Tanning Buyers Group | Tanning Regulation | Tanning Supplies Wholesaler

Written by David Kenney

Tax Exempt Filing Procedures

All new members must complete the procedure below prior to gaining exempt tax status on your orders.

1) Open the attached file and complete the applicable fields

2) Save the file to your desktop (NAME FILE same as your salon or business)

3) Print and Sign form

4) Take a picture of your signature page

5) EMAIL both (picture & file) to us

We must have this data onfile in order to avoid taxing your order for resale items. Resale items are not normally taxed as tax is paid by the end user.

If you have any question about completing this form please contact us.

Attachments:
Uniform Sales And Use Certificate	[ ]	76 Kb

Tanning Regulation by State Recent and Pending

Written by David Kenney

Tanning regulations related to the use of indoor tanning beds and booths have been on the increase. While many state still do not regulate tanning salons many states either do or are currently working on tanning regulation bills.

Generally tanning regulation centers around restricting the use of tanning equipment for those under 14 without a doctors permission. This proposal has met no resistance from the tanning industry and is fairly common practice in salons nationwide.

This type of oversight is much needed but in many cases the tanning regulations proposed in many pending anti-tanning bills far exceed the under 14 ban. Currently a wave of bills have be introduced that would eliminate all choice and make it illegal to tan for anyone under the age of 18. Tanning regulation just like tanning should be moderate and designed to protect the communities in which tanning salons are located.

Significant debate still reigns as to the detrimental and/or positive impact of UV exposure. A parent and child should be able to make an informed decision about the merits of tanning in a controlled environment like a tanning salon versus going to the beach or pool and getting their tan in a less consistent environment.

Some doctors are adamant that tanning regulation is a vital necessity citing skin cancer concerns. While other doctors say any risk is outweighed by the positive impact in skin conditioning and Vitamin D. Certainly common sense would indicate that exposure to UV is best in a controlled environment versus direct random exposure to heavy UV doses like many experience at the beach or in their back yards.

Additionally there is no evidence of an increase in UV related skin cancer cases for indoor tannign salon patrons and according to the CDC studies there is limited change in skin cancer rates during the past 20 year period. One can also read the maps of higher rates of cases and find that areas where tanning salons operate in Texas and New York being the highest concentration of tanning salon in US and yet statistics are lower than average in those states. One could also look at tanning salon statistics and determine that very few individuals have ever actually used a tanning salon and about 40% of the population would never use such a facility because of their heredity creating no cosmetic benefit.

To find detailed information on tanning regulations and new and pending tanning regulation on a state by state level please refer to the charts contained in this section. Recently indoor tanning salons have come under increased tanning regulations and tanning fees associated with the services they provide.

As part of the health care initiative recently passed, tanning salon services are now taxed an additional 10% federal excise tax. This tax is in addition to state and local taxes as goevernment expands it reach for much needed government revenues.

While tanning salons are not alone in the tax expansion they are in an industry that has been hard hit by the economic downturn as health and Beauty services are considered a luxury to most. Industry statistics for 2010 saw a near 24% decrease in the number of tanning salons in the United Stated from just 2 years prior. Suppliers have seen a 30+% drop in orders indicating that the industry has likely lost over 30% in the 2 years since 2008.

Additionally local salons have seen increases in state regulation of the services they provide.

Tanning salon owners response has been one of exasperation. Salon owners name the massive Big Pharma PAC combined with the Dermatology PAC as the main drivers of the regulation. Big Pharma has joined in to support the 12 Billion dollar SPF industry which directly benefits from all anti-tanning news and/or regulation.

Indoor Tanning Restrictions For Minors Tan Regulation State Laws

Tanning Regulation For Tanning Salons Introduced in 2010

Tanning Regulation For Tanning Salons Introduced in 2009

New York Anti-Tanning Legislation

Written by David Kenney

The New York state legislature is moving forward on a bill that would take parents out of the decision making process for their children. The new law will remove the parental permission option for all youths aged 15-18 that wish to tan and have gotten their parents permission to do so.

"Current law allows children between the ages of fourteen and eighteen to use indoor tanning facilities, with the written permission of a parent or guardian. This legislation does not adequately protect the youth from the potentially deadly health risk associated with indoor tanning."

Here is the full text of the bill.

If you would like to express your opinion on this bill please use the following information.We urge you to make your voice known to your elected Representative!

Dean Skelos Majority Leader
District Office
55 Front Street
Rockville Centre, NY 11570
United States
Phone: (516) 766-8383
This is a link for you, your customers, friends and family to automatically contact him regarding this bill.
http://salsa.wiredforchange.com/o/5746/p/dia/action/public/?action_KEY=1778

Indoor Tanning Restrictions For Minors Tan Regulation State Laws

Written by David Kenney

State	Statute	Ban	Parental Accompaniment	Parental Permission	Other
Arizona	Ariz. Admin. Code R12-1-1414 A2	N/A	N/A	Under 18, in person.	Operator must limit exposure time to manufacturer's recommendation; provide eye protection.
Arkansas	Ark. Stat. Ann. § 20-27-2202	N/A	N/A	Under 18, in person.	N/A
California	Cal. Bus. and Prof. Code § 22706 (b) (3) and (4)	Under 14	N/A	Under 18, in person; valid for 12 months.	Operator must limit time to manufacturer's maximum exposure recommendation; provide eye protection.
Connecticut	Conn. Gen. Stat. § 19a-232	N/A	N/A	Under 16	N/A
Delaware	Del. Code Ann. tit. 16 § 30D	Under 14; unless medically necessary.	Under 14	Between 14 and 18, in person; valid for 12 months.	N/A
Florida	Fla. Stat. Ann. § 381.89 (1998)	N/A	Under 14	Between 14 and 18; agrees to wear eye protection.	Operator must limit time to manufacturer's maximum exposure recommendation; provide eye protection.
Georgia	Ga. Code Ann. § 31-38-8 (1996)	N/A	N/A	Under 18, in person.	Operator must provide eye protection.
Illinois	Ill. Admin. Code Title 77; Sec. 795.190 (c)	Under 14	N/A	Between 14 and 17, in person.	Operator must provide eye protection.
Indiana	Ind. Code Ann. § 25-8-15.4-15 and 16	N/A	Under 16	Under 18, in person.	Operator must limit time to administrative or manufacturer's maximum exposure recommendation; provide eye protection.
Kentucky	Ky. Rev. Stat. § 217.922	N/A	Under 14	Between 14 and 17; agrees to wear eye protection; valid for 12 months.	N/A
Louisiana	La. Rev. Stat. Ann. § 40:2701 to 40:2718 (2005)	N/A	Under 14	Between 14 and 17, in person; agrees to wear eye protection.	Operator must limit time to administrative or manufacturer's maximum exposure recommendation; provide eye protection.
Maine	10-144 Dept. of Human Services ch. 223 12A (3)(f)	Under 14	14 and 15	14 and older, in person; valid for 12 months.	Operator must limit time to administrative or manufacturer's maximum exposure recommendation; provide and require eye protection.
Maryland	Md. Health Code Ann. § 20-106	N/A	N/A	Under 18, in person.	N/A
Massachusetts	Mass. Gen. Laws Ann. ch. 111 Public Health § 211	N/A	Under 14	14 to 17	Operator must limit time to administrative maximum exposure recommendation; provide and require eye protection.
Michigan	Mich. Comp. Laws Ann. § 333.13405	N/A	N/A	Under 18, in person.	Operator must require eye protection.
Minnesota	Minn. Stat. Ann. § 325H.08	N/A	N/A	Under 16, in person.	Operator must limit time to manufacturer's maximum exposure recommendation; provide and require eye protection.
Mississippi	Department of Health Regulations	N/A	Under 14	Between 14 and 17, in person.	Operator must limit time to manufacturer's maximum exposure recommendation; provide and require eye protection.
New Hampshire	N.H. Rev. Stat. Ann. § tit. XXX 313-A:31	Under 14; unless medically necessary.	Under 14	Under 18, in person; valid for 12 sessions.	N/A
New Jersey	N.J. Rev. Stat. § C. 26:2D-82.1	Under 14	N/A	14 through 17	Operator must limit time to administrative maximum exposure recommendation; require eye protection.
New York	N.Y. Public Health Law § 3555	Under 14 Under 16	N/A	Between 14 and 17, in person; valid for 12 months, agrees to wear eye protection.	Operator must require eye protection.
North Carolina	N.C. Gen. Stat. § 104E-9.1 15A NCAC 11 .1418	Under 13; unless medically necessary.	N/A	Under 18	Operator must limit time to manufacturer's maximum exposure recommendation; provide eye protection.
North Dakota	N.C. Cent. Code § 23-39	Under 14; unless medically necessary.	Under 14	Under 18, in person; valid for 12 months.	Operator must limit time to manufacturer's maximum exposure recommendation; provide and require eye protection.
Ohio	Ohio Admin. Code 4713-19-09 (B)	N/A	N/A	Under 18, in person; valid for number of tanning sessions as specified by parent.	Operator must limit time to manufacturer's maximum exposure recommendation; provide eye protection.
Oregon	OAR 333-119-0090 (2)	N/A	N/A	Under 18, in person.	Operator must limit time to manufacturer's maximum exposure recommendation; provide and require eye protection.
Rhode Island	Department of Health Rules and Regulations for the Registration of Tanning Facilities Part III; Sec. 9.5	N/A	N/A	Between 14 and 18, in person.	Operator must limit time to manufacturer's maximum exposure recommendation; provide and require eye protection.
South Carolina	S.C. Code Ann. § ch. 61, sec. 106-4.5	N/A	N/A	Under 18, in person.	Operator must provide and require eye protection.
Tennessee	Tenn. Code Ann. § 68-117-104	N/A	Under 14	Under 18, in person .	Operator must limit time to manufacturer's maximum exposure recommendation; provide and require eye protection.
Texas	Tex. Health and Safety Code Ann. § 145.008	Under 16.5.	N/A	Under 18, in person; agrees to wear eye protection.	Operator must limit time to manufacturer's maximum exposure recommendation; provide and require eye protection.
Utah	Utah Code Ann. § 26-15-13	N/A	N/A	Under 18, in person; valid for 12 months and number of tanning sessions as specified by parent.	Operator must provide and require eye protection.
Virginia	Va. Code § 59.1-310.3	N/A	N/A	Under 15; valid for 6 months.	N/A
Wisconsin	Wis. Code Ann. § 255.08 (9)(a)	Under 16	N/A	N/A	Operator must limit time to manufacturer's maximum exposure recommendation; provide and require eye protection.
Wyoming	Enrolled Act 36, 2010	N/A	Under 15	Between 15 and 18, in person; valid for 12 months.	N/A

Source: AIM at Melanoma, Centers for Disease Control and Prevention and NCSL, 2010.

Tanning Regulation For Tanning Salons Introduced in 2010

Written by David Kenney

State	Bill Description
Florida HB 205/ SB 430 Did Not Pass	Would amend current law, prohibiting tanning for those under age 16 and requiring parental consent, in person, for those under age 18. Parent must specify number of tanning sessions allowed for the 12 month duration of consent.
Georgia HB 853 Did Not Pass	Would amend current law, adding restrictions to tanning facilities. Requires written parental consent for minors, ages 14 to 18 years old. Parental consent forms must be signed in the presence of the tanning facility operator or the parent / legal guardian must be present during the time in which the minor is using the tanning device. The consent provides restrictions to what devices can be used and how many times it can be used, a new consent must be signed every 30 days. Any minor under the age of 14 years old, must have their parent or legal guardian present while using tanning devices.
Hawaii HB 653 Did Not Pass	Would prohibit the use of tanning facilities to anyone under the age of 18 unless written parental/legal guardian consent is provided in front of a tanning facility operator. Requires government approved documentation to verify the age of all customers.
Indiana HR 3 Did Not Pass	Would assign to the Health Finance Commission the topic of prohibiting tanning for those under age 14.
Kansas SB 101 Did Not Pass	Would prohibit the use of tanning facilities for anyone under the age of 14. Requires a parent or legal guardian to sign a consent form in the presence of the facility owner or authorized personnel before anyone age 14 through 18 may use the device. Consent valid for 12 months. The parental/guardian consent states that they have read and understood the warnings, consent to the minor's use and agree that the minor will wear protective eyewear. Requires parent to show proof of guardianship and a minor must show proof of age.
Maryland HB 1039/ SB 718 Did Not Pass	Would prohibit owners, employees, and operators of tanning facilities from allowing minors to use specified tanning devices; prohibiting owners, employees, and operators of tanning facilities from distributing to minors passes, coupons, or packages redeemable for use of a tanning device.
Massachusetts SB 903	Would prohibit the use of tanning devices to anyone under the age of 16. Minors ages 16-17 years old must provide written parental/guardian consent prior to using tanning devices. Before obtaining consent, the tanning facility shall provide to the parent or guardian a copy of the warnings required under section 209. The parent or guardian shall sign a statement in the presence of the operator acknowledging receipt and understanding of the warnings. The operator shall sign the written consent form as a witness to the signing of the parent or guardian. Tanning facility employees must be 18 years of age or older.
Minnesota HB 2296 Did Not Pass	Would prohibit anyone under the age of 16 from using a tanning facility.
Missouri HB 1822 Did Not Pass	Would prohibits individuals younger than 16 years of age from using a tanning device. Before individuals younger than 18 years of age can use any device, his or her parent or guardian must go to the facility and sign a written statement acknowledging that he or she has read and understands all the warnings given by the facility and consents to the minor's use of a tanning device. Would also allow for regulation of tanning facilities.
New Hampshire HB 1160 Did Not Pass	Would prohibit the use of tanning facilities to anyone under the age of 18 without written order from a physician.
New York AB 9110/ SB 3461 AB 9199/SB 6905 AB 9211	Would ban the use of an ultraviolet radiation device by persons under age 18 at tanning facilities. Would ban the use of tanning device by persons under age 16 at tanning facilities. Would require parental accompaniment or a doctor's recommendation for a person under age 18.
Ohio HB 173	Would prohibit those under age 18 from using tanning services unless the individual presents a prescription for receiving ultraviolet radiation treatments written by a physician.
Oklahoma SB 544 Did Not Pass SB 1171 Did Not Pass	Would prohibit use of a tanning device by a person under 13 without physicians' written order and parent/legal guardian present. Minors must be accompanied by a parent/legal guardian. Requires informed parent/ legal guardian consent statement for minors age 16 through 17. Punishment of violation is specified in the bill. Persons age 13 and under shall not be allowed to use tanning facilities in this state without a written order from a physician licensed in this state and without being accompanied by a parent or legal guardian for every use of the tanning facility.
Pennsylvania SB 461 SB 460 HB 2048/ HB 1992	Would require a parent/legal guardian presence and consent for anyone under the age of 18 to use an indoor tanning facility. Would provide penalties to any tanning facilities that permits minors to use tanning devices for anyone without parent/legal guardian consent and presence. Would require facility to provide and require use of protective goggles and limit exposure to manufacturer's recommendation. Would require parental consent, in person, for those under age 18 and ban use for those under age 14 without doctor's recommendation.
Rhode Island S 2205 Did Not Pass H 7274 Did Not Pass	Would prohibit the use of tanning facilities by anyone under age 18. Would also regulate equipment and facility.
South Dakota S 154 Did Not Pass S 158 Did Not Pass	Would prohibit the use of tanning facilities by a minor. Would prohibit the use of tanning facilities by anyone under age 18. Would require parental permission for minors over 14 years old. Would require a doctors order and parental accompaniment for anyone under 14 years old. Would also regulate equipment and facility.
Vermont HB 53 Did Not Pass	Would prohibit the use of tanning facilities by anyone under age 18, except when used for medical purposes.
Washington HB 2652 Did Not Pass SB 6663 Did Not Pass	Would prohibit the use of tanning facilities by anyone under age 18, except when used for medical purposes. Would prohibit the use of tanning facilities by anyone under age 14 without a written prescription. Requires parental consent, in person, for those age 14 up to age 18 and requires the use of eye protection.
West Virginia SB 118 Did Not Pass	Would require parental accompaniment for use of tanning facilities by anyone under age 14 and parental consent for those age 14 up to age 18.
Wyoming Act No. 114 (HB 63) Enacted	Would require parental accompaniment for use of tanning facilities by anyone under age 15 and require parental consent for those between ages 15-18.