Source: European Parliament
Question for written answer E-000379/2025
to the Commission
Rule 144
Liesbet Sommen (PPE)
Gender-based price discrimination (pink tax) is a common phenomenon. Many products such as shampoo, razors, deodorants, vitamin pills, haircuts and jeans are often more expensive for women than for men. In many instances, these products differ only superficially, e.g. as regards colour, name or description. That was confirmed by a 2017 German study that looked at 1500 products.
The pink tax can be seen as a form of indirect discrimination, given that it is a seemingly neutral practice – different prices for products on the basis of target group marketing – that disproportionately disadvantages women. The price differences are not explicitly gender-based, but do result in higher costs for products and services offered to women without any justification that can be regarded as objective or necessary. Indirect discrimination based on sex is prohibited under Article 4(1)(b) of Directive 2004/113/EC.
- 1.Can the Commission investigate and map this phenomenon at EU level, e.g. by making use of the Joint Research Centre?
- 2.Is there scope for tightening up Directive 2004/113/EC so that price differences with no objective or necessary justification that result in higher costs for products and services offered to women can be tackled?
Submitted: 28.1.2025