2008-09 Fact Book: The State Of The Industry Report

The addition or revision of tanning rules at the state and local levels has become an all-too-common trend across the country. What does this mean for the indoor tanning industry? Quite simply, we must join together as proponents of the industry and become more active in anticipating, monitoring and fighting these tanning restrictions.

The Indoor Tanning Association (ITA) spent much of its time fighting anti-tanning legislation at the state level; however, many local municipalities also introduced anti-tanning referendums. This is extremely troublesome since what was once a state issue also has become a local and county issue.

Although each state has the authority to draft and execute rules as its sees fit, most local authorities have stayed fairly consistent over the years in regard to mandated salon operations. In addition to licensing and registration requirements, operational areas typically covered by state and local regulations pertain to warning signs, protective eyewear, recordkeeping, age limits and training requirements.

Last year, just as in 2006, the industry witnessed increased fire from the anti-tanning coalition. In fact, salons reported that anti-tanning campaigns affected their season by 25 percent—up from 16 percent in 2006.

At least 22 proposed anti-tanning legislations were introduced in 20 states and at the local level—the majority of which were aimed at restricting teen tanning. Bills that carried over to 2008 included those in Massachusetts, Michigan, Ohio and Pennsylvania.

It seems 2008 is off to another fast start in terms of anti-tanning legislation. A number of bills carried over from 2007, and South Dakota recently drafted new legislation.

Unfortunately, a number of bills affecting the indoor tanning industry were passed in 2007 and became effective.

The Tanning Accountability and Notification (TAN) Act was signed into law Sept. 27, 2007 as part of the Food and Drug Administration (FDA) Amendments of 2007. Under the terms of the law, the FDA must conduct consumer testing to determine if the current text and positioning requirements of warning labels on tanning devices provides sufficient information on the risks of using tanning equipment. The FDA also will determine if modifying the current label to read “ultraviolet radiation can cause skin cancer” or adding any other warning would convey the risk of skin cancer more effectively.

These findings must be reported to the U.S. Congress within the next year; that report also must include a description of the measures the FDA is taking to significantly reduce the risks associated with indoor tanning devices.

The current FDA warning label has not changed since 1979 and states that exposure “may cause skin cancer,” which proponents of the TAN Act say inadequately conveys the understanding of the link between ultraviolet (UV) exposure and skin cancer. In addition, proponents say that the current positioning requirement dictating that the warning label be placed on tanning equipment is ineffective because the label is commonly placed on the top of bed lids—which are often propped open—and therefore, can be overlooked by users.

Reps. Carolyn Maloney and Ginny Brown-Waite introduced the TAN Act (HR 4767) in February 2007 amid an influx of proposed anti-tanning legislation at the state level.