Slashdot Mirror
Texas Senator Proposes Game Tax
Via 1up, an article at the Brownsville Herald detailing a proposed tax on videogames. From the article: "The McAllen Democrat said on Wednesday he plans to propose a 5 percent tax on videogames when he and other members of the Senate Finance Committee meet this weekend to discuss a series of tax bills. It would raise about $65 million every two years and be designated for new schools and building upgrades at poor school districts, he said. 'You have all these kids buying videogames, and sometimes they are good, some are bad and that's not my call,' Hinojosa said. 'But I think that we can generate (money) to put toward the schools they go to.'"
Texas gamers propose switching to mail-order, never buying video games from a brick and mortar store again
Always gotta come after the little man, huh? How about a 5% tax on high end multi-GPU 512MB DDR3 KO-edition video cards instead?
Jesus said to his disciples: "If you don't have a sword, sell your cloak and buy one" - Luke 22:36
'Stop playing that game and finish your homework!' 'Wait! Dad! I'm... uh... helping... fund... the school! YEAH!' 'So that's what that new tax is. [laugh] Alright, kid. Go for it.'
Informatus Technologicus
You have all these kids buying videogames
Kids being taxed? Have kids been granted the right to vote when I wasn't looking? I seem to recall Americans having a bit of a problem with taxation without representation.
Can somebody explain to me why kids aren't allowed to vote? Sure, they can be easily swayed by dumb slogans, but hey, if that was the reason for not letting people have the vote, hardly anybody would have it.
Because $10000 per child per year isn't enough. Because dumping bucketloads of money on schools has such a tremendous track record of success. Do it for the children (who actually won't be getting the money because it'll go to higher salaries for people who already work at the schools).
I just love how our legislators feel that video games need to be treated differently than movies, books, music or any other form of entertainment. Any argument that can be made for taxing games is going to be equally valid to any other entertainment medium.
my sig's at the bottom of the page.
and how many millions will it cost to propose, consider, publish, and implement?
On one hand more money for poor schools is a good thing.
On the other video games are a luxury item and many other luxury items are taxed.
I'm fine with this and I don't think it is incramentalism, after all they are taxing all games not just the "bad" ones.
I don't give a damn for a man that can only spell a word one way.
Mark Twain
There are ways to tax and there are ways to tax.
Most are highly inequitious - such as this tax.
Why should people buying software be paying for schools?
Is there some link here? of course not.
There are well-known principles of general taxation which are equitious and minimize the discouragement caused by taxation to industry. These need to be followed at all times.
ANYONE suggesting tax should be done otherwise is a complete idiot with regard to economics and should be kept WELL away from any such decisions.
Would you have a politician making design decisions for particle accelerators? of course not - you know full well that simply being a politician doesn't make you a physicist.
In EXACTLY the same way, being a politician does not make you an economist - and if politicians are then making economic decisions, their decisions will lead to an economy in the exact same state as the particle accelerator they would otherwise have built.
Tax is too complicated and too closely related to freedom to be used to implement political policy.
How about a tax on Democrats who don't think there are enough taxes? Maybe we could tax them out of existence.
And it's not even a tax on the kids, but on their parents. Just another school tax being described as something other than it really is (i.e. I'm taxing kids who buy video games to pay for their schools.)
Or we could tax stupidity. That would put the Democrats out of business before the Republicans -- but not by much!
"It's the height of ridiculousness to say for those 9 lines you get hundreds of millions."
Would Windows be considered taxable because it afterall contains Solitare and Minesweeper which clearly are games?
They tax cigarettes, gas, alcohol and the food we eat... heck, here in Virginia, we're taxed on the stuff we already bought and own (annual property tax and car tax), why not slap it on video games?
On a more serious note, the reason is that Video Games are already taxed via VAT/Sales tax. Any extra special "video game tax" is either a double tax or an excise duty. This is essentially the former in practice, but the latter in genesis as excise duties are usually used to discourage certain behaviours.
May the Maths Be with you!
Why oh why does this crap even come up when there are more pressing issues to deal with. We can try to vote these idiots out but they are replaced with more bought or idiot canidates. Why doesn't he propose taxing all that money the US oil companies are bringing in? Have them help fund schools. If you are going to propose a tax on video games because some of them may be "bad" and alot of kids buy video games, then why not tax violent movies for that matter(leave the pr0n alone though...wait I don't pay for that anyways) or even family movies--alot of people watch that crap. Games are getting more expensive with each new generation of consoles now we can possibly pay even more. Geez...
Instead of taxing games to pay for schools, how about the schools just sell games instead of candybars, magazines, coupon books, etc. It's mainly the kids' families that buy that stuff anyway.
BTW, I say we should tax campaign contributions.
"A government is a body of people, usually notably ungoverned." - Shepard Book Quoting Malcolm Reynolds
Put a tax on, oh, say, food? That would generate more revenue than a tax on games.
Or better yet, pornography.
"Hey kids! Your new playground is sponsored by taxes from hotaction.com! They've even put up a few promotional posters to encourage you!"
Works both ways!
Tell me something...it's still "We, the people"... right?
I already pay taxes to support schools. I just got my 2006 notice, and I'm paying $4,414.44 this year to support Texas schools. Somehow I don't imagine that figure is going to go down if this stupid proposal passes, it's just an attempt to get more school funding in a way most people won't notice enough to whine about.
Democrats just need to face the fact that most Texans don't want to fund schools. If they did, they wouldn't keep voting for Republicans. So quit trying to save people from themselves, and give them what they're asking for: low taxes and chronically underfunded schools.
GCHQ Quantum Insert installed. If only our tongues were made of glass, how much more careful we would be when we speak
Didn't we just extend a tax cut on dividend income? Wouldn't that generate a lot more income than taxing a kid who spends his Wendy's salary to buy a $45 game? I guess a senator (who probably owns a lot of stock) wouldn't even notice that games cost more, and parents (who at least own more stock than their kids) could see it as a good thing since their kids would be less likely to play as many games if they cost more. Too bad the poor kids can't vote!
I haven't heard so much bull since the California lottery was proposed to help the schools.
If you believe that TV, movies, music, video games, 'etc are free speech (and, outside of Jack Thompson, I'm pretty sure most people do), then taxing them is unconstitutional. Remember - the power to tax is the power to destroy. As soon as they are legally allowed to levy a $1 tax on video games, they can just as easily make it $1 million.
To make laws that man cannot, and will not obey, serves to bring all law into contempt.
--E.C. Stanton
I like how they talk about how it will 'help the children', instead of how it might negatively affect the game economy in the state. Shouldn't the rule of the thumb be "government doesn't need to go where government doesn't need to go"?
Wouldn't this just cause Texan gamers to order online even more often, shutting down game retailers in Texas?
This is just a tax increase, pure and simple. They say 'it's for the schools!' so people will vote for it. But all they do is then take away the other money that WAS going to the schools.
It's just a general tax increase aimed at an unpopular target.
Because all the previous taxes for schools, public works, and beautification projects have accomplished their intended goal. Every city in America already has adequate social servic--oh wait...
"You are a slave, Neo."
They believe, correct or not, that most of the people who play games are younger, either under 18 and not allowed to vote, or in the 18-25 range and thus not very likely to vote (for all their bitching, few university students actually get out to vote). Thus taxing something they care about isn't likely to have an impact on your votes. However if you tax something all your voters use, they'll be pissed.
Why is this targeting video games - and JUST video games?
If this is a luxury tax, then why not expand it to cover books, magazines, music and movies (including rentals)?
Let's see...you have "Children", "Taxes", "Schools", "Funding" and the newest addition, "Video Games". A fine example of grandstanding using Political Buzzword Bingo!
I'd point to the fast-food tax which was proposed elsewhere as being a more realistic - and lucurative - revenue source. The only stipulations I'd make are that this tax should apply to all cafe's/restuarants, AND that a larger percentage of the money should go into funding Sports and P.E. programs in the schools. After all, if kids are going to eat at McDonalds anyways, the least we can do is make sure there's a gym program around to make them work off a few of those calories the next day.
Disclaimer: I am a Texan Democrat who had a government teacher who loved to rant about Texas politics. For this, I apologize.
OK, it isn't really as simple as a Democrat/Republican thing. Texas tax politics are an icky morass from whence the few who enter seldom return. First of all, because almost all of the state's revenue comes from sales taxes (like this one), the state budget is incredibly sensitive to flucuations in the economy. This problem would be abated if Texas lowered sales taxes and implemented a income tax or state property tax. Even if you aren't from Texas, you should be able to guess that the chances of this are low.
Now, the main way the state government saves money in a crunch is by shifting costs from the state to local level. Hence, most schools in Texas are funded by local property taxes. This is fine for richer neighborhoods (like the one I grew up in), but does nothing to help poorer parts of the state.
What is really needed is a complete overhaul of the tax system. Even if there was the political will to do this, it would be a huge, painful process that would be difficult to design correctly and even more difficult to sell to the public.
Now, I think this is a stupid piece of legislation, and I don't think it's going to pass, and even if it passes, I don't imagine it will do much at all for Texas schools. But let's not be so quick to accuse Republicians, conservatives, Democrats, or even Texans for not caring about education. This is a very difficult problem that is difficult to fix.
Average pay to start for teachers is not $40,000 it is far lower, the overall average is $46,000.
Teachers work Sept through May (full months) with a at least a week in June and August so it is closer to 9.5 to 10 months.
Also worth noting is that public school teachers are worse conditions (don't get to pick who they want) and lower pay, so good teachers strive to make it to private schools lowering the standard of our public education.
The people with money who care about their childrens education do pay the teachers more, and it shows.
Wow, sent an e-mail as suggested when clicking on "use classic" banner, and got a fast response that addressed my msg
There are 181 members of the Texas Legislature (31 Senators and 150 Representatives). Each one earns $7,200 a year (really!) , your 5% pay cut idea would save the state $65,160.
In 2005, the amount of money the Texas Legislature appropriated for general education was $13 Billion. So you'd be increasing that by 0.000005%
Nice try, thanks for playing.
"(or just forgo a raise for a year)"
This is a state proposal, not federal. The Texas Legislature cannot raise its own salary ("cost of living" or otherwise) without the matter first being put before the voters (which is why they're stuck at $7,200 to begin with).
"if Chenney would donate some of his return"
"that's alot of money for a po' person like me and old Oprah"
But a drop in the bucket in the budget for one of the most economically vibrant states in the Union.
Just about everything you said was BS.
I don't know where you live, but I don't know anywhere outside large, high-cost-of-living cities that pay starting teachers $40k+.
My wife is a teacher, with a masters degree, and even with the masters she doesn't make $40k.
And just because you work 8 months a year, it doesn't automatically translate to a $60k a year salary. You try finding seasonal work that will pay you $5k per month. Oh wait, you just got out of high school.
No one is saying there should be 10 kids to a class. But when you have 25-30 kids running around like crazy, it is more difficult to handle them.
I don't know when we ever had 50 students to a classroom in a single room schoolhouse, but the 1870's are so last century. The curriculum is a million times harder than it was then, when most people didn't go to college or even high school. We may not be #1 in the world (or 2 or 3 or 4 etc) but we are WAAAAY more educated as a country than we were back then.
Don't even get me started on "No child left behind" and the FCAT. I know many teachers. My mother. My mother in law. Many of my wife's friends. They all have to teach less and focus on the bullshit FCAT.
-- Having a Creationist Museum is like having an Atheist place of worship
I never realized just how insane the American tax system is. I mean, taxation systems are usually deranged even at the best of times, but damn, Americans seem to get the very worst taxation out there. Most countries, when they want money for schools, just raise the sales tax or the income tax (depending on how the current administration feels about what the least harmful way of taxing people is). Taxes for particular goods or services are typically reserved for things that exact heavy costs on the nation, like alcohol or cigarettes.
its lovely to think that the kids who buy taxed games will be contributing to their own education. but unfortunately the substantial majority of gamers are over 20, and the most recent GDC expressed concern that new, younger people were not being attracted to game playing at all.
Homepage
Obiter Ludens Game Blog
Try Washington State. Average teacher starting salary (which is funded by the state, not the district), is approximately $28,000. In most school districts, teachers work close to be beginning of August to the end of June. Yes, there is a month of vacation in there, but salary is generally payed year round. So yes, most teachers don't make $2500 a month BEFORE taxes get taken out. Compound that with the fact that teachers work overtime without pay (if you think a teacher's job starts when they arrive at school and ends when they leave it, you're an idiot). Not only are teachers low paid, but they're also expected to earn an additional 15 college credits every 3 years (or 150 credit hours of seminars) that they themselves pay for. Add to this the fact that there are larger class sizes, not smaller, and that there are psychos out there who want to pay teachers based on performance while taking away the tools they need...
If this was the model that Microsoft used it would be like:
Write Windows Vista, in a week, using a pencil and paper, you get paid for how well it works. BTW, bring your own pencil and paper.
Your recollection needs updating to include the time period after the American Civil War. There are hundreds of thousands of people in the USA who have to pay tax, but aren't allowed to vote, and it has been that way for many years.
GCHQ Quantum Insert installed. If only our tongues were made of glass, how much more careful we would be when we speak
A better idea is to have a 5% tax on sponsoring all interactions with publicly elected officials. Took a congressman to dinner -- pay 5% of the price of the dinner to umm... help schools. Taxing an activity is a way to supress it... so why not supress bribery... I mean lobbying, of course.
Any guest worker system is indistinguishable from indentured servitude.
You know, texan oil companies don't pay taxes, they push all thier taxes off onto the consumer. This is basic business, they all do that. This is why liberal taxing schemes usualy result in inflation. So if you taxed the texan oil companies, you would most likley be paying more for gas and chosing it over even less food and school supplies.
Now what is going on is the exact same model the cigarette tax made. When a state wants to take money from the people and get re-elected, they now can comfortably do it by only taxing a certain portion of the state at a time. What they have learned is that when a reletive small percentage of people (say 1/4 the population) do or use something regularly, a tax on that product will generaly yeild steady result. Of course they expect some people to quit using that product but the majority will continue. Then a year or so later, they will segregate another portion of the population and do it to them.
I remeber some states rushing out to spend the money from the cigarette settlement and then complaining that it wasn't there two or three years later when people quit smoking. But thats what the settlment was supposed to doo right? make people quite smoking? nahh, it was just a learning experience for those wanting to tax us. Now when my state (not texas) got the lotery, they said half of it would goto the schools, Then one of the papers found that money already going to the schools was diverted to something else and the lotery money was very little more then what was alrerady being spent. So, I'm wondering if this tax is going to raISE money for the schools in adition to what they already have budgeted (plus existing projected budget increases)or if it will just displace the source of some existing revenue so it can be spent on somethign else. Either way, to me, it sounds like a scam from the start
Even though you're kind of mean, you're right. I was going to be a teacher until I realized that I could make more money delivering pizza.
Slashdot - where whining about luck is the new way to make the world you want.
Retailers have lobbyists too, chill.
"You know, texan oil companies don't pay taxes, they push all thier taxes off onto the consumer."
Ah, but most of those consumers live outside of Texas, so it's still a net gain.
Form - LEG101-EZ
Please fill out in entirety and submit to appropriate committee
(for a color coded list of committees and their chairs see appendix ii)
My suggestion is to raise taxes on ________.
(something you find distasteful, onerous, or, you know, bad)
Description of why said item should be taxed (please be verbose, and if possible, reasonably accurate):
The tax rate will be __%
We'll use the money to fund ________.
(something most people feel good about, e.g. schools, parks, healthcare)
All legislators are advised to file no less than quarterly and more frequently in re-election years.
Bush isn't from texas! he came from connecticut originally, he wasn't raised here, he only governed and did business here, and we don't claim him as our own! at least, I don't, and all of my friends, who also live in texas, can't stand him, so apparently, those of us texans with functioning brains aren't quite as stupid as the rest of those dwelling here make us appear to be.
thank you for not making gross generalizations! have a nice day, ya'll!
Seriously, why doesn't Texas just cecede. That state is a disgrace to freedom on both sides of the aisle.
But when you're under 18 (voting age) then you generally get your luxury items from your ... parents and other family members, thanks. So, when Mom and Dad, or G-mom and G-dad are being asked to pay an extra coupla bucks at the register, which constituent are you not affecting?
I'm confused by your specious argument which relies heavily on spin and mis-information to get the point across.
2^3 * 31 * 647
Hey, wait: you might have something there.
I am the State Treasurer of a small political party that doesn't accept corporate contributions, just personal ones, as a matter of principle. Some of our contributions come through PayPal. PayPal of course extracts a small fee for the service, so we don't get the full amount. $5 --> $4.55; $10 --> 9.41; $25 --> $23.97. In a certain sense, then, we are already paying a tax (of sorts; obviously it is a 'user fee'); in fact it's a *regressive* one: the lower the amount given, the higher percentage taken. $5: 9%; $10: 5.9%; $25: 4.12%.
But imagine a *progressive* tax on campaign contributions. The income tax is a kind of progressive tax; the more money you make, the higher your tax rate.
It wouldn't have to be much to raise vast amounts of money. And think of how popular *this* would be with the voters =8^D !
Just off the top of my head, I'd set the rate to be the log-to-the-base-10 of the contribution: it would start kicking in at $10. $10 = 1% (10 cents); $50 = 1.7% (85 cents); $100 = 2% ($2.00); $500 = 2.7% ($13.50); $1000 = 3% ($30), etc. We already have to track every penny we take in; it would be nothing to add another column to the spreadsheet to track this new tax.
We have to report all of our receipts and expenditures already, albeit to different organizations: expenditures to the FEC, receipts to the state. In fact, we report our receipts by transaction, so it would be fairly easy for the state to update its software to automatically figure the amount of state tax due on each transaction, and the required sum would automatically be reported to the state when we file our reports electronically. There is already a system in place to track and fine committees who do not file when required, so the amount of additional overhead required to track and invoice tax due would be negligible.
Needless to say, the only people who would be against it would be those who benefit from raking in *very large* contributions; you know, those parties already in power. A tax that no-one would hate EXCEPT politicians. And it is extremely fair. It would make a great wedge issue for us!
Thanks for your brilliant suggestion!
DNA is a Turing machine. You, however, being dynamic and emergent, are not.
Sera
Slashdot, where armchair scientists get shouted down and armchair theologians get modded up.
Get off my launchpad!
"A teenager who uses his allowance to buy a video game could be paying to build his school..."
How about this?
"A senator who uses his power to buy missiles could be funding the building of several hundred schools"
But of course, missiles aren't as violent and dangerous as videogames, are they?
You mean "skim" some off the top of some other industries' hard work. I don't see how your legislation generates ANYTHING other than pissed off people.
Wherever you go, there you are.
In 2005 the video game industry earned $10.5 billion in the United States. Texas has about 7.4% of the population of the United States, so it can be assumed they're responsible for a similar percentage of video game sales, giving us around $778 million to play with. If we use the same 5% figure used in the parent as our sales tax value, that would give Texas around $39 million. It would only raise the education budget by around 0.2%, but it's still several orders of magnitude more than either of the ideas offered by the parent.
Want to have money for education? Get out of Iraq and stop spending billions of dollars a year on the war.
Politicians need to revisit their priorities...
I sig, therefore I am.
You know, you would think Senators would have some grasp over public finance, or at least employ someone who does. I'm not sure if this says worse things about him or the people who put him in office. The reasoning behind the "sin" tax is not because its a "sin", necessarily, but that it is a tax to cover the negative externalities caused by people consuming those goods. Cigarette smoke causes people to get lung cancer, as well as a myriad of other diseases and treatment often requires state money at some point. Alcohol causes causes negative externalities when drunk drivers kill people and then the state has to pay for the police/firemen/lawyers to deal with it. You could say that video games cause negative externalities as well, though they usually take the form of red eyes, lost sleep, and diminished social lives -- not guts spilled out on the pavement or hacked up blood. I also seriously doubt he has any grasp of demand elasticity either.
Since your ears are clogged from all the bull in Cali then you probably didn't hear what the Texas State Lotto "pays" for!
Proposed nothing, I got one of those $30 tickets the other day, won 60 bucks, woot!
Best part is, I work for an ISD so it's like playing for free!
-Buddy of DoQ
Look into the K12 planet fisaco currently going down in Orange County. A couple million dollars for a system that is down at least once a week, and hasn't worked correctly since it was implemented.
"The government grants you rights, not the other way around."-- beav007. Yes, these people really exist...
As a gamer and a tech at a Texas ISD I am stuck in the middle. On one side the more tax money rolls in, the bigger my raise in Aug, on the other side that raise means nothing if I have to pay more for games. I guess I should be focusing on the kids and what it means for them, but if I don't get my Guitar Hero fix daily, those kids will destroy my mind, and then they all somehow fail my lab. On second thought, you better not tax games, it'll breed angry un-focused teachers who vent on slashdot during field-day. I'm not too worried about getting paid next to nothing, that's why I got two jobs! /sigh
-Buddy of DoQ
"That that extra 50% is being collected primarily from the poor and middle class and simply being given to the weathiest and shipped out of the country?"
Bullshit. The rich pay more in taxes than the poor do, and your example is no exception.
"The government grants you rights, not the other way around."-- beav007. Yes, these people really exist...
This isn't one of those "Post your god damned facts because I think you're full of shit" posts, I'm genuinely interested.
"The government grants you rights, not the other way around."-- beav007. Yes, these people really exist...
wow...were things that cheap in Texas?
Hmm...but according to the paper, Ken Lay's condo in Houston cost him 4mill (and cost the American ppl billions).
ANYWAYS...what about OTHER politicians?
You know, city officials, mayors, Senators and Reps....
And why apply the 5% to their "official" pay? Why not apply it to their kickbacks^H^H^H^H^H^H^H^H^Hcontributions?
As for Cheney, yea...I know he's not from Texas...but he SURELY does business in Texas. Actually, he did donate 6.87mill to charity...why not a few schools too? or rallied to get richer ppl to help too?
Cheney donated over $6,000,000 of his ~$9,000,000 income in 2005.
I used to bulls-eye womp-rats in my pants
Sin tax on video games is what it sounds like.
You constantly struggle for self improvement - and it shows.
Hooray for bad Engrish on fortune cookies
They'd tax us for the air we breathe if they could.
I've got a better idea... How about aggressively cutting excessive waste from government. They could be just as efficient with half the bloat they have now.
The amount of waste in government is mindblowing. Around here we've had a milder winter than normal and yet, by some miracle local governments still managed to go over-budget on snow removal. We get one bad snowstorm, like we do every year and they start crying for emergency funding.
The government is essentially like a bad welfare case. What do they care about being efficient? They're guaranteed an endless stream of money from their citizens. And when they need more they just find some way to raise taxes.
I've already said that....in another post....at least his "official" income...who knows what other benefits he may got from the oil companies, big HAL, and for shooting his lawyer friend. ;)
You said this
"That that extra 50% is being collected primarily from the poor and middle class and simply being given to the weathiest and shipped out of the country?"
Now you are backpedaling. I spent much too much time dealing with someone just like you yesterday, someone who continually revises their previous assertions when demonstrated to be wrong.
"No, I was correct."
No, you were not. It is impossible for your (first) statement to be correct. I will not waste another second refuting the argument of someone who debates by changing their assertions when disproven.
"The government grants you rights, not the other way around."-- beav007. Yes, these people really exist...
Don't tell that to the folks in DC.
Is it just my observation, or are there way too many stupid people in the world?
Isn't the average age of game playing people somewhere in the late 20's or something. He seems to think that kids are the only people who play games? They should tax everything that has teletubby branding so that they can use that money to help children brainwashed by that garbage.
He's from Wyoming, not Texas, otherwise Texas couldn't vote for the Bush/Cheney ticket.
How many people these days know that piece of constitutional trivia? Nice!
Socialism: a lie told by totalitarians and believed by fools.
Teachers are paid what they're worth. If they weren't, the jobs would go unfilled. Supply is high. Now, you might argue that we would get *better* teachers if we paid more (which wouldn't be hard, in my experience), but the salaries of *current* teachers are clearly enough that people want the jobs.
Almost every teacher I had back when dinosaurs roamed the Earth and I was in school was a glorified babysitter who made minimal effort to actually teach. They were paid pretty well for babysitters. Heck, I had several teachers who only worked 4 days a week, where the class was allowed to do anything quietly and the teacher was merely physically present.
Socialism: a lie told by totalitarians and believed by fools.
it's a line used all the damned time. Texas has so little money for school, yet they get money like there is no tomorrow for school. I wanna know where it all goes. The money earned from the Texas lottery was supposed to go to schools, it doesn't. Texas got a grant from the feds for school, they lost it cause they didn't use it for schools. Texas is the biggest load of crap. Right now, this special session that is being held to figure out how to fund schools, is gonna end up turning into something that gets to lobby for toll roads. Texas Gov't is ridiculous. Perry, strayhorn and all these other damned fools should be kicked out, covered in tar and feathered on congress and 6th. @ssholes.
Your missing the point, All it will do is make the products cost more. And usualy, those product shiped outside the state aren't subjected to taxes within the state. It will still just be more charged for the products being taxed.
"And usualy, those product shiped outside the state aren't subjected to taxes within the state."
And you're missing the point; the parent mentioned taxing the oil companies directly. While Texas may not be able to collect taxes from gasoline sold in Florida, they can tax the income the corporation receives from that sale, so it's a net gain for Austin.
Let me preface my comments by saying that I live in the Valley (near McAllen and Brownsville). I play video games. I also teach in the poorest school district in the state. So, theoretically the money they raise would come here. But should we be pouring resources into a system this defective?
Net gain at the expense of consumers most likely in that state. Oil companies have point of nexus (does enough business to implement thst states tax code or actualy has a presence)in other states to the point that thier income is taxed into those other states. Keeping with your example, any oil company selling to florida or operating in florida will amas it profits from there in florida and those profits won't be subject to a texas tax until it is distributed to the benefactors (EG personal income tax.) All the oil in the US is controled by 5 parent oil companies. 4 of wich operate in any given state at one time. Any small oil company will have to sell to one of these bigger companies wich will trip the taxing texas oil into a taxing only texans.
So taxing texas oil is most likley only going to be a tax on texans. It isn't neccesarily that simple but it is most likley what would happen. Microsoft and IBM have the same setup. Washington doesn't see tax on every penny microsoft makes as well as IBM divides thiers up into several states too. It is just how it works.