In a welcome change to make the forces more equal & inclusive, Sens. Maggie Hassan and Joni Ernst, R Lowa, introduced the bill to eliminate the so-called ‘Pink Tax’ that results in higher out-of-the-pocket costs for female troops when buying uniforms as compared to their male counterparts.
Earlier this year, nonpartisan Government Accountability Officer (GAO) confirmed that women officers face higher out-of-the-pocket expenditure for uniforms than that of men of the same ranks.
“It is absurd that we are forcing service members to fork over thousands of dollars in order to pay for necessary clothing items that they wear while serving our country,” Hassan said in a statement last week when introducing the bill to end pink tax. “This disparity in uniform costs is particularly stark for women, who are in some cases paying almost twice as much for the same uniform item as their male counterparts.”
As a result of the bill, the Pentagon would be required to review uniform changes for potential out-of-pocket costs between genders and produce a report on the retail cost of items for male, female and enlisted personnel.
Enlisted officers are entitled to a new set of uniforms when they join the military and a fixed annual clothing allowance after that to replace items when needed. They generally receive $400 as clothing allowance, however, there’ no compensation for replacements.
According to the GAO, items that are not considered “uniquely military” and cannot be paid for with the clothing allowance, such as underwear, generally cost more for women than men.
“Other uniform items that the services have determined are required and that enlisted female service members must pay for beyond initial issuance in fiscal year 2020 include handbags for the Army, swimsuits for the Navy, and dress pumps for the Air Force and the Marine Corps,” the report said.
Over the course of the services, the disparity in out-of-the-pocket expenses on uniforms between men and women only continues to increase. With the pink tax in force, by the end of 20 years, a women officer in the military will end up spending $8000 out-of-the-pocket as compared to $4000 for men.
Defense Logistics Agency ordering fewer military items for women than men, thus increasing individual costs, has been identified as one of the main reasons for increasing costs of uniforms for female soldiers.
To address those disparities, Hassan and Ernst’s bill, officially called the Military Forces Assuring that Treatment of Items by Gender are Uniform and Equal across the Services (FATIGUES) Act, would require the Defense Department to implement the GAO’s recommendations, including developing “consistent criteria” for deciding which uniform items are “uniquely military.”
The current bill seeking to end pink tax is similar to the one introduced by democrats Jackie Speier & Julia Brownley of California and Republican Elise Stefanik of New York. Brownley sponsored the provision in the fiscal 2020 defense policy bill that required the GAO report.
Besides the Pentagon implementing GAO’s recommendations, the House bill will provide female soldiers with a one-time allowance to make up for the disparities in out-of-the-pocket expenses on uniforms in the past decade.
The House bill was a part of the lower chamber’s version of this years’ defense policy bill known as the National Defense Authorization Act or NDAA. The House passed its version of NDAA in September and the Senate is expected to act on its legislation post which the two chambers will reconcile their versions for the bill to come into force as a law.
Also Check Out: US Space Force Unveils New Service & PT Uniforms
