From 1 January, contraceptives will be subject to a 13% VAT rate – part of a carrot-and-stick approach by the government to increase births
China is set to impose a value-added tax (VAT) on condoms and other contraceptives for the first time in three decades, as the country tries to boost its birthrate and modernise its tax laws.
From 1 January, condoms and contraceptives will be subject to a 13% VAT rate – a tax from which the goods have been exempt since China introduced nationwide VAT in 1993.
The measure was buried in a VAT law passed in 2024 in an effort to modernise China’s tax regime. VAT accounts for nearly 40% of China’s total tax revenue.
That’s… Oh my God. That is such a bad idea, for so many reasons. But I think if the point is to expand your population, specifically the poorest and most uneducated, it hits the mark.
Oh no… That is the point, isn’t it?
The future ruling classes are going to need serfs.
Yeah it’s a great way to dilute the intelligence of a population while skewing voting toward more conservative representation. Half the US has similar values.
Voting is done by an internal caucus, and even that’s a sham already, where they unanimously allowed Xi to be Chairman a third term.
It’s also not going to work, because even if they raised their population, we’ve seen they can’t do anything with their workforce without FDI.
Humans have a natural drive to procreate (not just have sex), so if your population doesn’t want to have children, maybe look at what you’re doing to make them avoid this natural proclivity.
I’d argue the only real solution is a longer leave for both parents without affecting their careers. But it’s generally just not doable with their corporate culture.
Leaders of all “developed” nations need to look at this.
Birth rates are plummeting, and its not because of some religious children of men scenario or plastics in our sperm.
People just don’t want kids, and why would we? World is a shithole, everything costs too much and we are being constantly reminded that WW3 is just around the corner.
Humans have a natural drive to procreate
Source?
The fact that there continue to be humans.
There continue to be atomic bombs. Do people have natural drive to build them?
I’m not even sure that comment really rises to the level of a counter arguement.
People have been around a lot longer than atomic bombs.
This is about protecting infants not about drive to procreation.
And how do we get these infants we love protecting?
This doesn’t say we have infants because we love protecting them. It says why we protect them once we have them. If you don’t understand this there’s really nothing to talk about. I will just assume there’s no proof for your first statement and it’s most probably false.
I’d argue the 8 billion people on this planet suggests it’s true.
In developing countries people have kids because it’s an investment. You need kids to help you work the fields, take care of the house and take care of you when you’re old. Infant mortality is high so family planning is difficult and people have a lot of kids. Once certain economical level is reached and people can count on social security to take care of them when they are old kids become an expense, not investment and, surprise surprise, people stop having kids. Almost universally in every developed country in the world birth rates are below replacement levels, even in countries with best social programs and highest life satisfaction. So no, it’s not true.
That’s how you get surges of STDs among other awful things…
how dare you speak ill of China! CHINA IS THE BEST!
CHINA IS A NUMBER 1!
/s
I can’t imagine people who can’t afford moderately more expensive condoms can afford another child. I do suspect however that they can afford to spread venereal disease
Because children are widely known as being very inexpensive to raise.
How much is the tax going to be? $20,000 per year?
Coming up next: China’s STD epidemic and what can we do about it?
China is run by morons. Restricting people to 1 child for decades was idiotic and this is nearly as stupid.
This is even more stupid. Even if you succeeded in making people have more unprotected sex, if people don’t want it, you’re still gonna have a bad time. The children who are born unwanted aren’t going to have as good of life as those wanted for many reasons. At least 1 child who was born previously got more resources and had better chances. Though both are stupid decisions, I agree. This one even more. And another reason - you hopefully see you’ve made a stupid decision in the past and should have not meddled with organic needs of people in such an extreme way. So then OBVIOUSLY, the solution is to double down, but in the opposite way. /s
I’m guessing the stance of the CCP on abortion is going from not good to dystopian.
Time for One Child (at least)-policy
I don’t know who will find this information helpful but I wish I knew when I was young.
A woman is only fertile during about 5 days each lunar cycle. Unfortunately those days are the most fun but the other 24 are safer.
Testicles descend when it’s hot to cool down because heat kills sperm. If you buy a microscope, and dunk your sack in hot water for a few minutes each day, you can become temporarily sterile and verify it with the microscope.
Finally, there’s a point you can press just in front of your anus that suppresses ejaculation. Any one of those things by itself would be risky but all three and it would be nearly impossible to fertilize an egg.
This is the worst advice. Is this Kennedy’s account?
Why is it bad advice to give men the means to control their reproduction without any outside party involvement? Because nobody profits off of it? The article is about limiting access to birth control. I’m simply saying, if your government does it you can still have safe(er) sex. No hormones or abortions needed.
Because the advice is BAD. You have no idea what you are talking about and if you keep playing doctor you will hurt someone. Medical degrees are not a scam to get money from you. They are to protect the public from people like you.
Why is it bad advice to give men the means to control their reproduction without any outside party involvement?
Because your advice is “naturalistic” shit. It’s not only famously unreliable at controlling pregnancies but it also offers zero protection from STDs.
or you could just, you know, get a 16 minute vasectomy procedure and bypass all that.
Fully reversable if you ever want kids, truly a better option and something I wished I knew when I was younger.
The reversability is over exaggerated, in the best case it’s about 50% from before the procedure
You can’t make a blatant statement like that without considering age and how long one has had said procedure.
As a general rule while not accounting for age and health too, see the following. Also, feel free to fact check me because I’m that sure of this:
< 3 years: Sperm return ~97-100%, Pregnancy ~80%.
3 - 8 years: Sperm return ~90%, Pregnancy ~50%.
9 - 14 years: Sperm return ~79%, Pregnancy ~44%.
15+ years: Sperm return ~71%, Pregnancy ~30%.
If the Chinese goverment is increasing taxes on condoms to force people to give birth more, I doubt they will let men get vasectomies easily
Best part about being in Asia is you’re a couple hour flight to Thailand, Singapore, India, Malaysia, and South Korea where such things like medical tourism is common for Chinese.
might as well tell them to make like a couch in a college dorm, and pull out.
Well for an added layer of caution on those 5 days, maybe, but not on its own.
“A woman is only fertile during about 5 days each lunar cycle. Unfortunately those days are the most fun but the other 24 are safer.”
Can confirm that these are the best days to get wiggy with it - ask me how I know…kids.
