California influencer flags a $2 price gap between a 3X and size L Target clothing item, calls the difference a ‘fat tax’

A California-based content creator has gone viral on TikTok after recording herself asking a Target employee to price match a plus-size clothing item that was listed at a higher price than its smaller counterpart. The video sparked widespread debate in the comments about whether retailers should charge more for larger clothing sizes. 

The creator, Samyra, who describes herself as a body-positivity activist and singer, shared the clip on her TikTok account. As shown in the video, she noticed in the Target app that the same clothing item was priced at $6 in a large size but $8 in a 3X size, a $2 difference she referred to as a “fat tax.”

In the video, Samyra approached a Target employee and asked whether the store could price-match the two items. She shared screenshots from the Target app showing both prices. “That just seemed, like, a little weird to me,” she said in the clip.

Target employee agrees to price match after customer raises concern over plus-size pricing gap

The employee acknowledged her point, saying, “Yeah, honestly, it does sometimes happen just because of more material. It sounds really stupid and ridiculous.” Samyra agreed with that, and the employee then agreed to change the price for her. “I’m gonna change it anyway for you. I don’t agree with that myself. Personally, I’ve never agreed with that,” the employee said.

Samyra also pointed out during the conversation that there appeared to be no price difference between an extra-small and an extra-large size, only between the standard and plus-size range. The employee said that this did not make sense to her either.

The clip gained traction online and drew a wide range of reactions from viewers. Some praised the Target employee for her response. “Yeah that’s weird as hell to me but shoutout to the cashier,” one user commented. Another wrote, “cashier didn’t wanna get canceled” It is not the first time Target’s in-store policies have come under fire, as one retailer recently faced backlash over a controversial new workplace directive that critics say puts undue pressure on its employees.

Anyway, not all viewers agreed with Samyra’s position. Several commenters argued that the higher price for a larger size was justified. “Honestly. I agree with the tax. Sorry not sorry. My opinion,” one user wrote. Another added, “Its literally more material. its not a ‘fat tax’. cost more to make, cost more to purchase.” Others pushed back on that reasoning.

One commenter argued, “As a sewist, the fabric cost on a mass scale makes no difference because the cost is distributed evenly across all the sizes. You don’t see the XXS being cheaper.” Another drew a comparison to footwear pricing, writing, “So my size 6.5 shoes should cost less than a size 9?” A real thinker, isn’t it?