Parts Catalog Accessories Catalog How To Articles Tech Forums
Call Pelican Parts at 888-280-7799
Shopping Cart Cart | Project List | Order Status | Help



Go Back   PeachParts Mercedes-Benz Forum > General Discussions > Off-Topic Discussion

Reply
 
LinkBack Thread Tools Display Modes
  #1  
Old 04-27-2004, 09:18 PM
MTI's Avatar
MTI MTI is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Nov 2002
Location: Scottsdale, Arizona
Posts: 10,626
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.

Reply With Quote
  #2  
Old 04-28-2004, 05:59 AM
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jul 2003
Posts: 336
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.
Reply With Quote
  #3  
Old 04-28-2004, 08:24 AM
Botnst's Avatar
Banned
 
Join Date: Jun 2003
Location: There castle.
Posts: 44,601
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
Reply With Quote
  #4  
Old 04-28-2004, 09:15 AM
Tomguy's Avatar
Vintage Moderator
 
Join Date: Aug 2002
Location: near Scranton, PA
Posts: 5,407
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
Reply With Quote
  #5  
Old 04-28-2004, 12:47 PM
MTI's Avatar
MTI MTI is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Nov 2002
Location: Scottsdale, Arizona
Posts: 10,626
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.
Reply With Quote
  #6  
Old 04-28-2004, 03:23 PM
MTI's Avatar
MTI MTI is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Nov 2002
Location: Scottsdale, Arizona
Posts: 10,626
Quote:
Originally posted by TheVirginiaDude
Not hardly they weren't collecting it before broadband existed, how can it be effecting their bottom lines.

States weren't collecting gasoline taxes before cars replaced horses, . . . so your "point" is . . . ? As for affecting their bottom line, if your salary was reduced, but your household expenses remained the same, what would that do to your bottom line?

The internet is clearly an interstate enterprise. which is under feral control.

feral control . . . that's so freudian . . . however, while the internet is the "information superhighway" should local providers of broadband be tax-exempt in the states where they provide the service? Seems to me that the industry is expanding exponentially, with 25% penetration in homes with the internet and over 50% in businesses, why do they need a tax break? Basicially, you're saying you're "ok" with having to pay higher local taxes and/or have less local services, so that your local broadband provider can avoid taxes that every other business in your state or county pays.

I oppose this tax, why? take a look at your phone bill sometime, almost half of what you pay isn't to the phone company at all.

Is there a state tax on your land line and local cell service?
Reply With Quote
  #7  
Old 04-28-2004, 08:44 PM
Botnst's Avatar
Banned
 
Join Date: Jun 2003
Location: There castle.
Posts: 44,601
Quote:
Originally posted by MTI

...
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.
Hey Empty, sorry to bust your bubble, but I was agreeing.

" 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

Reply With Quote
Reply

Bookmarks

Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is On
Trackbacks are On
Pingbacks are On
Refbacks are On




All times are GMT -4. The time now is 08:42 AM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.7
Copyright ©2000 - 2024, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.
Search Engine Optimization by vBSEO 3.6.0
Copyright 2024 Pelican Parts, LLC - Posts may be archived for display on the Peach Parts or Pelican Parts Website -    DMCA Registered Agent Contact Page