Parents of girls are being hit by a ‘pink tax,’ having to regularly fork out more money for clothes and toys aimed at girls rather than boys.

There is a ‘gender price gap’ in kids’ clothes and toys with stores charging more for almost identical items depending on whether it is targeted at girls or boys.

The research, carried out by parenting site ChannelMum.com revealed nearly three quarters (71 per cent) of parents believe girls’ clothes cost more than boys.

The study targeted UK stores such as Asda and Marks and Spencer.

For example, a blue and green striped jacket from George at Asda costs $14 for 1-6-year-olds but rises to $17 for a pink one, an increase of almost a third.

A pack of boys’ briefs in Marks and Spencer will set parents back $7 (£4-£7), while the same number of girls’ briefs will amount to $10 (£6-£8).

A pair of blue inline roller skates in Argos cost $14 (£7.99) while the pink pair rises to $19 (£10.99), which equates to around 37 per cent more.

Over half (58 per cent) of parents reckon they have to pay more for accessories aimed at young girls while 52 per cent believe the cost of a girl’s coat is often higher than one for a boy.

T-shirts and tops (37 per cent), nightwear (21 per cent) and underwear (17 per cent) are also among the items of clothing parents believe are priced higher for girls.

On average, girls’ items were priced at 21 per cent higher than the equivalent item for boys, but the items where boys were charged more averaged just 13.5 per cent more expensive.

MoM’s have you noticed this yourself?

Share your comments below

  • I can’t believe this. That just wouldn’t make any sense.


  • Really ?!! :0


  • I’m disgusted by this. I have 2 boys so haven’t noticed it, but I’ll take more notice from now on and kick up a fuss if I see differences.


  • How rediculous to pay more for the colour. Same toy, same design should be same price


  • This is so stupid, it should be the same price whether it’s pink or blue.


  • Wonder why this would be and if this is the case in Oz as well ?


  • I haven’t noticed a pink tax as such but as my children have got older I’ve noticed the difference in clothing prices.


  • Honestly, if parents want to pay extra just so their daughters wear pink……that’s there problem. I’m happy for my girls to wear any colour, especially if I’ll be saving money


  • This does not surprise me at all.


  • Incredible!! Having just a girl I never really compared prices, but it’s quite shocking!


  • Oh it works both ways and I’m bloody sick of it. I wanted chesty bonds type singlets for my 4 year old son. I coild buy a three pack of white “girls” singlets for $5 or I could buy a three pack with a million different combinations of pink singlets for $5. Or I could buy a three pack with a solid dark blue, a solid grey and a blue and white striped one for $8. No “boys” white 3 packs anywhere. Not to mention kmart, big w and targets all have an entire girls section for clothes, while the boys get maybe two or three shelves. Bloody over it.


Post a comment
Like Facebook page

LIKE MoM on Facebook

Please enter your comment below
Would you like to include a photo?
No picture uploaded yet.
Please wait to see your image preview here before hitting the submit button.
Your MoM account

Lost your password?

Enter your email and a password below to post your comment and join MoM:

You May Like


Looks like this may be blocked by you browser or content filtering.

↥ Back to top

Thanks For Your Star Rating!

Would you like to add a written rating or just a star rating?

Write A Rating Just A Star Rating