Internet Connection Tax Held Off for A Few More Years 100
Christopher Blanc writes "The ban on taxing Internet connections was set to expire at the end of October, but thankfully the US Congress has acted. Last night, a Senate bill was passed that extends the 1998 Internet Tax Freedom Act for seven more years. There are still some details to work out (the House's bill only extends it for four years), but it's clear both houses of Congress are looking to keep taxes out of the picture for the near future. 'Sen. Ted Stevens (R-AK) is excited at the prospect that Americans will be able to continue filing the tubes of the Internet tax-free. "The Internet has provided a powerful economic boost to our nation, and has become an important everyday tool for millions of Americans," said the senator. "By keeping Internet access tax-free and affordable, Congress can encourage Internet use for distance learning, telemedicine, commerce and other important services."'"
Great news! (Score:1)
Now if they could just get the ISPs to charge reasonable prices for those connections...
Re: (Score:1)
Re: (Score:1)
Re: (Score:3, Informative)
Re: (Score:2)
No percent of your money is enough..
Re: (Score:1)
Re: (Score:1)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:1)
Re: (Score:2)
But we'd need far fewer taxes if we weren't pissing away money in Iraq, which comes back to your sig: I don't support the troops because every dollar spent in Iraq is a dollar taken (by threat of force) from some ordinary American. I don't mind giving money to the government as long as I get something for it, but -- if Uncle Sam is going to waste it -- can I hav
Re: (Score:2)
Re:Great news! (Score:4, Interesting)
No, you can't have it back. Your tax dollars go to support the nation as a whole. The government is a not a personal service. It is an organization to foster economic growth by making investments that will benefit the entire country. Sometimes those investments are good, and sometimes they go awry. Sure, Iraq looks bad, but in case you haven't noticed, the US Army is sitting on top of about half of the proved oil assetts on the planet earth, and that's not exactly a bad place to put it.
Re: (Score:2)
So you're proposing we insure a supply of cheap fuel by conquest? Does this really benefit the entire country in the long run?
How many (non-greenhouse-gas-emitting) nuclear plants can you build for $2 trillion? Hint: a lot.
Re: (Score:2)
On that point, I agree, but name me enough votes on both sides of the aisle, regardless of party, willing to say, hey, we should have a national nuclear power grid. The Democrats won't do it because their environmentalist base would oppose it, and the Republicans won't do it because their corporate base would oppose it. All in all, if there was any one case where a centrist party needed to be form to realize t
Re: (Score:2)
I mean, come on. Inexpensive, clean energy whose only fault is that it has the same word in its name as those bombs that we dropped on Japan? You could probably make these people cut off their balls by telling them that meiosis is a nuclear process.
Re: (Score:2)
No, I am not kidding, look it up.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
But property tax is the most evil of all taxes. A freind I had about 20 years ago's parents lost their house. These folks were retired, had spent 30 years paying it off, and owned the house free and clear. When they bought it, they probably paid something like $20k for it, with payments maybe $50 per month.
So these poor folks are retired, on a fixed income (social security and maybe a small pension). Fo
Re: (Score:3, Informative)
Suggesting that "the rich" are just a bunch of lazy slobs who got it all handed to them is not a valid argument for socialism. Besides that, you seem to think that unear
Re: (Score:2, Insightful)
Nor am I saying all rich are idle rich; although the rich seem to have the opinion that the poor are all the idle poor.
Nor am I saying unearned income isn't taxed; it is. But it is taxed at a lower rate than the average workers' income, at least by the US Federal government.
I agree that charging a set amount is unfair. The vehicle registration taxes you mention are an excellent example.
A flat tax would be fair IF, and it's a big if, there were n
Re: (Score:2)
Dunno where all you've lived...but, I've only lived in one city that didn't charge sales tax on food. That was Tucson, AZ. Everywhere else I've lived charged sales tax on everything....food, clothes, booze....the necessities.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:1)
Re: (Score:2)
Now if they could just get the ISPs to charge reasonable prices for those connections...
$20/mo for DSL isn't reasonable?
Re: (Score:1)
I'm from Missouri. Half the population isn't close enough to an exchange to get DSL.
Lucky you (Score:1)
Lucky you, no tax for a first post. ;-)
Re: (Score:1)
I was hoping for a subsidy, but it's not forthcoming.
Re: (Score:1)
Perhaps if you included an 'imagine a beowulf cluster', 'In Societ Russia' or 'I for one welcome our ...', but competition for subsidies is considerable and with so little money to go around. Have you tried the Kellogg Foundation?
If nothing else (Score:3, Interesting)
The internet has made lots of money for shipping companies and employed a lot of delivery/logistics people. UPS, FedEx, USPS, etc. All those online shops have to get the product to the buyer somehow.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Delivery of products by big truck is far more efficient than the traditional retail method of buying things. Retail is grossly inefficient: you've got all the floor workers, the physical maintenance of the building itself, and then the huge amount of cash and effort that goes into marketing that gets spent on retail stores. Amazon.com or wherever has none of that: they've got some web-lackeys making a website and a bunch of stuff sitting in warehouses, and if you pay them money they dump some of it on a big truck and take it to you
I'm waiting for the day they install a pipe in my house connected to the great, world wide web o' commerce and anything I buy is put in at one end and pops out in my house a while later. :)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
It would seem more necessary than less, unless the profit is made in the delivery of raw common elements how else would someone make a living?
If we all respected IP laws (or had no choice not to) then it would make sense (to me) that what you would be buying is the blueprint the assembler uses to build $whatever it is you want...
Re: (Score:1)
The internet is not something that you just dump something on. It's not a big truck. It's a series of tubes.
How dare you try to clog my internets with your purchases!
Re: (Score:2)
while i think international system would be very hard and expensive.. there have been ones developed for localised area's.. several blocks at walstreet - even runs of several miles..
who knows it might jsut work
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pneumatic_tube#Pneumatic_Post [wikipedia.org]
if you want to read up on it
Great the internet is not taxed ! (Score:5, Insightful)
Fortunately sex and the internet are still untaxed. Cool.
Re:Great the internet is not taxed ! (Score:5, Funny)
Even my patience with reading your post is taxed. How about that.
Re: (Score:1)
- RG>
Re: (Score:1)
For most slashdotters, taxing either one would have the same effect.
</obvious>
Re: (Score:1)
Re: (Score:1)
Oh, and BTW -- since you can't deduct some of the taxes you pay from your taxable income, like the USF or sales tax, even taxes are taxed. Howya like dem beans?
Re: (Score:2, Interesting)
Re: (Score:2)
According to the government, sex *is* taxed. This madam [wikipedia.org] was busted for prostitution *AND* tax evasion...
Re: (Score:2)
What difference would that make to the average /.'er? Who around here would notice if sex was taxed?
Re: (Score:2)
Not me, although I would certainly notice if sex were taxed.
Re: (Score:2)
No offense dude, but membership in the grammar patrol isn't going to improve your prospects for getting laid...
Re: (Score:3, Interesting)
Re: (Score:1)
Sellers would just end up factoring that into the cost anyway.
Re: (Score:2)
Good, then i would see the real price advertised instead of seeing something 8% cheaper than it really will be...
Re: (Score:1)
In Australia the GST (10%, more or less a sales tax) must, by law, be included in the price as advertised/quoted/etc. Either way, the buyer will end up paying it. Me, I'm not a big fan of having a price on the ticket and then having a sales tax slapped on at the counter.
Watch what they do, not what they say (Score:5, Insightful)
It should be easy, right? A school asks for funds to help establish internet access, an application is reviewed and funds transferred... well, here's a little link to a flowchart showing how out-of-control a government agency can become in only a few years:
http://www.usac.org/_res/documents/sl/pdf/application-process-flow-chart.pdf [usac.org]
Re: (Score:1)
Re: (Score:3, Funny)
Re: (Score:2)
We aren't paying taxes on long distance phone service to pay for the Spanish-American War [arstechnica.com] anymore. That's one down.
Speaking of which, is there any update on repealing that same "federal excise tax" for local service yet?
Re: (Score:2)
"The government spend less money? You must be new here."
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
It's really quite efficient and stream lined, especially f
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
Re: (Score:1)
Los Angeles still has the telephone tax (Score:2)
The local tax was attached to the federal tax, it should have been done away with at the same time. Instead, we are now being illegally taxed. Furthermore, the Mayor of Los Angeles is proposing a 9% tax measure on all telephones, next election. It is being sold as a 1% tax decrease instead of a 9% increa
Re: (Score:2)
Remember, this is the "same" government that took ~100 years to remove the "Spanish American War" tax from our phone bill.
Rural internet access? (Score:4, Insightful)
But I have to wonder. What kind of inequities are being created that aren't solved by the "free market" because of what economists call externalities [wikipedia.org], or put simply benefits/costs not given to the party who produces the service?
Access to high speed internet at reasonable prices in rural, or outlying areas is certainly a concern. I don't really know if that's still a problem or not. But if it is, one solution is a.. yes, that dirty word, a... tax on internet service to support paying for "rural internetification" (to bastardize the program in the 30s, "rural electrification".
Re: (Score:2)
-Rick
Re: (Score:1)
Re: (Score:1)
But
Only ISP Account is Tax-free (Score:5, Informative)
blah blah blah it's all talk anyways (Score:4, Funny)
My DSL LINE is currently taxed and will remain so (unless there is big dif between house and senate version)
The ISP part only is not taxed.
That would be $66.00 taxed (office, home is like 38.00)
The 9.99 ISP charge is taxfree...woohoo ?
$10 a year more to spend, I am going to save the economy
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
How can they even tell the difference between a netradio stream over SSL and, say, a sftp transfer?
Re: (Score:2)
How can they even tell the difference between a netradio stream over SSL and, say, a sftp transfer?
The fact that you can disguise it doesn't change the fact that it is (hypothetically) taxable. All it means is that you are avoiding tax which is also illegal. I think geeks need to stop thinking about how we can easily avoid stupid laws and realize that we must work in the world created by stupid laws.
How can they tax VoIP and net-radio?
As for how they can tax it, it's really pretty easy. To get the service you need an account. The organization providing the account must abide by the law. If the law says they must charge a tax and r
Re: (Score:2)
Saw that one coming (Score:2)
Basically they're operating on a sort of "sell you the printer/razor for cheap, then nickle & dime you for the cartridges/blades" model.
Here is my question, I thought there were rules or guidelines, if not actual laws, that required the government to tax businesses entities equally (with rates, not dollar values). For example, let's say you have small biz owners A and B who are competitors. Now, and this
Re: (Score:2)
So I guess I still
Somebody wake me up (Score:5, Insightful)
We could legalize/regulate/tax the sale of pot... no, that won't happen.
We could tax the monetization of religions... no, that won't happen, Xenu won't let it.
We could tax gasoline... that will happen
We could tax food stuffs... that will happen
The list continues with all the stuff that you cannot live without
So be wary of any politician that promises to reduce taxes, even if they manage to not tax internet access.
Truthfully, the only reason that this has worked is that they are still trying to figure out who will give the best backhanders
If that sounds cynical, think about it for awhile, the truthiness of it will settle in.
Re: (Score:2)
You must have meant "middle class entitlements" such as Social Security, medicare, prescription drugs, etc. Those are far more expensive than anything spent on the defense budget. If you're unhappy with the state of the budget, then look no further than the massive benefits middle class Americans have voted themselves.
Taking away money doesn't help pay for anything (Score:4, Informative)
Yes they are, so reducing government income by raising taxes seems like a particularly poor idea.
The measured effect is very simple and has repeated itself enough by now that people should know better - lower taxes increase government revenue. Raising taxes freezes up money going into the government.
The government isn't the group that creates wealth so giveing them more money only lowers what the rest of us can do with the amount we have remaining.
Re: (Score:2)
Measured? Simple? Please. Reagan and George W both put forth this plan to get more revenue by lowering taxes thus stimulating the economy, etc. So then they lowered taxes a bit, increased spending super-enormously, and viola! more revenue! Please ignore the exploding debt behind the curtain. Heck, you could have gotten similar or better revenue increases ju
Re: (Score:1)
The measured effect is very simple and has repeated itself enough by now that people should know better - lower taxes sometimes increase government revenue. Raising taxes sometimes freezes up money going into the government.
Fixed that for you. Really now, if economic policy was even remotely that simple, would we need so many economical theories? Let's not sour a discussion with imaginary absolutes.
Re:Somebody wake me up (Score:5, Interesting)
Seriously, a lot of stuff is already taxed. It is an ever growing list and this is some minor little thing for them to use when the debate comes up during the next presidential election.
Re: (Score:1)
Assuring incumbents 7 more years of $$$ (Score:2)
Internet Access Still Gets Taxed by States (Score:1)
So if there is a federal law prohibiting Internet access taxing, why do so many states actually have the tax? I know for a fact that at least Texas has a tax on it. It is only supposed to be collected on monthly amounts over $25, but the ISPs generally collect it on the whole thing (or at least Time Warner Cable does). This would probably be grounds for a class action suit against any ISP that does the same.
Here is the link to the tax code for Texas. [state.tx.us]
When I talked to a tax representative there a few yea
Re: (Score:2)
They're grandfathered in.. i.e. they were all specifically charging tax in internet access before the first federal prohibition on such taxes. It was a compromise added to the original internet access tax prohibition legislation in order to get the support and votes from lawmakers in those affected states.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Internet_tax [wikipedia.org]
Sunset Clause (Score:2, Insightful)
Cool! A Minnie Driver/Anne Hathaway love scene. (Score:1)
> encourage Internet use for distance learning, telemedicine, commerce and other important services."
Gosh! He sounds like he's doing us a favor, not heaving the bon-bon eating lardass that is government on yet another thing.
I think what he meant to say was, "By keeping Internet access tax-free and affordable, Congress can avoid getting our asses handed to ourselves at the next election."
Headline is wrong (Score:2)