More than a year after the 10 percent tax on indoor tanning bills was implemented, the IRS has reported it has come up short on the expected money made from the tax.
Originally projected to bring in $200 million for 2011, the tax generated $36.6 million for the first half of the year, according to an October report from J. Russell George, the treasury inspector general for tax administration.
George said the IRS estimated in 2010 that about 250,000 businesses would be subject to the tax, but only about 10,300 have filed the required forms.
Ed Ruzakowski, owner of Tan USA in Butler Plaza, said he thinks the tax is "incredibly unfair," and he is not surprised by these results.
The tanning industry is relatively small, he said, and as the economy worsened, increasing numbers of salons closed throughout the country.
"The tax was just another nail in the coffin," he said.
Tan USA's basic monthly plan, originally $25, is now $27.50, an increase that didn't sit well with customers.
The salon has seen about a 20 percent decrease in customers since the tax's implementation, Ruzakowski said.
With winter around the corner, he said he expects to see a slight increase in customers for November and December but the biggest months are January through March.
Businesses that offer tanning as an auxiliary service, like gyms or apartment complexes, are not required to pay the tax.
Lauren Knight, a 19-year-old psychology freshman, said she was shocked by the number of Gainesville apartment complexes that offer free tanning as an amenity.
Knight said she doesn't go to indoor tanning beds because she's concerned about the risks of skin cancer, but she equates the tanning tax with taxes on cigarettes.
"I agree with the ‘tax the vices' mentality," she said.
If she were to visit a tanning salon, a price increase of a couple dollars wouldn't deter her, she said, unless she were really strapped for cash.
But Knight said she might choose to go to an apartment complex's tanning bed just to save the money altogether.
