If we're going to tax the hell out of tobacco, alcohol, and other vices and luxuries, then I see no reason not to tax elective, cosmetic surgery. At the very least, we shouldn't be subsidizing it with taxpayer money. I don't care if it's someone socking away money for years; unless you're trying to repair some disfigurement, it's not a high priority procedure.

I don't believe in this tax because I think we tax too much as it is. We should just spend less.

That said, to the extend we do tax, I am all for taxing consumption more, as this does, instead of our ridiculous "progressive" income" tax. Why are the vast majority of our taxes completely devoid of the lifestyle people actually chose to live? Why does it reward people who earn less but spend more and punish those who save?

I have no sympathy for the argument that the tax is not okay because it would burden the working and middle class more than the rich. That's exactly the kind of wrong-heading thinking we have too much of as it is. I'm a pretty high earner whose effective tax rate (including required FICA and social security) between federal, state and local will exceed 50% after the federal increase, health care surcharge and New Jersey's massive bump and dropping of mortgage deductions for high earners. But where does the rest of my money go? College savings, retirement (since we can't count on all the money we're paying to social security being there for us), paying for my ex-California teacher (who are not eligible for Medicare) mother's health care, etc. We eat out once a week at fancy places like Macaroni Grill. I pack a super cheap sack lunch to work. We take one vacation a year with our kids, flying at odd times in economy to save on airfare. We usually save money on lodgings by staying with relatives and avoiding expensive destinations. We drive two old, reliable Japanese non-luxury brands cars and typically keep them for at least 10 years. Most of our furniture is still hand-me-downs from older relatives we've collected over the years. We don't own any boats, cabins, second homes, RV's, jet skis, weekend ride motorcycles, etc. My wife buys new clothes for herself about once a year, as needed. I save on my commute by taking a train and walking - a cab would be a luxury expense. We're certainly not hurting. We have a nice home and our kids have nice Christmases and we pay for any expense they need in school or for tutoring for music, tennis, etc. And we know we can pay for health care emergencies when they come up. But that's because we chose to live within our means. We exercise discipline. We don't carry debt because we don't buy things we can't afford - including avoiding things we can afford now with financing but would cause an undue burden later if our financial circumstances changed.

Yet this country's notion of a fair tax system is that those earning less than us but spending more are in greater "need" of tax breaks and that we should pay for them. We are in effect subsidizing the lifestyle we don't have ourselves. Cigarettes are a choice, a luxury. So is alcohol. And certainly plastic surgery and botox are. The idea that someone "needs" it for their career is just laughable - was the author serious? If I ever did by a boat or a timeshare, go ahead and tax it as a luxury. That was my choice and if I can afford it, I should factor that tax in. But don't do it just to increase taxes - do it instead of taxing people's earnings completely irrespective of their financial discipline or lifestyle.

Don't get me wrong. There are millions in this country that truly barely get by. They deserve our sympathy and support. But I have none for those sitting in air conditioned houses (I grew up in 110 degrees summers and 30 degree winters with no heat or AC, other than portable units), driving SUV's, supporting a smoking habit and taking expensive vacations to Disneyworld or Atlantis but who don't insure themselves and who think the solution is more taxes on "the rich."

I'm totally opposed to this elective surgery tax. Not only does it target middle class Americans, but if implemented it probably won't even reach anywhere near the one trillion dollar health care debt its suppose to help curb. Just another unnecessary cost on the working class.

We should be making breast implants cheaper, not more expensive!

I own an elective surgical company. The average patient is a woman and the average income is less than $50k a year. Most put the cost on their VISA card or finance through one of the surgical credit providers. By the way, while our little niche is growing nicely, most elective surgery providers are down 40-50% over the past year. LASIK surgery, for example is down nearly 50%. If you want to tax your way out of a recession, you might want to pick something that people are buying.

I can't think of anything more useless then these procedures. If alcohol and tobacco can be taxed, why not injecting bacteria into your face? Most cosmetic surgery is harmful be it puncturable implants, bacteria laden botox or whatever the hell they did to Michael Jackson to make him go from a young attractive black man to a freakish looking old white woman.

If a woman is making 50k and putting this on their VISA maybe this kind of tax will help discourage her from cosmetic surgery (which is one of the worst things to finance, its called elective for a reason). This clearly qualifies as a Sin tax, and I see no reason not to levy it.

Go ahead tax it. It's already cheaper to go to Mexico, Costa Rica, Argentina etc. for high quality cosmetic surgery. They will thank you for all the medical tourism and extra business.