this post was submitted on 04 Dec 2025
49 points (98.0% liked)

World News

51062 readers
1965 users here now

A community for discussing events around the World

Rules:

Similarly, if you see posts along these lines, do not engage. Report them, block them, and live a happier life than they do. We see too many slapfights that boil down to "Mom! He's bugging me!" and "I'm not touching you!" Going forward, slapfights will result in removed comments and temp bans to cool off.

We ask that the users report any comment or post that violate the rules, to use critical thinking when reading, posting or commenting. Users that post off-topic spam, advocate violence, have multiple comments or posts removed, weaponize reports or violate the code of conduct will be banned.

All posts and comments will be reviewed on a case-by-case basis. This means that some content that violates the rules may be allowed, while other content that does not violate the rules may be removed. The moderators retain the right to remove any content and ban users.

Lemmy World Partners

News !news@lemmy.world

Politics !politics@lemmy.world

World Politics !globalpolitics@lemmy.world

Recommendations

For Firefox users, there is media bias / propaganda / fact check plugin.

https://addons.mozilla.org/en-US/firefox/addon/media-bias-fact-check/

founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
NewsAutoMod@lemmy.world
jordanlund@lemmy.world
Tenthrow@lemmy.world
little_cow@lemmy.world
lemmyAtom@lemmy.world
49
China imposes value-added tax on contraceptive drugs and devices - including condoms - to reverse plunging birth rates that threaten to slow economy (www.bloomberg.com)
submitted 1 day ago by Hotznplotzn@lemmy.sdf.org to c/world@lemmy.world
12 comments fedilink hide all child comments
 

cross-posted from: https://lemmy.sdf.org/post/46691137

Archived

  • China will impose a 13% value-added tax on contraceptive drugs and devices, including condoms, for the first time in three decades.
  • The revision to the Value-Added Tax Law also exempts child-care services, elder-care institutions, disability service providers, and marriage-related services from the tax.
  • The changes are part of China's efforts to reverse plunging birth rates and encourage people to have more children, as the population has shrunk for three consecutive years.

[...]

China will impose a value-added tax on contraceptive drugs and devices — including condoms — for the first time in three decades, its latest bid to reverse plunging birth rates that threaten to further slow its economy.

Under the newly revised Value-Added Tax Law, consumers will pay a 13% levy on items that had been VAT-exempt since 1993, when China enforced a strict one-child policy and actively promoted birth control.

At the same time, the revision carves out new incentives for prospective parents by exempting child-care services — from nurseries to kindergartens — as well as elder-care institutions, disability service providers and marriage-related services. The changes take effect in January.

They reflect a broader policy pivot, as a rapidly aging China shifts from limiting births to encouraging people to have more children. The population has shrunk for three consecutive years, with just 9.54 million births in 2024 — barely half of the 18.8 million registered nearly a decade ago, when the one-child policy was lifted.

[...]

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] Glide@lemmy.ca 1 points 5 hours ago* (last edited 5 hours ago) (1 children)

Then I believe you I missed the comparison.

I'm not suggesting that in both cases, a government is doing things to make "bad choices" harder. I'm suggesting that in both cases a government is disproportionately punishing the less wealthy to get what it wants. In neither case does the government gives a shit if you, individually, lead a healthier life or have a child. It wants you to generate more wealth for the country, whether that be by demanding less for health care costs or by producing the next worker drone.

The point in the sugar tax comparison, a real thing that happened in parts of Canada by the way, is that the government should be reducing the costs of the healthy choices, not making the unhealthy choices more expensive, as people were largely turning to unhealthy choices because they were cheaper and do not have the wealth to make better choices. Likewise, if the Chinese government wants to improve the birth rate of its population, they should make childcare more affordable and look to give parents more wealth/time, not attempt to punish them financially for preventing a pregnancy. Punishing a population that is making the choice you don't want them to make out of necessity isn't the solution to get them to make the choice you want. "Poor tax" is never a good solution, and that's what the comparison is: two versions of "poor tax."