Ethical Issues on GST on essential disability aids
Kartavya Desk Staff
Syllabus: Application of Ethics
Context: GST on essential disability aids like wheelchairs and Braillers is unjustly discriminatory. Since the GST regime began in 2017, disabled individuals must pay an additional 5% tax on these aids, which penalizes their disability.
Issues with tax on disability aid instruments:
Issue | Details
Article 14 | GST on disability aids is argued as unreasonable under Article 14, which ensures equality. For example, a ₹1 lakh wheelchair incurs ₹5,000 GST, costing ₹10 per kilometre.
Rights of Persons with Disabilities Act, 2016 | Section 3 of the Act prohibits discrimination against persons with disabilities, challenging the GST on mobility aids.
Indirect Discrimination | Chief Justice D Y Chandrachud’s 2021 judgment highlighted the need to address indirect discrimination, applicable to the GST on disability aids.
Contradicts Government Stand | The GST on disability aids contradicts the government’s concern for disabled individuals, as referred to by Prime Minister Narendra Modi as “divyang.”
Supreme Court Judgments | The Supreme Court has invalidated discriminatory taxes in the past, such as in Sakal Papers (1961), Indian Express (1984), and Aashirwad Films (2007).
Ethical issues with taxing disability aid instruments:
• Discrimination: Taxing disability aids imposes additional financial burdens on individuals with disabilities, who already face significant challenges.
• Violation of Equality: violate the principle of equality under Article 14
• Economic Burden: The additional tax on essential aids like wheelchairs and Braille books exacerbates the economic strain on individuals with disabilities
• Social Marginalization: Taxes on disability aids reinforce social marginalization by making essential tools for mobility and learning more expensive
• Indirect Discrimination: GST on disability aids can be considered a form of indirect discrimination, where the tax burden disproportionately affects those with disabilities compared to the able-bodied population.
View of World Ethical Thinkers on Disabled People:
• Immanuel Kant: Emphasized respect for individuals’ dignity and autonomy, advocating for the equal treatment of disabled people as moral agents deserving of respect.
• John Stuart Mill: Supported utilitarian principles, which would favour policies that maximize overall well-being, including the fair treatment and inclusion of disabled individuals.
• Martha Nussbaum: Proposed the Capabilities Approach, focusing on providing all individuals, including the disabled, with the capabilities to lead a flourishing life.
View of Indian Ethical Thinkers on Disabled People:
• Mahatma Gandhi: Advocated for the upliftment and inclusion of disabled individuals, emphasizing compassion and equal opportunities.
• R. Ambedkar: Supported social justice and equality, stressing the need for legal and social reforms to ensure the rights and dignity of all, including the disabled.
• Swami Vivekananda: Highlighted the importance of treating all individuals with respect and ensuring their well-being, including those with disabilities.
What should be done?
Reform tax policies to avoid disproportionate impacts on marginalized groups, including disabled individuals, and enhance legal protections to prevent indirect discrimination and ensure inclusivity and fairness.