backtop


Print 60 comment(s) - last by majBUZZ.. on Dec 21 at 7:30 PM

Proposed digital entertainment tax would affect all sorts of digital download services including iTunes

Large manufacturers in the automotive and electronics industry aren’t alone in having money problems right now. Alongside these firms in dire economic straights are consumers and even state and local governments.

New York State Governor David Paterson is looking at a massive $15.4 billion deficit in the state budget. To balance the budget the governor reportedly plans to raise some taxes and eliminate some jobs.

One of the most controversial taxes on the budget agenda would see New York residents paying more for digital entertainment including downloads from iTunes and other digital services like eBooks for Amazon's popular Kindle reader.

The state would charge a tax on digitally delivered entertainment services reports CNET News. Other than adding to the cost of music from iTunes, the tax would also affect things like tickets to sporting events, movie tickets, taxi rides, satellite TV, and satellite radio.

Patterson told NYDailyNews.com, "We're going to have to take some extreme measures." The so-called iPod Tax isn’t the only method on the agenda for increased tax revenues New York residents are facing. The plan would cut state aid to schools by $689 million, cut healthcare benefits by $3.5 billion, and eliminate 521 state workers and seven state agencies.

Patterson continued saying, "This is where we are. Maybe we should have thought about this when we were depending on what we thought was inexhaustive collections of taxes from Wall Street - and now those taxes have fallen off a cliff."

The proposed budget still needs approval by the state legislature before the proposed taxes go into effect.



Comments     Threshold


This article is over a month old, voting and posting comments is disabled

Paterson is a sightless jerk-off.
By Ordr on 12/18/2008 12:26:05 PM , Rating: 1
That's about all there is.




RE: Paterson is a sightless jerk-off.
By Lord 666 on 12/18/2008 12:30:19 PM , Rating: 2
He definitely doesn't have vision on how to take NY through this situation. In the words of SNL, he was never intended to be governor.

There should be a special election that puts Bloomberg in the governor's spot for the time being. If anyone is fiscally sounds, its Mike.

But talking about odd taxes, an iPod tax? Whats next, a Starbucks tax? Newspaper tax?


RE: Paterson is a sightless jerk-off.
By Ordr on 12/18/2008 12:31:13 PM , Rating: 2
Or a "two useless orbs in the front of one's face" tax.


RE: Paterson is a sightless jerk-off.
By Smilin on 12/18/2008 2:39:49 PM , Rating: 3
They aren't always in front of my face and they aren't useless. You can put your head between them and go bloogabloogabloogablooga and it feels real nice. Pinching is fun too.


RE: Paterson is a sightless jerk-off.
By Smilin on 12/18/2008 2:41:27 PM , Rating: 2
Oh, you mean "in the front of" rather than "in front of" like eyeballs.


RE: Paterson is a sightless jerk-off.
By TomZ on 12/18/2008 4:03:11 PM , Rating: 2
quote:
But talking about odd taxes, an iPod tax? Whats next, a Starbucks tax? Newspaper tax?
An obesity tax, apparently:

Today, we find ourselves in the midst of a new public health epidemic: childhood obesity. ... That is why, in the state budget I presented last Tuesday, I proposed a tax on sugared beverages like soda. Research has demonstrated that soft-drink consumption is one of the main drivers of childhood obesity.
http://www.cnn.com/2008/HEALTH/12/18/paterson.obes...

Note to Paterson - correlation is not the same as causation!


By Lord 666 on 12/18/2008 10:09:12 PM , Rating: 2
Think the CNN article sums it up best with

quote:
The opinions expressed in this commentary are solely those of David Paterson.


By majBUZZ on 12/21/2008 7:30:44 PM , Rating: 2
I agree I live in New York and the last and I mean the last thing this state needs is more tax's. If you want to pull the state out of the gutter maybe create jobs instead of tax people that have been taxed to the max already.

As far as making fun of the guy for being blind that's just low class and doesn't really help anything, seems like from a personal perspective he has achieved a lot more then most people who can see.


RE: Paterson is a sightless jerk-off.
By headbox on 12/18/2008 12:38:05 PM , Rating: 3
It makes you wonder how a state like Oregon can get by with no sales tax at all, or Washington with no income tax.

Oh wait, I know how...


RE: Paterson is a sightless jerk-off.
By FITCamaro on 12/18/2008 1:07:34 PM , Rating: 1
Texas has an $11 billion surplus and no state income tax. I don't doubt Obama will try to spread their wealth around as well.


RE: Paterson is a sightless jerk-off.
By MPE on 12/18/2008 1:46:48 PM , Rating: 2
Uhm - Texas is an oil producing state.


RE: Paterson is a sightless jerk-off.
By qdemn7 on 12/18/2008 2:30:17 PM , Rating: 2
Bit, but, but, we are always told NYC is such an engine of the American economy...Guess it's not that big of an engine after all is it? And yes, I'm a Texan.


By jskirwin on 12/18/2008 2:43:42 PM , Rating: 2
Delaware doesn't have a sales tax. How do we do it?

All your credit card balances are belong to us.


By Quiescent on 12/18/2008 3:11:46 PM , Rating: 2
It seems to me that I have heard quite a bit on Apple being attacked by New York. This is funny, but sad... But still funny.

This is what you get for being a goody two-shoes and trying to spit out more money than worth it to Apple. New York knows there is profit for them in the large amount of profit for Apple.


How about this...
By Pneumothorax on 12/18/2008 12:54:00 PM , Rating: 3
It's time to clamp down, how about these sightless gov jerks getting a paycut? Since the rest of us are losing our jobs, getting paycuts... and this idiot wants us to pay higher taxes. As far as I'm concerned these guys are getting paid way too much for their "Idiocracy"




RE: How about this...
By chmilz on 12/18/2008 1:45:26 PM , Rating: 5
Buying digital entertainment isn't a basic need, it's a luxury. People that lose their jobs and can't feed their families need food, not songs for their iPods. Those that can afford the luxuries can afford to pay the taxes. Oh, the things people take for granted...


RE: How about this...
By FITCamaro on 12/18/2008 3:10:03 PM , Rating: 1
So you're saying everything that people that is not needed for survival should be taxed because those that buy those things can afford it? You already pay a sales tax (in most places) for goods. So basically you're admitting that we should charge a luxury tax on everything. So buying music is a luxury that should have extra taxes, buying a DVD is now a luxury that should have extra taxes, going to the movies is a luxury that should have extra taxes, going out to dinner is a luxury that should have extra taxes, do I need to continue?

Christ people who think this way are scary. Do you not realize what effect this will have on businesses world-wide? Practically every business out there exists to sell products we want. Not necessarily need. Your idea to better the economy is to add luxury taxes to all products that are not basic needs? Yeah that's a great idea....

And as far as taxing things like soda because they're not healthy for you. I'm so glad I lived to see the day where the government is now trying to tax you for wanting to enjoy foods that it deems aren't good for you. Do you like beef? Hope not since we soon might be paying a carbon tax in order to eat it.


RE: How about this...
By JoshuaBuss on 12/18/2008 4:30:12 PM , Rating: 2
quote:
So you're saying everything that people that is not needed for survival should be taxed because those that buy those things can afford it?


Uhh.. yeah. Why's this a bad idea? It's already this way in Illinois and most other states far as I know. Food tax here is ridiculously low compared to other items. Seems like it makes sense.. why should digital music be even more accessible than food?


RE: How about this...
By FITCamaro on 12/18/2008 9:57:42 PM , Rating: 2
I'm talking about on top of sales tax. Most states don't tax foods like vegetables. The rest gets sales tax. But what New York is talking about is extra luxury taxes on items. Or essentially an "unhealthy" tax for foods they deem aren't healthy for you(at least that's what they tell you).

Do you have any idea how much this kind of thinking would harm our economy.

What's proposed here is this. Say a 12 pack of Coke is $5 and there is a 6% sales tax. So its $5.30. But now they're proposing another 18% sales tax on it. So now its $6.20. What do you think extra taxes like this will do to businesses? When people have to pay sales tax plus say another 10% on their meal, I'd say there's going to be even less people going to restaurants than there already are. So even more people get laid off. Same with movies. More laid off. Yeah this sounds great...


RE: How about this...
By FITCamaro on 12/18/2008 9:59:00 PM , Rating: 2
And look how great Illinois is doing with its economy in shambles.


Seriously...
By maverick85wd on 12/18/2008 1:48:11 PM , Rating: 4
quote:
The plan would cut state aid to schools by $689 million


Why don't politicians understand this is never the right option? Perhaps the politicians from when they were in school had the same thinking?




RE: Seriously...
By fishbits on 12/18/2008 3:55:16 PM , Rating: 2
Why wouldn't it be the right option? You seem to be tying dollars spent to educational services provided. Definitely not the case in the US. Countries that spend a good deal less per student get far better results. You CAN pay someone $4,000 for a gallon of milk, but that doesn't mean it is better, or that you couldn't get the same thing far cheaper. If instead your goal was learning instead of dollars spent, kids and the nation would be better off.

Sorry, a kickback scheme so that the teachers' union can fund politicians, political activism and union bosses is not a good use of taxpayer dollars and should be reclaimed.

If you really want to understand this, find out how much government (city, state, federal) funding your state claims to spend per student. Each and every year. Budget it out on the back of an envelope for a school of typical size and you'll very quickly realize just how much money is being siphoned off for things that aren't for the student's education. You could be outraged and do something about it. Or let kids rot in bad, overpriced schools because you heard spending was high, therefore everything must be ok.


RE: Seriously...
By maverick85wd on 12/18/2008 7:09:55 PM , Rating: 2
fair enough, but you really can't argue that cutting almost $700 million isn't going to negatively impact the quality of education.

I was fortunate enough to grow up in an area where a lot of money was spent on education (some thought too much) but in the end all the best teachers wanted to work there. We also had brand new computer labs (which were also griped about) but we used them all the time and it enriched our education.

The fact remains, cutting money on education is ignorant and short-sighted.


Interstate Commerce notwithstanding
By SoCalBoomer on 12/18/2008 2:56:20 PM , Rating: 2
Or actually, yes - this isn't going to stand up to a court challenge.

California charges tax on iTunes - yes, because Apple is a California company and, thus, it is not an interstate commerce transaction.

However, NY can't since Apple is a California company - unless they claim that since Apple has a store in NY that they can charge tax. . .which is stupid - you don't buy your music from the Apple Computer Store - you buy it from iTunes (or has Apple not split itself up into pieces like they should have to keep this from happening?)

So IF NY thinks they can get away with it because Apple operates stores in NY, this should not apply to others - Newegg doesn't have a NY store (I don't think) so anything NY'ers buy from NewEgg should be tax-free, right? Am I missing something?




RE: Interstate Commerce notwithstanding
By mydogfarted on 12/18/2008 4:57:10 PM , Rating: 2
If a company has a "brick and mortar" business in a state you live in, you are supposed to be charged sales tax - even for internet sales.


RE: Interstate Commerce notwithstanding
By SoCalBoomer on 12/18/2008 5:24:34 PM , Rating: 2
Which was partly the point - I know that which is why I pay tax for NewEgg purchases. . .they have a store in California.

So all Apple would have to do is to spin iTunes off from the rest - make it its own store and separate from Apple Hardware/OS - and it would be tax free and NYC would not be able to do anything. . .


By foolsgambit11 on 12/18/2008 7:29:19 PM , Rating: 2
It really shouldn't matter whether there is a B&M store in your state, I think. It should be that, if there is a tax, it could only be levied by the state that the seller is in. That's where the transaction is taking place. After that, it is transferred across state lines, which is protected from tariffs and taxes by states in the Constitution.

States probably wouldn't want to tax internet retailers, though, because that would send those businesses to other states. So we end up with the status quo - no taxes on most purchases.

Other points - how would Apple, for instance, know where you are located? IP sniffing, or from the address on your account? One could be bypassed by using a proxy not in New York, the other could be bypassed by setting up your account with an address outside the state. With online statements, the billing address on your credit card doesn't really have to be your physical address. In other words, this tax would be difficult to enforce, and would add costs to businesses who currently don't have to differentiate which state their customers are coming from.

Or what about this? Would digital cable be taxed, too? It's media being delivered digitally, yes? I guess, with all the other random charges on the bill, nobody would even notice an additional tax on cable.


You have to love Democrats
By Reclaimer77 on 12/18/2008 5:37:52 PM , Rating: 1
quote:
New York State Governor David Paterson is looking at a massive $15.4 billion deficit in the state budget. To balance the budget the governor reportedly plans to raise some taxes and eliminate some jobs.


Good plan. That will fix the problem...

quote:
Patterson told NYDailyNews.com, "We're going to have to take some extreme measures."


A Democrat raising taxes and trying to get a bigger piece of the pie from businesses ? Yeah thats REAL extreme !!! Its never been tried before I'm sure !

To a Democrat cutting spending and killing entitlement programs isn't extreme apparently. Its unthinkable...




RE: You have to love Democrats
By foolsgambit11 on 12/18/2008 7:55:48 PM , Rating: 2
quote:
To a Democrat cutting spending and killing entitlement programs isn't extreme apparently. Its unthinkable...
Did you just ignore the part where he said he was cutting spending and entitlements? Like, $689 million from schools, $3.5 billion from health care? Is it reading comprehension, or willful ignorance?

I read this article and think, 'hmm, a politician taking tough decisions in order to be fiscally responsible.' Okay, maybe a balanced budget is mandated by law in New York, I know it is in almost every state (49, right?). But still, these are hard choices to make, and rather than deride him for trying to find a solution, you should imagine yourself in his shoes, and see what you'd do. Would you really cut off health care to tens of thousands, or even hundreds of thousands, of people? Fire teachers, sacrificing the quality of education for students? What about emergency services - firemen, police, national guard? Cut welfare payments in winter, so people are kicked out on the freezing streets? It's no easy choice. Where would you cut spending first? Or would you consider charging an extra 2 cents to people downloading a song on iTunes?


RE: You have to love Democrats
By Reclaimer77 on 12/19/2008 11:51:51 AM , Rating: 2
quote:
Did you just ignore the part where he said he was cutting spending and entitlements? Like, $689 million from schools, $3.5 billion from health care? Is it reading comprehension, or willful ignorance?


AHAHAH oh my god, how many times have we heard that ? You believe him ? Democrats NEVER, EVER, cut spending. What he means is he will "cut" the proposed INCREASES in spending to those areas. Where have you been for the past 20+ years ?? This is the oldest trick in the Democrat playbook.

quote:
I read this article and think, 'hmm, a politician taking tough decisions in order to be fiscally responsible.'


Well I guess thats your first problem. There's more pork in New York's budget than a BBQ factory. If you believe the only way he can possibly be "fiscally responsible" is more taxes, then you are an idiot. Go eat a BULLET right now.

quote:
Would you really cut off health care to tens of thousands, or even hundreds of thousands, of people? Fire teachers, sacrificing the quality of education for students? What about emergency services - firemen, police, national guard? Cut welfare payments in winter, so people are kicked out on the freezing streets? It's no easy choice. Where would you cut spending first?


New York just spend millions of dollars funding a fine china museum ! How much did that sports stadium cost again !?? Don't come to me with this emotional "what about the healthcare !! " attempt at a rebuttal. There is SO much waste in their budget that has nothing to do with healthcare or social services.

Get a clue. GET A CLUE !


RE: You have to love Democrats
By maven81 on 12/19/2008 1:39:32 PM , Rating: 2
You have some nerve telling someone else to get a clue when you don't have one yourself.
Tell me... who was governor of NY from 1995 to 2006? hint, it wasn't a democrat. So where have you been? Without even getting into whether he was good or bad, your argument just self destructed. Clearly the problem is New York politicians, not just democrats or just republicans.
Moreover if you simply glance through the other threads here, you have people saying things like "Obama is going to cut NASA funding" or "The democrats have always cut NASA budgets".
Isn't it funny how that works? People like you say the democrats ALWAYS increase spending, until they cut it in which case the democrats ALWAYS cut budgets...
This isn't even funny anymore.


Keep trying
By fishbits on 12/18/2008 12:21:50 PM , Rating: 1
Keep voting for leftists, then wondering why spending and taxing are on the rise.

"Maybe we should have thought about this when we were depending on what we thought was inexhaustive collections of taxes from Wall Street"
Priceless. They could have gotten a fifth-grader who would display the same grasp of reality and ability to reason.

"But our policies work great! Provided an unlimited supply of Other People's Money to fund them."




RE: Keep trying
By FITCamaro on 12/18/2008 1:04:55 PM , Rating: 2
quote:
Provided an unlimited supply of Other People's Money to fund them.


Well when you have:
a) tax money
b)a president that will give state governments however much they "need"
c) + a treasury that will print money and issue bonds at a whim

You pretty much have an unlimited supply of other people's money. At least until it doesn't matter anymore since the country will fails.


RE: Keep trying
By maven81 on 12/18/2008 2:14:14 PM , Rating: 3
Meanwhile, in the real world... during a republican governor and a republican mayor in NYC my taxes have sure gone down... Oh wait... no they didn't! Damn that leftist Pataki!
NYC in particular has sure shown some fiscal restraint and responsibility... Because we really needed another stupid stadium, or two... And we really need that multibillion dollar freedom tower, when they can't even make the trains run on time!


TAXATION Without Representation is TYRANNY...
By MrJustin5 on 12/18/2008 6:33:52 PM , Rating: 2
Tax, tax, tax. Every year and every month you're hearing about how much trouble we're all in if we dont have new taxes passed or increase existing taxes.

Facts are, we are taxed about 70% or more of our actual income (25 to 30% income tax, state, fed, S.S., etc) then we pay taxes through sales tax, and in the actual price of items we buy - through import taxes, transportation (big-rig taxes), manufacturer taxes, etc.

SOON we will be GIVING AWAY 85% or MORE of our income directly to taxes. 85% of the time you work - is all for government. 85% of your Sweat and Blood - 85% OF YOUR LIFE (Currently 70% as if that's any bit less) GOES STRAIGHT TO GOVERNMENT - You are ALL SLAVES... INCLUDING ME!

And for what? We get nothing in return. Not even the Federal Income tax goes to anything important... not one red cent goes to anything within the USA as Regan said.

At least 40% of your County and State taxes, even your parking tickets, etc... go STRAIGHT to private offshore bank accounts. NO JOKE! Look it up! So each year they loot more and more money straight from us (no secret, check out the Annual Comprehensive Financial Reports, released by the Gov.) and you'll see that you're money goes to Privately owned (that means like Mafia style thievery) bank accounts outside this country.

DID YOU KNOW that it IS Legal to use DRUG MONEY in the stock market? So long as that drug money comes OUTSIDE the united states?

SAY NO TO NEW TAXES, get rid of 90%+ of current taxes and say no to Tyranny.

Watch Aaron Russo's: America: Freedom to Fascism.

Enjoy!




By Bateluer on 12/19/2008 8:30:22 AM , Rating: 2
I agree with your sentiment, not necessarily your ideals.

we all definitely pay too much in taxes because the government spends too much money in frivolous endeavors.

I swear, I'd probably be the most hated president in history.

1)I'd freeze all foreign aide for a period of 4 years.
2)I'd cease purchase of foreign oil incrementally, stepping down 25% of 2008 levels every year for four years.
3)Totally revamp the copyright and patent laws to benefit the consumer
4)Scrap thousands of government wasteful spending programs
5)Privatize social security for younger demographics.
6)Dissolve political parties, let people get elected on their own merits
7)Revamp election campaign finances
8)Impose stiff penalties for those who press frivolous litigation(54M USD pants anyone?)
9)Revoke the tax exemption status of religious institutions
10+)Reserved for any future issues I have with the US government


*sigh*
By mpc7488 on 12/18/2008 2:15:06 PM , Rating: 2
Yet another reason to make me dislike living in NY. Despite some advantages, the taxes are incredibly high for the benefits received. One of the big reasons NY is hurting is because industry keeps leaving the state due to existing tax rates.




I say N.Y. gets what they deserve.
By SDBettas on 12/18/2008 6:09:18 PM , Rating: 2
They continually elect the Tax and spend liberals, while their city crumbles in front of them. As a matter of fact I'm going to write an email to the governor of N.Y. and suggest he institute a "Breath Tax". But then again, if it came from one of their beloved liberal politicians, I'm sure the folks up there would welcome it with open arms.




It won't work- plain and simple
By Mayosoft on 12/19/2008 11:39:52 AM , Rating: 2
What will happen has been seen over and over again .

Set up a tax on something that most are using. Then the states draw up a budget based upon last years income from it, then hard times come and people drop 'extras'. This leaves the states without the funding that they THOUGHT they would have. Then you have a defecit, and start slashing programs that are needed.

It's currently happening now in 40 states. They don't have the anticipated budget income because people are scaling back. This creates a two-fold problem.

The state loses three time
1: On the lost income from the tax
2: Lost income from state income taxes-laid off workers
3: The companies lose or fold, because they are not making money. So no taxes come in from them to the state.

Patterson - you are playing with fire! - and the whole state will get burned. But you won't see, because you won't be in office much longer.




NIMBY
By austinag on 12/18/08, Rating: -1
RE: NIMBY
By walk2k on 12/18/2008 12:51:00 PM , Rating: 3
Apple already charges sales tax in CA on iTunes purchases.

But this is yet another reason for a national sales tax (and massive reduction or elimination of income tax).


RE: NIMBY
By TomZ on 12/18/2008 4:12:52 PM , Rating: 3
quote:
But this is yet another reason for a national sales tax (and massive reduction or elimination of income tax).

Is is IMPOSSIBLE for politicians to substitute one tax for another. They will instead add the new tax while leaving the old one in place. They don't understand the concept of "either-or."


RE: NIMBY
By MrJustin5 on 12/18/2008 7:19:07 PM , Rating: 2
If they replace it with a national sales tax, the rates will be even higher and it will help destroy the economy, just like the Banker Takeover, the silent coup d’etat thats taken place already. 8.5 TRILLION Stolen in a few months. We would end up paying MORE for everything with a national sales tax, plus it would consolidate power and centralize government. At the very least - you dont want to pay more for EVERYTHING, do you? And they wont EVER eliminate income tax - which itself, is illegal and the 14th amendment was never ratified. But lets say they did - the hike in the national sales tax would more than make up for it.

Dont be fooled and dont be conned - research it for yourself.

You must read up on National Sales Tax on http://www.infowars.com Also see my comment below about

I hope this awakens a few more people.


internet tax
By ajvitaly on 12/18/08, Rating: -1
RE: internet tax
By bnutz on 12/18/2008 12:31:19 PM , Rating: 5
It's funny how everyone blames pirating for the pricing, not because actors and artist are driving around in 5 different Bentleys to 10 different houses and stay in hotel 5 miles from one of their houses, while vacationing in in Cancun for a month in a mansion.


RE: internet tax
By MPE on 12/18/08, Rating: -1
RE: internet tax
By Ratinator on 12/18/2008 2:32:44 PM , Rating: 2
Watch a few episodes of lifestyles of the rich and famous and what he just said will make complete sense. At a movie theatre you see the anti pirating messages indicating how it is your everyday worker at the studios that are hurt because of it....are they really? Ton Hanks made $20 million for the Divinci code, Tom Cruise made 25 million for The Last Samurai, Nicole Kidman made 17.5 million for Bewitched and the list goes on and on and on. Is it really the pirates hurting those who work for the industry and those buying the items, only partially. The over payment of big name movie stars plays a huge role in the prices we have to pay.


RE: internet tax
By jconan on 12/19/2008 2:16:13 AM , Rating: 2
LOL... However Hollywood likes to brainwash the masses into thinking that only the grips, the cameramen, extras, are affected and don't show who is actually taking the millions of dollars from the movie patrons and dvd purchases. Has anyone noticed the price of blu-rays now that HD-DVD is RIP? It's like 20 - 30 bucks for a disc. That's like 2 to 3 times the prices of movie ticket. The lawyers don't care if the blu-ray is defective or jack and consumers lose 20 - 30 hard earned dollars that went to the main actors and publishing house.

Too bad the holodeck isn't anywhere close to reality... Then there would be no need for 2d projected entertainment.


RE: internet tax
By Mayosoft on 12/19/2008 11:22:17 AM , Rating: 2
yeah and like $5.50 for a small bag of cold with no salt or butter popcorn (worth 12 cents) because the theaters have to make money too.

I banned theaters from my discretionary funds... 2 movies a year MAX.


RE: internet tax
By uhgotnegum on 12/18/2008 12:49:09 PM , Rating: 5
(Not saying you were saying this, but...)

Just because government is missing out on a big piece of the action doesn't mean it NEEDS to get involved.

When did our government become this blob that constantly looks for as many avenues as possible to absorb more of our money?

...there is so much more to write on this subject, which is exactly why I have to stop now and immediately post the comment...


RE: internet tax
By FITCamaro on 12/18/2008 1:01:03 PM , Rating: 4
1933


RE: internet tax
By filibusterman on 12/18/2008 9:02:04 PM , Rating: 4
Well I was thinking more like 1913 with the founding of the 'Federal' reserve.


RE: internet tax
By theapparition on 12/18/2008 1:07:31 PM , Rating: 2
Almost all states already tax internet purchases. I hope when filing your state income tax reports you're filling out the row for "Tax due for out-of-state purchases". That includes online sales, and for most states you're obligated to report it and pay the tax.

I understand what your intent was, and I agree, eventually you will have to pay that tax directly at time of purchase.


RE: internet tax
By marvdmartian on 12/18/2008 4:07:58 PM , Rating: 3
Gosh, what's a state income tax??? ;)

This is just another "sin" tax, plain and simple. Tax what people want, and don't want to do without. :(


RE: internet tax
By soloman02 on 12/18/2008 5:43:37 PM , Rating: 3
Funny, I don't file my state income tax. Because NH doesn't HAVE one. Nor do we have a sales tax. The only reason we have a deficit this year is because they decided to spend too much (that and since the economy blows, business tax revenue is down). Hell, we didn't even have a property tax until Shaheen (governor, liberal) added a BILLION dollars to our budget (which doubled NH's budget) and had to find some way to pay for it back in the 1990's.

/end rant

If NY or some other state tries to collect taxes from me for buying online, I'll tell em "Over my dead body." I'm a citizen of NH first, then the US.


RE: internet tax
By Mayosoft on 12/19/2008 11:31:40 AM , Rating: 2
Then it's time to clean house, get rid of your states senators that vote for it. I think they should cut waste. Put a check and balance system in place for state funded projects. Get warranties on street repairs. If a contractor says it will last 7 years, then they have to fix it for 7 years. All projects should be inspected after completion. verifying that it is done right the first time.

Isn't taxes what started the Boston Tea Party? You don't tax simply because it is there, or you don't know how to manage a budget and need more money. Get rid of them. I don't know how you can put up with TAX, Tax and more taxes, and have broken streets, missing street lights, potholes etc.

Why not add $1000 tax to every LIMO, Stretch, And personal vehicles with larger than 3.8L engines?

Why not add $1000 state tax on every mansion/apartment/condo over $1M ??

Once again, they are taxing twice- taxing the Music distributors as income, then taxing the listeners for entertainment. The little guy feeding a wasteful system - Think!


RE: internet tax
By DFranch on 12/19/2008 11:42:01 AM , Rating: 2
I believe the Boston Tea Party was not simply about taxation, but taxation without representation. They were paying taxes, but had no representatives in parliament, which they felt was unfair.


RE: internet tax
By omnicronx on 12/18/2008 1:25:00 PM , Rating: 2
quote:
A sales tax via the internet is coming, no matter how hard we try to stop it. As goods and services move more and more to online based businesses, governments are missing out on a big piece of the action.
You nailed it right there, then you contradicted yourself right after.. What does piracy have to do with local governments missing out on taxes because people are no longer buying this media (physical or not) in state?

10 years ago if you wanted a CD, you went to the local CD store and bought it, meanwhile paying taxes to your local government. Well the internet kind of circumvents this doesnt it, especially if the company you are buying from does not operate in state. So really you are picking up the slack for your OWN DOING!

Pirates are responsible for a lot of things, but this is not one of them.


RE: internet tax
By mmntech on 12/18/2008 4:28:02 PM , Rating: 3
In Canada it's already here. When I buy stuff off PSN, I have to pay tax both federal GST and Ontario's PST on it. Works out to 13%. I think the only thing we're not taxed on here is the air we breath. (Though the Federal Liberals ran a campaign on doing just that.) Get used to it America.


"This is about the Internet.  Everything on the Internet is encrypted. This is not a BlackBerry-only issue. If they can't deal with the Internet, they should shut it off." -- RIM co-CEO Michael Lazaridis

Related Articles
No Amazon Kindles Until February
December 8, 2008, 4:47 PM













botimage
Copyright 2014 DailyTech LLC. - RSS Feed | Advertise | About Us | Ethics | FAQ | Terms, Conditions & Privacy Information | Kristopher Kubicki