House Bill 510, titled the Menstrual Equity for All Act, would exempt feminine hygiene products from North Carolina sales tax by adding them to the state’s list of items excluded from taxation. The bill defines feminine hygiene products to include tampons, panty liners, menstrual cups, sanitary napkins, and similar products used in connection with the menstrual cycle, and it distinguishes those items from general grooming and hygiene products.
In addition to the tax change, the bill appropriates $750,000 in recurring General Fund money each year of the 2025-2027 fiscal biennium to the Department of Public Instruction for the Feminine Hygiene Products Grant Program. The act would take effect July 1, 2025, with the sales tax exemption applying to sales made on or after that date.
HB510 would amend North Carolina’s sales tax statutes by expanding the list of exempt items under G.S. 105-164.13 and by adding a statutory definition of feminine hygiene products in G.S. 105-164.3. The practical effect would be to remove state sales tax from menstrual products and to provide ongoing state funding for school-based or related grant support through the Department of Public Instruction. The bill would affect consumers purchasing menstrual products, retailers collecting sales tax, and public schools or programs eligible for the grant funding.
No committee transcripts or recorded votes were provided, so there is no direct evidence of debate or formal support/opposition in the available record. Based on the bill’s title and structure, the measure appears to be framed as a menstrual equity and affordability initiative, suggesting a policy goal of reducing costs and improving access to essential hygiene products. The absence of recorded opposition or amendments in the provided materials means sentiment cannot be measured beyond the bill’s introduction and referral.
The main substantive issue is fiscal and policy treatment of menstrual products: supporters would likely view the bill as a fairness and public health measure, while potential critics may focus on the loss of sales tax revenue and the recurring General Fund appropriation. Another possible point of contention is the scope of the definition of feminine hygiene products and whether the exemption should be limited to certain items or extended more broadly. Because no committee discussion or votes are included, specific lawmakers or stakeholder positions are not available.