Why do Women Get More Tax Exemption Than Men?

Males have been, are and will be disposable.

The myth that women had it going all wrong has been practiced for too long. For the ten of thousands of years that humans have been around, men had their places in war zones or jungles, but woman having places in the families has suddenly become a huge problem for feminists, as if war zones and jungles are better suited for personality development and pleasures of life than a family.

The Fundamental: A rise of woman empowerment era is a direct offshoot to the fact that men have started to suffer only as much as women. Prior to it, men used to suffer/killed/murdered...let me say about 50 times more than women. A society(powerful patriarchal men and women alike) can not tolerate an equilibrium where men and women suffer as much.

As regards to your points about tax exemption:

1) Here are figures. Men make 82% of taxpayers and account for about 95% of direct tax returns which are to the tune of little above 50,000 crores. Thus overall contribution to tax revenue by women is well below 2000 crores.


2) There are about 31.5m tax payers so the total tax exemption to women is about 1700 crores.


3) Compare it to amount spent on various women empowerment schemes. Amount allocated under 2007-08 Budget is 22,282 crores.

4) Add to it Govt, police and judicial machinery for exclusive protection of women you will find out that direct tax exemption is very miniscule.


4) Add to it indirect but even higher cost of supporting a system which needs to provide conducive environment for women to be able to demonstrate the so called "untapped talent".

5) Add to it the ever burgeoning cost of legal harassment, legal terrorism and other associated costs, men (and families) have to bear at the hands of unjust and twisted legal framework which has been conceptualized only to make women feel that they are(as expectedly) treated like queens by law.

And all of the above is being spent to support handful of women who claim themselves(and few others) to be self professed victims.

If I sum up all the above (which will be close enough to a significant portion of our GDP), tax exemption to women will be the least of my concern.

Society conditions men to possess, own, protect, snatch "baby making machines", because the more the baby making machines in a tribe or clan, the more stable the clan will be on long run and it will not get extinct.

Please, note women were baby making machine for more than 99.99% of human history that we know. Only in past 30 years or so the things started changing otherwise, women used to remain pregnant for more than 15 years or so in their life time.

This social conditioning will not go away unless men put some effort towards changing it. Please note, the same conditioning also makes some men rapists.

Chivalry is soft-chauvinism and hence the victorian knights in armour give special concessions to women even today.

The feminists are Okay with it so far as it discriminates men, where as in reality they are on the side of chauvinists in such issues.

There are thousand things, much bigger that this remain un-noticed by men because of their chauvinistic ways. Men are just blind to many other ways in which millions can be ripped off them compared to this issue where women save just some Rs.10,000 or so.

Our lawmakers and politician not understanding what article 14 of constitution said in plain english .

they get tax benfits becase they are woman. Simple :))

Thanks FF and Sumanth for your insightful comments. Though I may not be on the same side of the argument as you two, I surely do appreciate the fact that FF chose to pepper his comments with facts and figures. As for what Sumanth said, yes mate, it's only in the last 30 years that we seem to have a phenomenal rise in the number of women seeking equality.

Now I think getting tax exemptions is not enough. there should be 33% reservations for women in employments, so that women can come forward and take tax exemption benefits.

33% reservation as well? What happened to all the hoopla about "Women having equal rights" .. so on and so forth! I believe women should be lobbying for 50% reservation, at least!! :-) The more the merrier!

Yes its a fact that women have been suppressed for generations (at least in this country) and in some regions they still are, but the only question that arises is - Is tax benefit any solution to that at all? Or for that matter even reservations?

1. Tax benefits will be enjoyed by the working women who already have kind of come out of the clutches of the male dominated society. And now its all about equal pay for equal work!!!

2.On a balance, if the weight on one side is more by x grams, you need to balance it by adding x grams only to the other side too. Here that x grams is the social and political equality that women can enjoy. Providing reservation or added benefits will shift the balance on the other side now.

3. I personally think it shud hurt a woman's dignity to draw such favors. Anything that hasn't been won by merit is an insult!!

4. This particular issue has lots of political reasons behind it. Otherwise there are lots of other things regarding women one needs to think about but y is that we always debate on reservations and tax benefits?

5. So many desrving men have to suffer because of this biased mentality. I mean y shud a man be deprived of a seat in some insti or a part of his money while a non deserving woman gets all the benefits. Its so unfair...!!!!!

Well, women have been oppressed for generations.
So have the lower castes been oppressed for generations.
Aren't the issues similar in nature.

Whatever views someone holds, they should be same on both topics.

If reservations for lower castes are right, so are reservations and tax breaks for women.
If they are wrong, they have to be wrong for both.

I am personality against reservations as well as tax breaks for both women and lower castes.

Injustices of the past cannot be cured, particularly not by reverse injustice in present.

There are still places in India, particularly villages, where this equality of gender and caste does not exist. The injustice has to be cured by making sure there is equality in those villages as well, not by giving soaps to the well to do city people.

@Shashank - As per your point (3) - It does NOT hurt my dignity, because I didn't ask for it. But I do declare - "I do not need any tax breaks".

Thank God Lexiss that you clarified ur position towards the end of your comment -- I almost had a heart attack upon reading about reservations and tax breaks for BOTH scheduled castes & tribes AND women! Now if such a thing were to happen - especially the reservation part - , where would that leave us men from normal castes? Somewhere in some museum, I am sure -- as antiques!

Parliament in its true spirit is not to be treated as a power house. It is, rather in every spirit of governance, a service house. I as a citizen, do not expect any reservation for people I know, but I would rather insist on their due representation...irrespective of gender, caste, creed of the person representing them.

Hence, I do not concur with any of this reservation/quota for women. I would however certainly "DEMAND" exact 50% representation of women in parliament.

Now if that sounds crazy, take a close look.

Currently there is huge(close to 80%) representation of women in parliament.
Adding reservation will suddenly make that 80% jump close to 95%.

Who then is going to restore the balance in this already disbalanced democratic setup?

I have absolutely no problems, if 50% of women constitute parliament and then they raise women only issues, as long as 50% of men in parliament raise male perspective and men related issues.

That said, I do see a long term benefit, if we give short term benefit to women, by reserving 50% of seats in parliament...It will at least displace those scoundrels sitting on their cherished thrones in Indian Parliament.


People who are pushing for 33% reservation, just want to be at the helm of power and are least interested about welfare of people they are designated to represent... Else they would have asked for exact 50% reservation and consequently 50%(reduced) representation of women.