Slashdot Mirror


New York Wants To Tax Internet Downloads

An anonymous reader writes "NY is considering taxing 'video and music' downloads to offset a burgeoning budget deficit." How long before we all have meters on our routers? This version is just a 4% tax on movies and songs downloaded from services like iTunes, but I'm sure if they could figure out a bit tax, they would.

35 of 485 comments (clear)

  1. Old news is old by superbus1929 · · Score: 4, Informative

    This is nothing new; they've been talking about this for months, maybe over a year. It's caused issues with Amazon in the past, if I remember right.

    --
    Let's stop dilly-dallying and just change "-1: Overrated" to "-1: Disagree" or "-1: Doesn't Subscribe to Groupthink".
    1. Re:Old news is old by ShawnCplus · · Score: 5, Informative

      Most online retailers hate New York because we have horrible taxes, I believe NewEgg stopped requiring users to pay the tax in NY which caused them some issues. This will only exacerbate the intertube hatred of NY

      --
      Excuse me while I gather the virgin sacrifice and assemble the pentagram required to solve your problem
    2. Re:Old news is old by Smidge207 · · Score: 5, Insightful

      *sigh* I agree...BUT: Why should there be a tax on Internet traffic for any reason? I mean a true, cogent reason? New York has contributed nothing so why should it profit from that which it has contributed nothing to? Secondly it offers no protectionism. This is taxation without representation. Thirdly how much tax dollars is wasted in New York and given to the rich? Fourth what is the purpose of a Federal Tax deduction if it's going to be added to state and local taxes? Fifth if New York is going to raise taxes then it shouldn't get any bailout money because it contradicts what the Federal Government is doing?

      There needs to be correspondence between what the Fed does and State and Local Governments are doing in order for the stimulus to work. We can't pull two different directions. Taxing downloads is an invasion of privacy anyway. It's not about pr0n it's about taxation without representation. The reality is tax money as well as tax deductions are given to corporations for the purposes of conventions centers and etc... which does nothing for the areas except deplete taxes for the purpose of benefiting rich corporations. They claim to make jobs, however the jobs do not pay a living wage and further taxes the economy through social programs.

      Enough is enough!

      =Smidge=

      --
      Is it just my observation, or is eldavojohn an idiot?
    3. Re:Old news is old by larry+bagina · · Score: 4, Informative

      They've been talking about it for a while, but it's different than the amazon tax. Amazon (and other mail order/internet stores) don't collect sales tax if they don't have a physical presence in the state. New York wanted to reclassify affiliate programs so that Amazon (and anyone else with an affiliate in New York) would need to collect NY state sales tax.

      --
      Do you even lift?

      These aren't the 'roids you're looking for.

    4. Re:Old news is old by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Funny

      New York has contributed nothing so why should it profit from that which it has contributed nothing to?

      Nonsense. New York has given us Credit Default Swaps.

    5. Re:Old news is old by causality · · Score: 5, Interesting

      Most online retailers hate New York because we have horrible taxes, I believe NewEgg stopped requiring users to pay the tax in NY which caused them some issues. This will only exacerbate the intertube hatred of NY

      You wouldn't think that a state could tax interstate trade, but if NewEgg (which appears to operate out of California) really did experience "issues" then I have a solution to that. Nothing would get the attention of the state of New York quite like every out-of-state online retailer refusing to sell to any NY resident or to ship items to a NY address. When customers complain, refer them to the problems NewEgg experienced and encourage them to take it up with the NY state legislature. The point is to make this an utter failure. That's definitely in our interests because if NY does this successfully, you can count on other states following suit.

      If this happened, I doubt it would have to happen more than once to put an end to this sort of BS. Just imagine the precedent it would set.

      --
      It is a miracle that curiosity survives formal education. - Einstein
    6. Re:Old news is old by quanticle · · Score: 5, Informative

      Well, the precedent would last until some retailer sued the state in federal court on the exact grounds you've brought up - regulation of interstate commerce is a matter explicitly reserved by the federal government.

      --
      We all know what to do, but we don't know how to get re-elected once we have done it
    7. Re:Old news is old by FireStormZ · · Score: 5, Informative

      "You wouldn't think that a state could tax interstate trade"

      A little known fact is that the 'sales tax' is more a 'use tax'. If someone in NY drives to PA to by cloths and save the tax money they are legally required to pay NY taxes on it (few actually do this). This is why NY (outside of the City) is dying, its not just Buffalo but everywhere except Albany (seat of state government) is hurting. Taxes in NY are just way to high for business to start setting up shop and competing with neighboring states.

      --
      "Ahh! Arrogance and stupidity in the same package, how efficient of you!" --Londo Molari
    8. Re:Old news is old by ADRA · · Score: 4, Insightful

      Maybe I'm just lame with your annoying legal policies, but I fail to see how materially, a tax shouldn't be applied on internet purchases vs. store-fronts. In fact, by not supporting online taxation, your punishing local retailers that are legally obligated to charge you.

      If this keeps up, you'll simply speed up the death of all brick and mortar stores and further kill your dwindling retail markets. It may not be SOOO bad for the consumer (besides the ability to walk into a store and purchase something), but It'll mean a hell of a lot less jobs for those retail peeps.

      --
      Bye!
    9. Re:Old news is old by qbzzt · · Score: 5, Insightful

      Maybe I'm just lame with your annoying legal policies, but I fail to see how materially, a tax shouldn't be applied on internet purchases vs. store-fronts. In fact, by not supporting online taxation, your punishing local retailers that are legally obligated to charge you.

      Local retailers receive a bunch of services from the local and state governments: police protection, roads, etc. Internet retailers do not.

      Besides, it's reasonable for a local retailer to support one taxing jurisdiction. It isn't reasonable for an internet retailer to support thousands of us.

      --
      -- Support a free market in the field of government
    10. Re:Old news is old by Hordeking · · Score: 4, Insightful

      and Connecticut too. I list untaxed internet purchases when I do my tax returns. Sales tax keeps our states running!

      Then give me a complete refund on my income taxes.

      --
      Disclaimer: The opinions and actions of the US Gov't are in no way representative of those held by this author or its ci
    11. Re:Old news is old by Dreadneck · · Score: 4, Insightful

      New York has contributed nothing so why should it profit from that which it has contributed nothing to?

      This amounts to nothing more than a sales tax on internet commerce. Don't act so surprised. You didn't honestly think government was going to sit idly by, forever passing up yet another opportunity to milk taxpayers for all they're worth, did you?

      On a different note, I found the following excerpt from TFA quite hilarious.

      But not everyone is on board with the idea of profiting off porn. The chairman of New York's Conservative Party says that taxing it legitimizes it.

      The National Republican Congressional Committee had no problem taking money from the porn industry at a 2005 fundraiser attended by President Bush.

      Christian evangelical leaders called for an explanation. The only one they got, at least in public, was from a spokesman for the National Republican Congressional Committee, who said: "We'll take that money and use it to elect more Republicans."

      I love the smell of hypocrisy in the morning. It smells like... politics.

      --
      Power does not corrupt - power attracts the corrupt.
    12. Re:Old news is old by phorm · · Score: 5, Informative

      Um? My guess would be:

      a) Via the internet, which you pay for

      b) Via postal mail, which you pay for

      c) By plane, train, or automotive, for which the fuel surtax and others are paid for by the transporter and then considered as part of the bill paid for in (b)

  2. The upside by Warll · · Score: 4, Insightful

    The upside of them metering one's bandwidth use would be that many people would start taking action over their windows zombie box.

  3. Great for increasing piracy by kseise · · Score: 5, Insightful

    No tax on torrents? Cool! Bye Bye iTunes.

  4. No problem for me by Yvanhoe · · Score: 5, Funny

    I would happily forward 4% of the bits that comes into my router to the NY city hall if that can help them balance their budget.

    --
    The Wise adapts himself to the world. The Fool adapts the world to himself. Therefore, all progress depends on the Fool.
  5. I want to see a provision in the stimulus package by PeeAitchPee · · Score: 5, Insightful

    . . . that forces states to pay back the money they receive from the Federal government, and puts a harsh salary and compensation cap on politicians in those states who elect to take Federal bailout funds. The likes of California and New York clearly have no concept of what it means to "spend less," and current taxpayers are fleeing by the tens of thousands, causing them to create asinine taxes like the one in TFA and causing even more people and companies to head to more tax-friendly states. A government should be forced to plan its finances like a responsible household, taking into consideration risk, debt and spending just like the rest of us have to in reality land. After all, it's our money they're spending. Why is this so hard to comprehend?

  6. Grrrr by LatencyKills · · Score: 5, Insightful

    I'm sick of the attitude "we've got stuff to pay for and we need to figure out how to raise revenue to do it" regardless of how they choose to raise it. Here's a novel approach to government: we've got X dollars, how can we spend it to maximize the quality of life of our citizens? I don't get to randomly pull in more money from secondary sources if I decide I want a bigger TV this year, so why should the government?

    --
    Jealously hoarding mod points since 2007.
    1. Re:Grrrr by Ironchew · · Score: 5, Insightful

      Time to go after the pork. Scaling the military-industrial complex down to a defensive level instead of an imperial level suddenly frees up nearly half our federal revenue. Imagine all the social programs that would benefit.

    2. Re:Grrrr by causality · · Score: 4, Interesting

      I'm sick of the attitude "we've got stuff to pay for and we need to figure out how to raise revenue to do it" regardless of how they choose to raise it. Here's a novel approach to government: we've got X dollars, how can we spend it to maximize the quality of life of our citizens? I don't get to randomly pull in more money from secondary sources if I decide I want a bigger TV this year, so why should the government?

      That's easy. There's this common misconception that politicians don't understand things like balanced budgets. They do. They're power-hungry liars but otherwise they are not stupid. They know how to play this game and they know that the average person is far too trusting and naive.

      The reason why they don't carefully spend our money and otherwise respect and honor the citizens is because there is no political power to be had by doing that. That is the nature of political power. I wish we'd be more open and honest about that instead of beating the drum of patriotism and claiming that the expansion of government is "for the children" or "for our safety". A minimal government that is fiscally responsible and leaves the citizens alone as much as possible just doesn't satisfy the sort of fevered egos who are attracted to positions of political power.

      As a side note, to get a better idea of the sort of manipulation that goes on, just research "problem, reaction, solution" which is also known as Hegel's "thesis, antithesis, synthesis". If you can notice that pattern just one time you'll start seeing it everywhere. See that and patterns like it and perhaps then you, too can experience the joy of predicting the outcome of political "debates" in the media (it's easy -- whichever prefabricated solution does the most to expand government is the one that will probably "win") for people who neither believe you nor question the high success rate of your predictions. There's just not a lot of understanding of the idea that our politicians have been going down the same path for quite some time and that they intend to travel further down that same path.

      --
      It is a miracle that curiosity survives formal education. - Einstein
  7. porn tax by innocent_white_lamb · · Score: 5, Interesting

    TFA says that this will include a tax on porn, but not all of the lawmakers are on-board with the idea of taxing porn. Apparently taxing "legitimate" movies and music is fine, but a porn tax is bad.

    Things that make you go hmmmm....

    --
    If you're a zombie and you know it, bite your friend!
  8. NYS wants to encourage piracy by Vandil+X · · Score: 5, Insightful

    So what they're really saying is to hit the torrent store for our online "purchases" rather then stay legit and send more tax revenue to a bunch of $100K/yr earning public servants who got NYS into this budget problem in the first place.

    I'm sure this was proposed over a $1000/plate fund-raiser dinner.

    --
    Up, Up, Down, Down, Left, Right, Left, Right, B, A, START
  9. Re:No shit, sherlock. by KyleTheDarkOne · · Score: 5, Insightful

    The main reason for taxes on good is the use of the infrastructure, the roads and the like for the movement of goods, as well as to get money, but downloads don't actually provide any wear on the infrastructure.

  10. It's about taxes. Logic is actively opposed. by khasim · · Score: 4, Interesting

    Think about it for a moment. We have enough processing power that we can tie taxes to specific projects at the fraction of a cent level.

    Why not let the voters vote for projects AND the taxes to fund them? If they want another school, then they get a property tax increase of $3.15 on all property in area X.

    If they want to fill in the pot holes on 1st Avenue then they increase the sales tax by 0.013%. And when the project is finished, the tax is repealed.

    Let the people see EXACTLY what they're spending the money on.

    If someone runs for office claiming to want to "cut taxes" then let them specify EXACTLY what projects will be cut and the people can see how much they'll be saving.

    1. Re:It's about taxes. Logic is actively opposed. by kent_eh · · Score: 5, Insightful

      the tax is repealed.

      Uh huh.
      Just like every other "temporary" tax has been repealed.

      --

      ---
      "I can't complain, but sometimes still do..." Joe Walsh
  11. Re:How the states can get their sales taxes by ColdWetDog · · Score: 5, Funny

    It would be nice if there was a single federal e-form with a box per state.

    Don't worry, with having to pay for the bail out and sundry little extra added expenses, you will soon see a simplified 1040 form:

    1. How much money did you make?
    2. Give it to us.

    No need for complex calculations.

    --
    Faster! Faster! Faster would be better!
  12. I believe that provision is in the bill by Shivetya · · Score: 4, Insightful

    right next to the part where Congress holds themselves to account.

    Honestly, everything you attributed to NY and California is attributable to the Federal Government. Worse, they Feds have no restraint whereas states do. The Feds aren't even bothering to try and balance the budget.

    Face it, through years of manipulation Congressmen have managed to lay the blame for all things at the feet of people who have money while themselves spending money they don't have.

    Congressmen vilify the businessman who sends his kids to private school, flies private jets, and vacations overseas, all the while doing the same thing on our dime. Congress chides the business for laying off people, losing money, or asking for money, all the while doing the same thing.

    Look, the majority has spoken, they want all they can get from those who make money while there is still some to get.
     

    --
    * Winners compare their achievements to their goals, losers compare theirs to that of others.
    1. Re:I believe that provision is in the bill by BlueStrat · · Score: 5, Insightful

      I suppose you're somehow showing the the poor old rich guys are getting beaten over the head with high taxation and the such, but you fail to explain or elaborate on how this hurts society as a whole?

      It (raising taxes to punitive levels on the wealthy & corporations) hurts society on myriad levels.

      The corporations don't pay taxes. Their customers do. Tax, like any business expense, is rolled into the price charged for products and services. This hurts the people who depend on the corporations' products and services.

      If taxes & regulations rise to where the corporation must raise prices to the point where they become uncompetitive in the world economy, they simply leave the country in question for less-costly locations, taking all their jobs and tax revenue with them. This is why so many US corporations are either outright leaving, or moving operations out of the country and outsourcing jobs.

      Individual rich people have even less reason to stay in a country where they must pay high tax rates. They simply move their money and then themselves away.

      Eventually there is not enough of a tax base left able to pay taxes, the country finds itself with nobody willing to buy treasury notes to finance more debt, and the countries' economy collapses and the government soon follows. The US is currently in the run-up stage for the economic collapse portion as politicians continue to spend more money to buy votes to get re-elected, more and more rich people and US corporations flee to remain competitive and protect what they've worked hard for, and the available tax base shrinks.

      Politicians, rather than attempting to correct the problems, borrow huge sums against future generations' livelihood in an attempt to prop up the house of cards long enough for them to extract their share of wealth, after which they simply don't care. Meanwhile they keep the population distracted with political sideshows, meaningless wedge issues, drugs, and bread & circuses. When it all comes crashing down, they'll be residing in mansions in a warmer clime, sipping drinks and enjoying the wealth they stole.

      Unless people wake up, stop listening to the politicians' empty promises, storm the capitols with force of numbers, and take back their country. Being that most are too lazy, disconnected, cowardly, and distracted I have little faith this will happen.

      Strat

      --
      Progressivism (aka US 'Liberalism'): Ideas so good they need a police/surveillance-state to enforce.
  13. Re:I want to see a provision in the stimulus packa by PeeAitchPee · · Score: 5, Insightful

    That's funny . . . California lost 144,000 people between July 1, 2007 and July 1, 2008, and New York lost 126,000 during the same period. Both states' populations are shrinking, not growing. According to you, state spending should be falling, but both states are tens of billions in the hole and scrambling to come up with new taxes to make up for the revenue they're losing from the people who left and continue to leave for more tax-friendly states. You can spin it all you want, but people and companies are getting the hell out of CA and the Northeast, and the primary reasons are high taxes and high cost of living. Increasing spending (which requires higher taxes on the poor souls who choose to stay when you have a negative population growth) will only make people leave faster.

  14. Re:I want to see a provision in the stimulus packa by FireIron · · Score: 4, Insightful

    Did you even read the article you linked? They buried it, but these are total losses not net losses; both CA and NY populations continue to grow overall due to births and immigrations greatly outnumbering tax fliers.

  15. Re:I want to see a provision in the stimulus packa by PeeAitchPee · · Score: 4, Informative

    California has almost 3 million illegals. That's almost 8% of the state's population who are not paying taxes, and it's part of the reason the state is $41 billion in the hole (the cost of illigal immigrants to California is $10.5 billion annually, according to the Federation for American Immigration Reform). People who think it's "racist" to state that illegal immigrants generally don't pay taxes are full of shit and clearly don't have a clue as to what real racism is.

  16. Re:I want to see a provision in the stimulus packa by DustyShadow · · Score: 4, Insightful

    What part of "illegal immigrant" implies a certain race? I think you are the racist one for suggesting that only certain races come here illegally. They come from all countries/backgrounds/races btw.

  17. Corrupt Politician mistress tax by binaryseraph · · Score: 4, Funny

    Hey I'm fine with it if that means we can have a "Mistress" tax that applies to Mayors and Governors of NY. I'm thinking like 15% tax on the hush money they are given?

  18. Re:I want to see a provision in the stimulus packa by cortesoft · · Score: 4, Informative

    It isn't exactly true that illegal immigrants don't pay taxes. For example, many illegal immigrants use a fake social security number so they can get a job. Just like any other worker, part of their income is withheld and sent to the government (especially FICA and payroll taxes). In fact, since they are using fake social security numbers, they can't file for any refund and often times end up paying more than they would have if they had been legal citizens (since many lower income workers end up receiving money back at tax time). While some illegal immigrants work under-the-table jobs and don't pay any income taxes, they still pay sales taxes and other non-income taxes. In addition, many illegal immigrants avoid taking advantage of social services out of fear of being deported, making them less likely to be a drain on these taxpayer-supported institutions.

    While illegal immigration is a complex and vexing issue, do not make it out that illegals do not pay taxes. Here is a look at the issue: http://www.taxfoundation.org/blog/show/1424.html

  19. Re:I want to see a provision in the stimulus packa by Trailer+Trash · · Score: 4, Insightful

    California has almost 3 million illegals. That's almost 8% of the state's population who are not paying taxes,

    You know, I hear this all the time here in TN, where we have a 9.25% sales tax and no state income tax. Maybe you can answer the question that your intellectual kinsmen here never can seem to answer.

    Where is it that these illegals are buying groceries? And gasoline? Where do they live that there isn't a property tax? I'm serious when I ask this. I have to pay taxes on most stuff that I buy, but then I find out that illegals don't. Are they simply shopping at the same places as me, and producing an "illegal alien" identification card that lets them skip paying the taxes? Does the gas pump knock off the 18 cent federal tax and 21 cent state tax on gasoline if a car pulls up with an unlicensed driver? I've looked closely many times when Mexicans were getting gas and the pump shows the same $/gallon as my pump, but maybe that's to fool me and when they go to pay the cashier knocks the tax off?

    Let me know, if you can. The mouthbreathing racists around here seem to turn into stroke victims when I ask them such questions.