate Research, 11(2019), pp.56-72. 9 Spencer Feingold, What is the pink tax and how does it hinder women?, World Economic Forum, (Jul. 14, 2022), https://www.weforum.org/stories/2022/07/what-is-the-pink-tax-and-how-does-it-hinder-women/.

of the gender pay gap and hinder women's capacity for economic independence and broader economic equity. Apart from the direct economic effects, the pink tax is a significant issue when looking at it through a gender equality lens. The pink tax is not simply a matter of market forces; it is a reality that emphasizes long-standing gender norms and stereotypes. The pink tax is often a result of reinforcing stereotypes that women are willing to pay more because they care what others think about their femininity or how society would define beauty and self-care. By examining the pink tax, researchers have the opportunity to expose how market practices profit, and walk the line of enabling gender inequity. It is important for the study of the pink tax because of advocates for consumers and pricing standards.

All consumers have a right to expect prices that force essential choice (or what they want for themselves or their families) to be based on production, demand, and value - not gender. By studying the pink tax, it helps to expose how pricing can be manipulated, informing various regulatory responses to hold businesses accountable for pricing practices. Ultimately, the study of the pink tax adds to the understanding of gendered marketplaces and can force greater transparency. In conclusion, solid academic research on the pink tax has important implications for policy. By providing evidence and analyses, research can inform policy and regulation aimed at decreasing price discrimination based on gender, and potentially create a more equitable economy.

In addition, sharing research findings is a key component of raising social awareness about the pink tax, which can lead to more informed decisions on the part of consumers and more ethical and equitable pricing from businesses.

II. Literature Review

This literature review will analyze the existing body of research and academic discussion on the "pink tax", which refers to the higher price of goods and services marketed toward women as compared to the same products marketed toward men. This section considers how the pink tax has been defined, methods used to study it, and notable findings and debates. It will also identify research gaps and areas needing more exploration, particularly the socio-economic impacts of the pink tax in a variety of cultures, including India.

Pink Tax and The Law - Discriminating against Women Consumers10, a book by Alara Efsun Yazıcıoğlu looks at the confluence of gender and consumer culture, and how marketing reproduces economic differences. It investigates gendered pricing practices, media depictions of brands and people, and the changing evolution of feminist critiques of marketing over time. Within the context of consumer culture, the book identifies the "Pink Tax" as a representation of how consumers experience discrimination in terms of pricing, and how that experience is shaped by society and organization. The work also considers the implications of policy/regulatory action and ethical arguments to call for a reconsideration of gender-based pricing.

With the use of global perspectives and empirical analyses, the author contributes to a greater understanding of how marketing reproduces economic inequality and potentially offers avenues for addressing inequities. Our intention in providing this work to the community is to demonstrate the demand for research and policy responses in the context of marketing experiences and impacts to consumers. Beyond the Pink Tax: Gender-Based Pricing and Differentiation of Personal Care Products11 addresses the legal aspects of gender-based pricing and assesses whether the Pink Tax is a form of economic discrimination. We look at legal frameworks that have been developed in relation to gendered pricing issues, and find considerable gaps in consumer protection laws and antidiscrimination laws as they apply to pricing practices. The paper evaluates the limits of existing U. S.

laws such as the Equal Protection Clause or consumer rights regulations, in adequately fighting the Pink Tax. We review both state and federal legislative attempts to establish a ban on gender-based pricing, and analyze the issues regarding enforcing these legislative bans. Additionally, this paper explores international legal history and policy responses to gendered pricing and compares how global legal systems respond to discriminatory pricing practices. By examining consumer discrimination on the legal front this paper demonstrates the significant need to legislate, intervene and engage in efforts to eliminate economic inequity. On a larger scale, this research will contribute to the general work of gender justice, and highlight various pathways for understanding the intersection between law, policy and market practices to address systemic inequities.

10 Yazıcıoğlu, A.E. (2018). Pink Tax and the Law: Discriminating Against Women Consumers (1st ed.).

Routledge. https://doi.org/10.4324/9780429486975

11 Crawford, B.J., 2023. Pink tax and other tropes. Yale JL & Feminism, 34, p.88.

The Pink Tax: The Persistence of Gender Price Disparity12 discusses the long-term phenomenon of the “pink tax," which represents the markup women often experience for everyday goods and services that are essentially identical to the goods and services of men. The author suggests that this is a form of systemic economic gender discrimination that stems from a combination of social circumstance, strategic gendered marketing by companies themselves, and possible discrimination from both legislative and international trade frameworks. Lafferty explains how products that are designed for use by women, typically in pink packaging and using gendered descriptors in their marketing, are often more expensive than men's identical products simply because they are targeted at women and not men.

The study examines specific case studies like the dubious "BIC for Her Pens" to represent the silliness of this pricing scheme in consumer goods. Lastly, the author broadens the discussion to service-based, gendered price discrepancies as seen in dry cleaning services. For example, women are charged more to launder items of clothing that are the same as men's clothing items. In their work, Lorimer and Babchishin13 critique the notion of generating revenue through taxes on tampons and other sanitary products to support addressing the causes of violent offenders against women. They assert that while prevention services are vital and need funding, imposing the burden on women through taxes on essential products is problematic.

The authors maintain that this approach to funding violence against women's services continues the idea that violence against women is a "woman's problem" and does not account for the wider issues permeating society regarding women's safety. They go on to say that the revenue collected from the fee is not nearly enough to cover the costs of comprehensive prevention programs. Lorimer and Babchishin also connect the tampon fee to the "pink tax", the rationale that women are charged more than men for comparable personal health hygiene products. They argue for the removal of these fees and indicate the need for action by the government to recognize a larger societal problem related to the safety of women and violence against them. Ultimately, they assert that we are indirectly asking women to pay for services related to violence against them.

Moshary, Tuchman, and Bhatia14 explore the issue of gender-based pricing in consumer packaged goods (CPG), centering on the controversial "pink tax. " This term refers to the

12 Lafferty, M., 2019. The pink tax: The persistence of gender price disparity. Midwest Journal of

Undergraduate Research, 11(2019), pp.56-72. 13 Lorimer, K., & Babchishin, K. (2016). Diverting tampon taxes will not solve the issue of violence against women. BMJ: British Medical Journal, 354. 14 Moshary, S., Tuchman, A., & Bhatia, N. (2022). Gender-Based Pricing in Consumer Packaged Goods: A Pink Tax? (J. MIRON, Ed.). Cato Institute.

observed trend where products aimed at women typically cost more than similar items marketed to men. The authors note that although lawmakers are working to address these perceived injustices through initiatives such as New York State's bill S2679 and the proposed Pink Tax Repeal Act at the federal level, there is a lack of substantial research to inform these legislative efforts. Their study delves into how targeting and pricing based on gender manifests within personal care products. They find that a significant majority—80% of product volume— is intentionally targeted by gender. However, they assert that gender-based pricing in CPG differs from its application in other sectors like labor or real estate where negotiation plays a role. In contrast, CPG involves fixed prices, allowing women access to men's products for observation and purchase.

The researchers argue that companies modify their goods to attract specific genders by incorporating attributes beyond mere color choices and packaging designs. Their findings reveal minimal overlap between ingredients used in men's versus women's products, indicating that differentiation is crucial in understanding gender-driven pricing strategies. This approach stands apart from legislation geared towards addressing price disparities among "substantially similar" items. An Economic Analysis of The Pink Tax15 investigates the alarming "Pink Tax," outlining how gender-based price discrepancies harm women when purchasing various consumer goods. The article does more than just an economic analysis of this problem but also discusses the sociocultural context that perpetuates these issues.

The article's authors contend that gender socialization, driven in part by marketing and social conventions, is a significant contributor. The strength of the study was its empirical evidence demonstrating a clear inverse relationship between levels of education and exposure to targeted marketing, especially from fifteen years of age and younger, which illustrates how manipulative marketing practices influence social expectations that continue to reinforce traditional gender stereotypes resulting in women paying more. Additionally, the paper theorizes the moral issues of the "Pink Tax" and the "Tampon Tax" and urges proactive government intervention by way of legislative changes that would eradicate gender-based price discrimination.

The author also brings attention to the power of consumer education and awareness, which fosters their independent ability to recognize and combat these processes. Therefore, the article attempts to advance the conversation toward a more equitable marketplace where an individual's gender is not a pricing factor. 15 Habbal, H. L. , 2020. An Economic Analysis of The Pink Tax (Doctoral dissertation, Lake Forest College).

In summary, this literature review illustrates the complex nature of a "Pink Tax" that stems from deep-rooted gender stereotypes and manipulation of marketing practices. Furthermore, research on young consumers is provided, revealing their susceptibility to targeted advertising, which perpetuates stereotypes and higher prices for men compared to women. This literature review highlighted the ethical implications and discrimination surrounding the "Pink Tax," underscoring the need for policy change and increased consumer awareness. Overall, abolishing the "Pink Tax" will require a concerted effort to alter perceptions and address issues of gender equity, ensuring that women are not unfairly tasked with an economic burden.

III. Research Methodology

The study utilizes a mixed-methods research methodology that integrates qualitative and quantitative techniques of data collection. The primary data collection technique was through an online survey that had multiple-choice questions meant to assess the public's awareness, attitudes, and experiences of the Pink Tax in India and abroad. A blend of descriptive and inferential statistical analyses were used to interpret the results. The quantitative aspect of the study considers the percentage distributions of the responses, whilst qualitative themes emerged from responses and patterns in the data. The analysis is complemented with secondary data from the USA and UK to draw comparisons of gendered pricing practices and the socioeconomic implications.

The underlying purpose of this methodology is to offer a comprehensive socio-economic analysis of gendered pricing, and its impacts inside and outside of India.

3.1 Studying The Pink Tax in India

Question: Have you heard of the term "Pink Tax" before? 71.3% of respondents reported having heard of the term "Pink Tax," while 28.7% stated that they were unfamiliar with it. This indicates a significant level of awareness regarding the issue, though nearly a third of the respondents lack knowledge about the concept. This gap in awareness suggests the need for increased discussions and educational initiatives on gendered pricing. Question: The Pink Tax refers to gender-based price differences in products/services marketed to women. Do you think it exists in India?

66% of respondents think the Pink Tax exists in India, 26% were unsure, and 8% did not think it exists. While the majority are aware of gendered pricing, uncertainty for a fairly large percentage of respondents indicates awareness-raising campaigns that speak specifically on instances of the pricing disparity is warranted. Question: Do you think the Pink Tax is intentional or just a marketing strategy? 46% of respondents believe the Pink Tax is a combination of both intentional and a marketing ploy. 28. 7% thought it was strictly a capitalistic marketing plan to target consumers, while 10. 7% believed it is entirely intentional. Perceptions of the Pink Tax are varied, but a large percentage of respondents attributable to planning and targeted marketing directed to gender. Question: Have you ever noticed a price difference between men’s and women’s products for the same type of item (e.

g. , razors, deodorants, clothing)? A substantial 86% of respondents have observed a price difference between men’s and women’s

products, while 8. 7% have not noticed such disparities, and 5. 3% remain unsure. This high percentage of awareness suggests that gendered pricing is a widely recognized issue and not just a theoretical concept. Question: Have you ever chosen to buy a men’s product instead of a women’s one to avoid paying the Pink Tax? 40% of respondents have opted to purchase men’s products instead of their female-marketed counterparts to avoid the Pink Tax, while 48% have not made such a choice, and 12% are unsure. This finding indicates that a significant portion of consumers actively make purchasing decisions to counteract gendered pricing, demonstrating an awareness of and resistance to the Pink Tax. Question: How much extra do you think women in India spend on products due to the Pink Tax? While 32% of respondents were unsure about the amount spent due to the Pink Tax, 26.

7% estimated the extra cost to be between ₹2,000–₹5,000 per year, and 19. 3% believe it exceeds ₹5,000 annually. Additionally, 18% estimate it to be ₹500–₹2,000 per year, and only 4% think it is less than ₹500 per year. The uncertainty in responses suggests a lack of precise knowledge

regarding the financial impact of the Pink Tax, highlighting the need for more research and transparency on the issue. Question: How much do you think this extra cost affects financial independence for women in India? Using a scale of 1-5, where 5 is the greatest impact, 34. 7% of respondents rated the financial impact as a 3, compared to 33. 3% rating it a 4, and 18. 7% rating it a 5. In contrast, 10% rated it a 2 and 3. 3% said it was a 1. This shows that, on average, people believe the Pink Tax has moderately (or worse) significant effects on women's financial independence adding to the idea of gendered economic disadvantage. Question: Do you think higher pricing on women's products discourages them from buying certain essential goods? 64% of those surveyed believe that raised pricing discourages women from purchasing necessary goods, while 19. 3% are not sure, and 16. 7% disagreed.

This finding speaks to the socio-economic impact of the Pink Tax, implying that gendered pricing may restrict women's access to necessary products influencing women's financial decisions. Question: If given the choice, would you actively seek brands that do not charge a Pink Tax? 70% of respondents stated that they would actively seek brands that do not impose a Pink Tax, whereas 19. 3% were unsure, and 10. 7% said they would not change their purchasing behavior. This strong preference for fair pricing suggests that companies offering gender-neutral pricing may have a competitive edge in the market. Question: Do you believe the Pink Tax is more prominent in India than in other countries? 40. 7% of respondents were undecided about whether the Pink Tax is disproportionately present in India compared to other countries.

20% believed it is disproportionately present in India, another 20% were neutral, and 19. 3% believed it is not disproportionately in India. The high level of uncertainty of responses suggest more comparative research is warranted to understand the extent of the Pink Tax present across nations.

Question: Are you aware of any countries that have taken measures to reduce or eliminate the Pink Tax? 81.3% of respondents indicated they were unaware of any countries that have taken action to address the Pink Tax, while only 18.7% were aware of actions taken. This indicates a lack of awareness of legislative actions in the legislative process around the world. Therefore, more needs to be done to educate consumers about international activities that are tackling gendered pricing. Question: Would you support the Indian government implementing a law to regulate gender-based pricing? A substantial 82.7% of respondents indicated support for the government to intervene to

regulate gender pricing, 10% opposed government intervention, and 7. 3% were unsure. This overwhelming support reflects a potential public acceptance and support for these legal regulations against the Pink Tax. Question: Do you think removing the Pink Tax would make a significant difference in gender equality in India? Agreeing that removal of the Pink Tax would positively affect gender equality, which 68% of respondents believed and 18. 7% were unsure, and only 13. 3% claimed it would not. While most people see that the removal of the Pink Tax could improve gender equality, there are a sizable minority of respondents who are skeptical. This verifies that improving gender equality is a more complex issue, one that is not limited to price adjustments.

In an article in Economic and Political Weekly16, the author estimated the additional cost for women-only households due to the Pink Tax, to be just under $300 per year. This was based on household-level data from the years 2015 to 2022. 7 Taking an exchange rate of about ₹75 per USD over that this represents about ₹22,500 per year on average for women-only households. The article also mentioned that the price premium for women varied from 2 to 6 times across states within India. Comparing the EPW article to our category-based estimation reveals an important difference. By aggregating across all women (or a large portion of them),

16 Saibal Ghosh, Pink Tax in India, Economic and Political Weekly, (Mar. 28, 2025),

https://www.epw.in/journal/2025/10/commentary/pink-tax-india.html.

our rough estimate of approximately ₹326.3 billion annually across personal care and haircuts is not restricted to women-only households. The EPW article is based on estimating the additional cost for women-only households, which may provide some insight into this difference. Additionally, our estimate has more limited categories based on the information available, while the EPW article likely incorporated a wider variety of goods and services by looking at household-level data. The significant range of the price premium (2 to 6 times) mentioned in the EPW article indicates that the price premium may differ significantly depending on the state and the specific products consumed.

3.2 Secondary Data - Studying the Pink Tax in the United States of America and the

United Kingdom Data reveal glaring differences in gender pricing, demonstrating how women pay more than men for more or less essential items and services. For example, in the United States, higher tariffs on women's clothing represents an additional cost borne by women that men do not pay, to the tune of about $2 billion more in tariffs than men do17. This kind of price discrepancy continues in personal hygiene products. A 2015 study from the New York City Department of Consumer Affairs determined that women's products cost, on average, 13% more than men's products. The U. S. News18 report draws attention to the long-lasting financial consequences of the Pink Tax, showing how women end up spending thousands of dollars above men for the same items over their lifetimes, as a result of gender-specific pricing loopholes19.

These costs accrue in a variety of sectors, including personal care goods, clothing, and even financial products like loans and insurance. Women often also pay more for mortgages and car loans because of implicit bias within formal financial institutions, widening the economic gap. In addition, the study highlights the compounding effects of the gender pay gap, which restricts women's financial mobility, but also makes them pay more for basic goods and services. The cumulative effect of higher costs for the same everyday items, coupled with lower earnings, creates a huge economic disadvantage for women over time. In addition, the report also drives home the importance of consumer awareness and policy. For example, across a variety of

17 Lane Gillespie, The pink tax: Latest updates and statistics, Bankrate, (Feb, 27, 2023),

https://www.bankrate.com/personal-finance/pink-tax-how-women-pay-more/. 18 Maryalene LaPonsie, Pink Tax: What Does Price Discrimination Cost Women?, US News, (Oct. 11, 2024, 12:44 PM), https://money.usnews.com/money/personal-finance/taxes/articles/the-pink-tax-costs-womenthousands-of-dollars-over-their-lifetimes.

19 Anna Bessendorf, The-Pink-Tax—How-Gender-Based-Pricing-Hurts-Women” New York City Department of

Consumer Affairs, (Dec. 2015), https://www.jec.senate.gov/public/_cache/files/8a42df04-8b6d-4949-b20b- 6f40a326db9e/the-pink-tax—how-gender-based-pricing-hurts-women-s-buying-power.pdf.

states, legislative mandates have been introduced to ban the established practice of genderbased pricing. Still, those regulations are often limited. The report concludes that while voting with your buying power can help, systemic policy changes and corporate accountability must occur to create a more equitable marketplace. In the United Kingdom, similar price differences appear in products sold for everyday personal hygiene. For example, women’s shower gel costs 428% more than men’s shower gel; women's shampoo costs 149% more than men's; and women's deodorant costs 34% more than men’s20. Even razors, a basic hygiene product, demonstrate a 23% price difference. Even menstrual products were taxed smugly as luxury items until 2021. Scotland even passed the Period Product Act, supplying free and accessible menstrual products for people who require them.

The Pink Tax has serious effects on financial inequality, especially in conjunction with the gender pay gap. Solving this issue must consist of many different approaches, like valid consumer awareness, political engagement, and assisting businesses in providing justifiable pricing. Action can be taken by the individual to consider the cost of their purchasing choices; systemic change is needed to eradicate gender-based pricing and economic equity.

3.3 A Comparative Analysis between India, The United States of America, and The

United Kingdom. The Pink Tax, or price discrimination on the basis of gender, is a global problem which can have adverse an effect on women's financial well-being due to the price differentiation for products and services targeting women, making them more expensive than comparable products and services targeting men. Research on this issue has been plentiful in the United States and the United Kingdom, with published academic research documents significant price differences for personal care products, clothing, and necessary services. In India, this is a problem, though hardly studied, with scant formal studies that demonstrate the financial burden on women. A comparative study of India, the U.S., and the U.K., reveals the breadth of the Pink Tax, and the responses of policies and consumers have affect on the impact of the general phenomenon.

20 The Co-operative Bank, Pink Tax: Women are paying 40% more for their essentials, (Oct. 29, 2025),

https://www.co-operativebank.co.uk/content-hub/articles-and-advice/pink-tax-women-paying-more-for-theiressentials/

Price differences between India and international markets illustrate a distinctive tendency towards gendered pricing across certain categories of products. In India, women experience higher prices for products such as razors, shampoos, and deodorants, though research explicitly measuring differences is limited. In the United States, a 2015 study conducted by the New York City Department of Consumer Affairs found that, on average, women's products were 7% higher than men's, with women's personal care products being 13% higher, and women's clothing being 8% more expensive than men's. The discounts observed from the United States are considerably more acute in the United Kingdom.

A study conducted by The Co-operative Bank concluded that women's shower gel was 428% more expensive than men's; women's shampoo was 149% more expensive than men's shampoo and women's deodorant was 34% more expensive than men's deodorant. These price differences demonstrate that the Pink Tax is not merely a localized or singular issue, but instead a systemic issue for women. The taxation of menstrual products has been a controversial issue in all three regions, albeit with different levels of policy reform. In India, sanitary napkins were taxed at 12% under the Goods and Services Tax (GST) until their tax was abolished after protests and advocacy efforts in 2018. Educational initiatives can help overcome affordability and accessibility obstacles, especially in rural areas where hygiene products are still considered a luxury item.

In the United States, menstrual products are taxed in various states as "non-essential items," although some states have eliminated the "tampon tax. " The UK abolished the tampon tax in 2021 and Scotland eliminated the tampon tax in 2021 and addressed menstrual equity by enacting the Period Product Act, which provides free menstrual hygiene products. The differences in policy illustrate different levels of government intervention in decreasing gendered fiscal burdens. The Pink Tax deepens economic inequality based on gender, especially in countries where pay gaps are already high. For example, in India, women earn about 20 percent less than men on average, which already widen the economic gap, but when you consider gendered pricing, it increases the gap for low-income women even more.

The issue of women lacking financial independence due to wage gaps, coupled with the Pink Tax being placed on all women, adds a burden that makes saving, investing, and other economic opportunities far less accessible. In the U. S. , and the UK, where we see lower levels of the gender wage gap, it is still there, and women will spend thousands of dollars over their lifetimes, losing financial and wealth security as a result. Therefore, gendered pricing/taxation, combined with wage inequality, means women are at financial disadvantages as a result of a systemic inequitable context.

Responses to the Pink Tax differ across regions in terms of policy responses and consumer awareness. In India, there is only some legislative action around gender-based pricing, and consumer awareness is lower. Advocacy is increasing, but firms continue pricing products at values which are based on perceived demand by the marketplace versus an evaluation of fair prices. The U. S. has enacted some legislation to counter the Pink Tax, for example, California has legislation known as the Gender Tax Repeal Act, and has prevented gender-based pricing in services. In the U. S. there have also been consumer awareness initiatives that encourage women to buy gender-neutral or men’s products to limit price-markups. The U. K. has more regulation in place, and this has included regulation on taxes on menstrual products as well as studies on pricing differences based on gender.

Corporations have responded - as a result of public scrutiny - by changing pricing structures.

IV. Conclusion

The Pink Tax is an important yet often unrecognised factor in disparity against women in economies across the world. The U.K. and U.S.A. have sought to address the Pink Tax by enacting consumer awareness and legislative reforms, and India has had limited research and policy initiatives on both fronts. The additional price for women's products alongside a gender pay gap adds to women's economic disadvantage over their life. Reducing the Pink Tax requires a multifaceted approach including some policymakers addressing additional consumer awareness and accountability from corporate actors.

4.1 Hypothesis Testing

To evaluate the presence and impact of the Pink Tax in India compared to the U.S. and the UK, we conducted hypothesis testing based on the survey data from India and statistical reports from the U.S. and UK. Null Hypothesis (H0): There is no significant difference in the impact of the Pink Tax on women in India compared to women in the U.S. and the UK. This implies that the pricing disparities, taxation policies, and overall financial burden imposed by the Pink Tax are similar across all three regions. Alternative Hypothesis (H1):

The impact of the Pink Tax on women in India is significantly different from that on women in the U. S. and the UK. This suggests that Indian women experience unique challenges due to factors such as lower consumer awareness, lack of regulations, and compounded economic disadvantages. Given the results show that the Pink Tax impacts women in India in a different way than women in U. S. /UK, we reject the null hypothesis (H0) and accept the alternative hypothesis (H1). The Pink Tax is exceptionally predatory to women in India due to structural economic disadvantages, less transparent consumer awareness, and policy frameworks that are not sufficiently privileged to marginalized communities. While women in the U. S. and U. K. experience gendered pricing strategies, they have shown greater governmental and consumption response to similar economic inequalities.

Initiating attitude adjustment addressing the Pink Tax in India will require price adjustments, but must come with accountability of consumer awareness and advocacy work.

4.2 Inference

The results derived from the hypothesis testing demonstrate that the Pink Tax impacts women all over the world, but it is more severe in India because of its economic disparity, lesser awareness, and weak regulatory environments. Women in India take on more of the financial burden not only because they are gendered, but they also have a much larger wage gap than women in the U. S. /UK. Also, the surveys show that women appear to be less aware of this surcharge in India, while more advocacy movements in the West are more tangible in their regulatory changes, such as abolishing the tampon tax in the UK and states banning genderedbased pricing in the U. S. Consumer activism was successful in the U. S. and UK to pressure brands to alter their gendered based pricing. However, accountability of businesses in India is not common, and they are seldom confronted on their pricing strategies.

While reforming law abroad has changed this pricing strategy, India still does have any policy strategies to regulate gendered pricing holistically. The overall conclusion is the Pink Tax exists universally, but its effects are greater in India because of institution and structural factors.

4.3 Recommendations

A. Strengthening Consumer Awareness

A large portion of consumers in India are unaware of the Pink Tax and its cost.

Campaigns across the country, educational programs, and social media initiatives could help to alleviate this knowledge gap. By exposing consumers to gendered pricing, we can help them make more informed decisions to shop genderless or challenge the price point of unfair sales. Schools and universities may also have discussions on economic gender inequity to measure the impact on younger heteronormative individuals.

B. Implementing Stronger Regulatory Frameworks

In contrast to the U.S. and UK, which have implemented some measures to address gender pricing, specific legislation addressing the Pink Tax does not exist in India. The government must enshrine legal protections against unjustified price discrepancies in gendered products and services. Regulators, such as the Consumer Protection Authority, should conduct regular audits in industries susceptible to commodifying gender, such as personal care and clothing.

C. Encouraging Corporate Responsibility

Businesses ought to act in a proactive manner to eliminate gender-based pricing in their products. Take stock of their own goods and services, review their pricing practices and verify that products for women are not priced higher than similar men’s products. This will demonstrate to consumers that they can trust the business. Businesses can adopt a general demographic strategy for pricing, where women's products are not marked up simply because they are marketed towards women. It is at the least ethically dubious to price a “pink version” of a similar product higher simply because it's in a different color. Additionally, organizations should be supported to offer the necessities for life, like menstrual products, free of charge to workplace employees and in public institutions. D. Strengthening Advocacy and Public Policy Influence

Activist grouping, consumer rights organizations, and policy-makers need to join together to advocate for systemic change. Advocacy can take the form of petitions, lawsuits and campaigns to push for governments to stop discriminatory pricing structures. Many examples and successful systems elsewhere, such as the elimination of the tampon tax in the UK, or California’s Pink Tax Repeal Act, signal India could do

the same. Moreover, the government can establish programs to provide free or subsidized period products to marginalized communities would be one way to address the financial burden of gendered pricing.