“Equality is not a women’s issue, it’s a business issue. Gender equality is essential for economies and communities to thrive.” – Emma Watson

Have you ever noticed that your pink razor costs more than the blue one your brother has, even though they do the exact same job? If you’ve ever questioned why women’s deodorant is pricier than men’s, despite having nearly identical ingredients, you’ve stumbled upon a frustrating reality: the Pink Tax. It’s not an actual government-imposed tax but a systematic form of price discrimination where products and services marketed to women cost more than their male-targeted counterparts. The extra price tag isn’t about superior quality or unique features. It’s often just about branding, packaging, and perception.

What Exactly is the Pink Tax?

The Pink Tax affects numerous industries, from personal care and clothing to children’s toys and even financial services. While women are often led to believe that these price hikes reflect added value, research shows that many of these products are virtually identical to those marketed to men.

Where Did the Pink Tax Start?

The PinkTax has been around for decades, though it became widely recognized in the 1990s. One of the earliest recorded instances was in California in 1994, when a state study revealed that women paid nearly $1,351 more annually than men for similar goods and services. This led to the passage of California’s Gender Tax Repeal Act (1995) to prevent discriminatory pricing in services. 

Globally, gender-based pricing has existed for much longer. In France, studies in the early 2000s revealed that women paid 8%-10% more for personal care products than men. In the United States, a 2015 New York City Department of Consumer Affairs study found that women’s products were priced 42% higher on average than their male counterparts. India, too, has seen gendered pricing, particularly in grooming products, clothing, and even vehicle insurance rates.

Despite various regulations, the Pink Tax persists in different forms worldwide, mainly due to marketing tactics that continue to justify gendered pricing.

What Reasons Do Companies Give for the Pink Tax?

Companies often justify gender-based pricing by citing a variety of economic, manufacturing, and psychological factors. One common argument is that products targeted at women often undergo additional research and development to cater to specific preferences, such as skincare formulations, fragrances, or ergonomic designs. For instance, brands like Venus (USA) and Schick (USA) claim that women’s razors are designed with added moisture strips and flexible blades, supposedly warranting higher costs. However, a close look at the ingredient lists or functionality often reveals minimal differences.

Another justification is that women’s products typically involve higher marketing and advertising costs. Since brands use separate campaigns for male and female consumers, companies argue that the expense of segmenting and personalizing advertisements increases product prices. This is particularly evident in luxury anf beauty brands like L’Oreal (France) and Estée Lauder (USA), which charge premium prices for female-targeted products under the pretext of exclusivity and scientific advancements. In India, premium skincare brands like Forest Essentials and Kama Ayurveda also price their women’s lines significantly higher than men’s products.

Additionally, businesses claim that packaging and aesthetics drive up costs. Many women’s products feature sleek, pastel-colored designs with intricate details, whereas men’s versions often have simpler, bolder packaging. A well-known example is Bic’s “For Her” pens (France), which were priced higher simply because they were pink and marketed as being “designed for a woman’s hand.” This reasoning is often used to justify price hikes without substantial changes in product quality.

While these explanations may seem logical from a business perspective, they often fail to account for the core issue: Gender-based pricing exploits social norms and perceptions rather than genuine product differentiation.

The Role of Marketing in Pink Tax

Gendered Packaging and Branding

Marketers understand that visual appeal influences buying behavior, so they use color psychology to reinforce gender distinctions. Gillette, Bic, and Nivea are prime examples. Their women’s razors and deodorants come in pink, purple, or pastel shades, whereas men’s versions stick to dark blue, black, or silver.

Targeted Advertising

Advertisements for women’s products emphasize beauty, delicacy, and sophistication, while men’s products focus on strength, durability, and utility. Dove and L’Oreal market female-targeted shampoos as nourishing and luxurious, while men’s versions highlight “fast-cleaning” properties.

In India, Glow & Lovely (formerly Fair & Lovely) created an entire industry around fairness creams for women, charging a premium despite offering a nearly identical men’s version at a lower price. 

Price Differentiation

Brands use gender-specific language to justify price differences. A basic Nike or Adidas hoodie labeled “for women” may cost more than the men’s version, even if the design remains the same. In the USA, Old Spice and Secret deodorants have similar active ingredients, yet Secret (marketed to women) is often priced higher.

The Impact of the Pink Tax

The Pink Tax is not just about paying extra for a razor or shampoo. It has long-term economic and social consequences that disproportionately affect women. It deepens financial disparities, reinforces gender stereotypes, and raises ethical concerns in global markets.

Financial Burden on Women

Women, on average, earn less than men due to the gender pay gap. In India, women earn approximately 19% less than men for the same work, while in the USA, women make 82 cents for every dollar earned by men (as of 2023). When they also have to pay more for everyday necessities, the financial burden becomes even greater.

For example, in New York City, a 2015 study by the Department of Consumer Affairs found that women’s products cost 7% more on average than men’s products across categories like clothing, personal care, and health products. A similar 2022 study in India revealed that women’s personal care items, such as fairness creams, shampoos, and hygiene products, were priced 10%–15% higher than men’s variants, despite containing nearly identical ingredients.

This financial burden accumulates over a lifetime, meaning women end up spending thousands of dollars extra for products marketed specifically to them.

Reinforcement of Gender Stereotypes

Marketing plays a significant role in reinforcing traditional gender roles, often making women feel they need specialized (and more expensive) products. From childhood, girls are marketed pink-colored toys and dolls, while boys are given building blocks and cars.

Take LEGO, for example. While the brand is widely loved, its LEGO Friends line (2012) specifically targeted girls with pink and purple sets featuring hair salons and shopping malls, reinforcing gendered expectations. Meanwhile, boys were marketed action-oriented LEGO sets with superheroes and cars.

 In India, face cream brands have long promoted the idea that lighter skin leads to success, particularly for women. The same fairness creams for men, however, were often cheaper and marketed as “powerful” or “energizing.”

These subtle reinforcements create a society where women are expected to prioritize beauty, grooming, and delicate aesthetics while men’s products emphasize strength, functionality, and affordability.

Ethical Concerns and Transparency Issues

The Pink Tax raises serious ethical questions about fairness and corporate transparency. Many companies do not justify the price difference between male and female products. In some cases, manufacturers repackage the same product in pink packaging and charge extra simply because they know women will buy it.

For instance, in France, a consumer watchdog group exposed a leading razor brand selling an identical men’s and women’s razor—except the pink version was 35% more expensive. The only difference? The color.

In the United Kingdom, Boots (a popular pharmacy chain) was forced to lower prices on women’s razors and eye creams in 2016 after public outcry revealed they were significantly costlier than men’s products with similar ingredients and functions.

Consumers deserve transparency. If a product is truly worth more, companies should provide justifiable reasons for the higher price. Otherwise, it’s just exploitative pricing based on gender.

Extra Cost on Essential Hygiene Products

One of the most controversial aspects of the Pink Tax is how it applies to feminine hygiene products like pads and tampons. Many governments still classify these as “luxury items” rather than necessities, leading to higher taxes and prices compared to non-essential goods.

In the United States, tampons and pads were taxed in many states until activists successfully fought for exemptions in places like New York, Florida, and California. However, 22 states still impose a tax on menstrual products while exempting items like Viagra and Rogaine.

In India, a similar issue existed until 2018, when the government finally removed the 12% Goods and Services Tax (GST) on sanitary napkins after years of protests. Before that, women had to pay extra for a product that is essential to their health and hygiene.

Meanwhile, countries like Canada, Australia, and Kenya have abolished the tampon tax entirely, setting an example for other nations to follow.

Impact on Financial Independence

The extra cost of gendered products and services affects women’s overall savings, investments, and financial security. Women already face barriers in achieving financial independence, and the Pink Tax only makes it harder.

For example, if a woman spends an extra ₹5,000 per year (approximately $60–$80) on everyday goods like razors, deodorants, and haircuts, she ends up spending an additional ₹2,00,000 (around $2,500) over 40 years. That’s money that could have been invested or saved for retirement.

In countries where the cost of living is already high, such as the USA and the UK, this extra financial burden puts more pressure on women, especially single mothers and low-income earners.

What Can Consumers Do?

Consumers have a powerful role in challenging the Pink Tax. By being aware of pricing tactics, making smarter purchasing decisions, and holding companies accountable, individuals can drive meaningful change. Here’s how consumers can take action:

Be a Conscious Consumer

Before making a purchase, compare prices between men’s and women’s versions of the same product. In many cases, the only difference is the packaging or scent, and opting for gender-neutral or men’s products can save money. For example, many women find that men’s razors work just as well, if not better, and cost significantly less. Generic beauty products often have the same formulations as gendered ones but come at a lower price. Reading ingredient lists and labels carefully can help consumers make informed choices and avoid overpaying.

Consider Buying Gender-Neutral Products

Many everyday essentials, like deodorants, shampoos, and moisturizers, have gender-neutral alternatives that work just as well without the added cost. Brands like Public Goods and Dr. Bronner’s focus on universal, minimalist products that avoid gendered pricing. Similarly, in India, Mamaearth and Minimalist offer skincare products that are not marketed based on gender, ensuring fair pricing for all consumers. Choosing these options not only saves money but also signals to brands that consumers prefer fair and inclusive pricing.

Support Brands That Promote Fair Pricing

Companies are beginning to recognize the demand for transparency and gender-neutral pricing. Brands like Billie (USA), Flamingo (USA), and Bombay Shaving Company (India) have made a name for themselves by offering women’s shaving products at reasonable prices, competing directly with male grooming brands. Supporting such businesses sends a clear message that fair pricing matters to consumers. Additionally, shopping from ethical and socially responsible brands that promote gender equality helps drive systemic change in the industry.

Speak Up and Raise Awareness

Social media is a powerful tool for exposing unfair pricing and holding brands accountable. If a company is charging more for a women’s product without a valid reason, consumers can call them out on platforms like Twitter, Instagram, and LinkedIn. Many brands have revised their pricing strategies after facing public backlash. Consumers can also participate in petitions, like those advocating for the removal of tampon taxes worldwide. Raising awareness about the Pink Tax through conversations, blogs, and social media posts can push more people to demand change.

Demand Transparency and Advocate for Policy Changes

Supporting legislation that promotes fair pricing is another crucial step. In the USA, states like California and New York have introduced laws prohibiting gender-based price discrimination. In India, organizations have campaigned for fair pricing on essential products like sanitary napkins, leading to the removal of GST on menstrual hygiene products in 2018. Consumers can stay informed about such movements and support policies that advocate for transparent pricing. Signing petitions, engaging with policymakers, and voting for leaders who prioritize gender equity can create long-term change.

What Can Businesses Do?

Companies play a crucial role in eliminating the Pink Tax and promoting fair pricing. By adopting ethical business practices, ensuring transparency, and challenging outdated gender norms in marketing, brands can create a more equitable marketplace. Here’s how businesses can take action:

Adopt Fair Pricing Practices

Businesses should conduct internal audits to ensure that men’s and women’s products with similar formulations, materials, or functionalities are priced fairly. Many brands, such as Billie (USA) and Boxed (USA), have successfully removed gender-based pricing and positioned themselves as consumer-friendly alternatives. In India, companies like Nykaa have received criticism for gendered pricing on beauty products, prompting discussions on fair pricing. By eliminating arbitrary price differences, businesses not only build trust with consumers but also strengthen their brand reputation in an increasingly conscious market.

Promote Inclusive and Transparent Marketing

Brands must move away from the practice of using gendered packaging, stereotypical messaging, and unnecessary product differentiation. Companies like Dove (global) and Fenty Beauty (USA) have set examples by promoting inclusivity in their marketing, ensuring that their products cater to everyone rather than reinforcing gender stereotypes. In India, Minimalist and Mamaearth focus on product benefits rather than targeting consumers based on gender. Businesses should also clearly explain the rationale behind pricing strategies, so customers can see that prices are based on quality and value rather than arbitrary gender distinctions.

Be Accountable to Consumers and Engage in Ethical Business Practices

Consumers today demand accountability from brands, and businesses that ignore this risk losing market share. Companies can build loyalty by listening to customer feedback and addressing concerns about unfair pricing. In the past, brands faced backlash for charging women more for nearly identical products, leading to pricing adjustments. Engaging in ethical business practices not only prevents negative publicity but also attracts a growing base of socially conscious consumers. Brands that actively address gender-based price disparities will stand out as industry leaders committed to fairness and equality.

Breaking the Price Tag Bias

The Pink Tax is a frustrating reality that has persisted for decades, but awareness and action can bring about change. By making informed choices, demanding transparency, and supporting fair-pricing brands, consumers can push back against gender-based price discrimination. Businesses must also take responsibility and commit to equitable pricing strategies.

The power to eliminate the Pink Tax lies with consumers and businesses alike—because being a woman should never come with an extra fee.