|
|
|
#1
|
||||
|
||||
Tax Free Broadband?
WASHINGTON (AP) - President Bush on Sunday urged Congress to slap a permanent ban on taxes consumers pay for high-speed Internet hookups. Bush has set 2007 as a deadline for providing speedy Internet access called broadband to every American home. To encourage the spread of this technology, Bush says the users shouldn't be taxed, and that the government should take steps to encourage the spread of competitive services.
Bush has already signed into a law a two-year extension of the Internet Access Tax moratorium, which expired in the fall. Now, he's calling on Congress to pass legislation that would extend the moratorium to broadband and make it permanent. Okay, you so-called conservatives . . . what's the problem with this permanent ban on taxes for broadband? A) Interferes with state's rights and budgets. B) Will decrease state revenues, with resulting increase elsewhere. C) Is another big government "unfunded" Federal mandate. D) All of the above. |
#2
|
|||
|
|||
I like the no-tax idea. For some weird reason, I think that if this were taxed, all extra costs would roll down to the consumer but the consumer wouldn't see any benefit from paying the extra money.
Broadband for all does concern me, though, just because of all the exploits / malware. |
#3
|
||||
|
||||
Lessee heah....
Broadband connects interstate and internationally so it falls under the "Commerce" clause of the Constitution. It's okay for the fed to be in on it. What one administration giveth, another may taketh away. Is there something unique about this service? What I mean is that the fed taxes and regulates interstate and international goods and services--that's where a good portion of their budget originates. Oh wait, now I get it: The fed is proposing to prevent states from imposing an intra-state tax. I don't know what conservatives think of it, but this libertarian federalist is agin it. So mark me down for "A", subsection "Rights". Bot |
#4
|
||||
|
||||
You can always look at it this way: At least we aren't taxed like Europe. I know in Sweeden they have to pay taxes to watch TV - even plain-jane broadcast, not cable.
I'm more worried about the sales tax off of internet goods - most of the stuff I buy online isn't taxed and that makes it a good deal cheaper than stores. Can you imagine what states would charge on "Internet taxes"? buisnesses in Cali would charge buyers in PA tax, and then they have to pay PA tax on top of that. And who's to say states won't raise tax, like from PA's 6% to about 12%, to recover for "Lost jobs in the commerce sector"? Naturally, I think that we wouldn't have a problem if we were more like Europe - there aren't really remote areas over there. But do you really think companies will want to spend buckets of cash to make broadband available to the 10 John Does who live in an area of 1000 sq. mi., in the hopes that at least 1 will buy the service - and then not want to be able to tax this to make up for all that lost money on making it available? I don't want to say only Bush has this problem, many others do as well, but, "Bush has set 2007 as a deadline for providing speedy Internet access called broadband to every American home." People, especially politicians, often forget the fact that a lot of America is VERY rural - Just a few quick examples include Montana, Arizona, Alaska, Idaho, and the Dakotas.
__________________
Current: 2021 Charger Scat Pack Widebody "Sinabee" 2018 Durango R/T Previous: 1972 280SE 4.5 2014 Jeep Grand Cherokee Limited "Hefe", 1992 Jeep Cherokee Laredo "Jeepy", 2006 Charger R/T "Hemi" 1999 Chrysler 300M - RIP @ 221k |
#5
|
||||
|
||||
There may be some confusion about the "tax" that's proposed to be blessed with a permanent ban.
It's not a sales tax on internet commerce. It's the monthly sales tax that your local broadband provider pays to your local government, like the tax on phone service. More clearly, it's for the service, not the stuff you purchase over the service. As for violating the "Commerce Clause", if the same logic is applied, the state fuel and road taxes violate it already as a use tax. What the "Feds" are doing, is giving an unfunded subsidy to the broadband industry, that affects the bottom line of state budgets. That is classic federal interference with state economies. |
#6
|
||||
|
||||
Quote:
|
#7
|
||||
|
||||
Quote:
" Oh wait, now I get it: The fed is proposing to prevent states from imposing an intra-state tax. I don't know what conservatives think of it, but this libertarian federalist is agin it. So mark me down for "A", subsection "Rights"." B |
Bookmarks |
Thread Tools | |
Display Modes | |
|
|