Slashdot Mirror
Mississippi Bill Would Tax Software Sales
Byzantine writes "The Mississippi Legislature has passed MS House Bill 1461 which would amend the state's tax laws specifically to charge sales tax on 'electrically transferred digital products,' including products bought via mail-order. The bill is currently on the governor's desk awaiting signature." Softpedia claims that 20 states have enacted download taxes of one sort or another — most of them for iTunes music — and that New York is considering taxing downloads of all kinds.
Mississippi stays at the bottom of the heap
Nullius in verba
I wonder how this will play out with regards to illegal downloads? If one gets caught/charged/accused of transferring "digital goods" to which they don't own the copyright to, are they then responsible for the taxes those goods would have generated had they been legit?
Reminds me of Al Capone's downfall...
I don't believe that any reasonable person believed that online sales would not eventually be taxed. This government after all - thier job is to find things to tax after all. I assume it took this long because of the ineptitude of beuracracy.
Stay tuned for new sig...
Or are they going to tax based on the honor system? What if I lived in Mississippi, but I traveled to Louisiana and downloaded music? What if I host a server in Colorado, pay for downloads from that server remotely, then sync my file system with that server?
The preceding post was not a Slashvertisement.
When the chips are down, tax people even more and damage the economy further.
---- Booth was a patriot ----
I would wager that while technically you would need to pay taxes in those scenarios, but no one is going to give a rats ass because most people will be downloading through a service like iTunes from their home. Your examples would apply to so few people that it wouldn't be worth paying someone to track you down.
The Kruger Dunning explains most post on
I live in Canada. Here, all of these products are taxed like any other good or service - and there is no mail order freebie to distory the level playing field of the retail economy by not having to pay them via mial order. Up here? It's not new. It's not shocking. Believe it or not, the sun still comes up every morning - the world turns. Then it gets dark and we go to sleep. Every day. Life goes on.
Thing is, the federal debt in the USA has been spiralling so fast since 2000 that all of these "reports" and pointing to same as the portents of the Four Horsemen are going to go the way of the dodo in a dozen years or so - or less.
You simply will not have a *choice* but to increase taxes in the USA to at least Canadian and possibly Western European levels if you don't deal with it soon enough. (My bet - you won't deal with it soon enough. Americans are nutty when it comes to taxes.) You'll put it off and put it off and then put it off somemore until there is no wiggle room left at all. And then you will point fingers at your politicians - instead of you the voters - which is *precisely* where the blame will lie.
That's the price you will ultimately have to pay for spending money for decades that you simply do not have. That prediction is not a *maybe*. It is a *certainty*. The cheque is coming to your table. Deal with it (and kindly quit your whining about it too, please. It's not a big deal.)
.Robert
How the impact of tax will affect purchases? Since people might be reluctant to pay extra money for taxes (especially in this economy), will they then be discouraged to buy online, or will it be insignificant enough to not care? How about paying taxes and shipping?
In most EU countries there is a 17% VAT tax on electronic downloads. Has been that way for a couple of years.
Why shouldn't it be taxed in the US?
I have a feeling this will be implemented like sales tax for purchasing items online: you buy an item from Newegg, and they have to charge you sales tax if you live in a state where they have a physical presence (CA, NJ, TN), even if your order is shipped from elsewhere.
Convert FLACs to a portable format with FlacSquisher
They syncing version maybe - though it's an interesting idea.
The leaving the state one - absolutely not. You can't charge sales tax in one state for business done in another state, especially business that is most likely interstate anyways. I'm not going to research the location of the servers to be certain - but iTunes, probably hosted in Washingston state or California. How would Mississippi have any right to tax a transaction between Louisiana and California? I regularly travel between Texas and Louisiana, I sure as hell don't have to pay Texas state tax on Louisiana gas when I cross back, the same thinking should apply.
The preceding post was not a Slashvertisement.
Let's start with a fact: If you're over the age of 18 and have ever filed taxes, you're guilty of tax fraud. I don't know what law, but I assure you, you're a criminal. Shame on you. Now, that said, they can pass this law all they want... and it will only succeed in chasing any businesses operating in their state that sell software online away. And really, how many skilled programmers are you going to find in Mississippi anyway? Oh, sorry, that might be stereotyping. Shame on me. :) But seriously -- I suggest the British approach to this for my fellow american citizens: See a stupid law? Ignore it.
#fuckbeta #iamslashdot #dicemustdie
... figure the Misissippi tax on an Ubuntu .iso download.
Have gnu, will travel.
Photo of the bill on the governor's desk, awaiting...
Internet and mail order purchases are already subject to use tax in many states. Not that anyone actually pays it.
You can tax my porn when you pry it from my wet sticky fingers ;)
and that New York is considering taxing downloads of all kinds.
I want peace on earth and goodwill toward man.
We are the United States Government! We don't do that sort of thing.
Good luck getting a retailer in New Jersey to comply with Mississippi state law if they don't have to, especially small retailers.
Though, getting Apple and a few the largest others, like Amazon to comply wouldn't be as hard.
The preceding post was not a Slashvertisement.
You can't charge sales tax in one state for business done in another state
A rose by any other name...
http://window.state.tx.us/taxinfo/use/
Many state do require you to report items purchased in another state, based on how long ago you bought it.
You might want to find out about that tax fraud you've been committing.
The Kruger Dunning explains most post on
This is a result of the Republicans loosening banking regs. since Reagan and the 'choking the beast' tax cuts.
The Kruger Dunning explains most post on
Good job, lawmakers. As we all know, the best way out of an economic recession or depression is to increase and create new taxes. After all, the fastest way to economic recovery is to increase the tax burden on citizens!
The Christian Right is Neither (Christian nor right). See: Matthew 23, Matthew 25, Ezekiel 16:48-50
Its called a "use tax". For example CA charges one on anything bought on OR (where there is no sales tax). Buy a car there and you'll quickly find yourself being taxed by CA (although admittedly only big things like cars get tracked down. Everything else is done on the honor system, with remarkably few people filling out anything but a 0 on that line.
I still have more fans than freaks. WTF is wrong with you people?
Read my post again: I listed those three states for Newegg because of sales tax. Newegg has locations CA, NJ, and TN, so if they ship an order anywhere in CA, NJ, or TN, they have to charge sales tax. If Newegg ships a package to any of the other 47 states, they don't charge sales tax.
As far as I can tell, if Mississippi passes a Software Sales Tax, then the only retailers that have to comply are retailers in Mississippi to Mississippi residents.
Convert FLACs to a portable format with FlacSquisher
I wouldn't place the blame on voters who really have little say on what politicians do. When we vote, it's usually a choice between bad or worse...
All very well and good.
But Mississippi isn't the Federal government, and Ms can tax whatever it likes without affecting the Federal deficit in the slightest.
Note, by the way, that Ms, like pretty much all the States (and unlike the Federal government), are required to balance their budgets.
"I do not agree with what you say, but I will defend to the death your right to say it"
Yes. While technically you should ahve been paying the use tax on that yourself* , nobody does. .00001% of sales where mail order. Now it's a big deal.
Wasn't a big deal when
Mail order companies know this is coming, that's why they are pushing for states to have a single tax for the entire state for these purchases.
It's one thing to ahve to stay up to date on 50 sales tax numbers, it's another for every state county city, etc . . . in the US.
Maybe the feds should apply a flat rate to all sales, and then divide those monies up to all states based on population.
*assuming your state has a sales tax.
The Kruger Dunning explains most post on
I think you misunderstand our method of government. Unlike most "western european" countries, our government is based on a division between the county, state, and federal levels. And it's not a clear division either. For example, a federal law trumps a state law, unless it happens to be in the state constitution, in which case only the federal constition can override or restrict it. You might imagine what merry hell this plays on our justice system (give you a hint: Everyone in this country is a felon, it's just that some of them haven't been caught yet). The law books are just that damned dense, and have that many competing administrations. And laws are rarely, if ever, repealed. Now, imagine how hellacious that is, and multiply it by a hundred and you have the tax codes in this country.
It's not about tax as a percentage, or tax of a certain good or service, but simply knowing what to pay in. The tax code has become so horribly complicated that nobody wants to fix it, so they throw monkeys at it and they flip levers and switches and hope that it dials into the desired amount of income. It never does. Recently they approved a federal tax on cigarettes, one of a variety of so-called "sin taxes" that we knew the democrats would push forward as the solution to the deficit (if you're a minority of some kind or another -- prepare to be taxed. Alcohol is safe for now though because everybody drinks in a crap economy). Next they'll be taxing food with "trans fat" in it, and other acts of sheer idiocy, and the pattern will continue.
You have this attitude that if you sprinkle magic european-thinking fairy dust over america there problems will all be solved. That's really naive. The current state of affairs is a byproduct of how this country's government is structured, and while at times it irritates all of us, it is all about tradeoffs. As I'm sure you're discovering across the pond right now, the European Union is a giant clusterf--k of monumental proportions. Our country did the same thing -- and then we abandoned that system of organization and created the US Constitution. The European Union is experiencing many of the issues our country dealt with 200 years ago -- which is, how do you organize a number of autonomous and sovereign member states into a cohesive whole? There must be a balance struck between the power of the central authority, and that of its member states.
Our balance point may not be perfect, but it's been around for 200 years. I doubt the European Union will last another twenty. For starters, their constitution is way too long. ;)
#fuckbeta #iamslashdot #dicemustdie
I live in Canada
When the shit does finally hit the fan the biggest customer of your cattle, energy, labor, oil and practically everything else Canada produces will vanish. Despite your discipline and rigorous public governance you're still going to be screwed.
That's the price you will ultimately have to pay...
...for relying on the American consumer.
Enjoy.
Oh, and when Obama gets around to renegotiating NAFTA, try not to whine too much. It's not a big deal.
The way to make money off of the internet is to use it like a highway. Except instead of having ot cart your dumb ass all over hell and back, you could be conducting the business of the day from the comfort of your own home. That is where the money is, it is in the SAVING OF MONEY (a penny saved is a penny earned remember????). The money to be made off of the internet is in having to pay 50% of what you do now to insure the health if your employees. It is in the saving of space on the design of your "robotic" manufacturing plants (occupy less "real" estate, no need for corridors or offices, just a maintenance shop, a front office, and a staff meeting room,where you convene once or twice a month to talk face to face). The internet is the answer to our energy crisis too. Look around you if you work in an office and ask yourself sometime, "what of my surroundings here at work could I NOT DO WITHOUT"? Of those things that you CANNOT DO YOUR JOB WITHOUT, "how many of these things could be provided "virtually"? No doubt there are many of you that need to be on-site as a part of your job, but I bet there are far more of you who can do everything you do now for your company or business, from some cyber-cafe in town. Instead of pursuing this inevitable migration with gusto, it seems most of the US "Economy" is based on the idea that the internet MUST BE EXTORTED FOR EVERY LAST CENT IT CAN PROVIDE. Every time I hear someone on C-Span talking about the internet, the subject matter invariably is "how do we make money off of the internet". Get it straight, THE INTERNET IS NOT "THE PRODUCT". The "PRODUCT" is the service or items you provide others VIA THE INTERNET. The sooner we get away from the "capitalist-extortionist" mindset that currently runs internet related businesses, the sooner we can all make "real" money providing our goods and services to the world... FREE THE INTERNET!!! -Oz
That's the last straw! I'm switching to fiber optic networking.
"Believe me!" -- Donald Trump
The bad news is there might be a sales tax on downloads.
The far, far worse news is you are in Missinhippie. Get out while you can.
-fb Everything not expressly forbidden is now mandatory.
Legalize prostitution then charge everyone for taxes they should have paid on sex they have for "free".
Note, by the way, that Ms, like pretty much all the States (and unlike the Federal government), are required to balance their budgets.
Only up to the point that the person doing the counting runs out of fingers and toes.
I didn't suggest Mississippi was the Federal Government. I did suggest - and do suggest - that the overall deficit burden at all local state and Federal levels is interdependent and is certain to result in cessations of funding and transfers from one government level to the next, requiring significant increase in taxation over the next 12 years to come close to maintaining current commitments.
That means when the federal government runs a deficit, all ogvernment levels will ultimately be paying taxes to deal with the fallout of that red ink on their budgets in subsequent years. There is no free lunch.
My point: You will not have a choice. You once had that choice and you made that choice. You have been enjoying a dollar's worth of government for much less than a dollar for decades. That dollar's wortg of government was not "on sale". The bill for the difference - between what you got and what you paid for it - comes due.
In Canada, unlike virtually all of Western Europs and the United States, we have bene running significant federal budget surpluses since 1995. 2009 will be our first year in the red in over 14 years. That's the cost of bad times. We'll go back in the black in two or three years, I expect. The taxpayers in Canada would rather services were not cut and deficits are not run unless they have to be. We will keep tax levels higher in order to make that happen.
Americans? They won't. Someone says raise taxes, and middle America freaks out.
That, essentially, is the story of America since before Day One. It has its strengths - and it has its weaknesses, too. Welcome to "weaknesses".
Americans have been told that they can pay now or pay a lot more later. They have consistently chosen "a lot more later" please. Without ever really *believing* that "later" will actually come.
Fair enough. In many cases (now, say) that's probably good fiscal policy. In 2002-3, choosing to go fight TWO wars and cut taxes at the same time? All by borrowing the money from the Chinese to do it?
That's maybe not so good a fiscal policy.
Good or bad... doesnt' really matter now. That bill comes due either way.
Moral of the Story: Man up and stop whining about it.
.Robert
This pisses me off. No good reason to tax this but to just further profits. Give me a logical reason why software should be taxed. Why does the government deserve a piece of the action? I'm not against taxes, it's just got to be logical.
The way I read the bill, it appears that only digital books, music and movies are taxed: (a) "Specified digital products" means electronically transferred digital audio-visual works, digital audio works and digital books.
Who the hell is "Mississippi Bill" and why does he care about software sales? He should probably devote more of his time to planning his upcoming battles with Minnesota Fats and the Cincinnati Kid.
Reading the story title, I thought this article was going to be about a colourful, wacky American named "Mississippi Bill." Drag that it isn't... :)
Light the blue touch-paper and retire immediately.
America was in debt since ever before Andrew Jackson and ever after Andrew Jackson. Certainly long before Reagen.
Jackson despised any form of national bank (in our time, the Federal Reserve), and saw to their bankruptcy and demise, as he thought that whoever controlled the money had power and he wanted the people to have power.
After bankrupting the national bank, he became the first and only president to date to pay off the national debt. I suspect he will also be the last president to pay off national debt, as the United States probably won't exist in its current form by the time it will take to pay off the $15 trillion left by the end of Obama's first time.
You simply will not have a *choice* but to increase taxes in the USA to at least Canadian and possibly Western European levels if you don't deal with it soon enough. (My bet - you won't deal with it soon enough. Americans are nutty when it comes to taxes.) You'll put it off and put it off and then put it off somemore until there is no wiggle room left at all. And then you will point fingers at your politicians - instead of you the voters - which is *precisely* where the blame will lie.
No, it really is the politicians' fault. They flat-out lied to us (over and over). Bush literally told us that it would be wrong for any country to invade another country without just cause, a clear goal, yada yada... The Republican party said they wanted to lower taxes and make government smaller and do less spending. All they did was largely lower taxes on the rich (because they thought that would make things better, which it clearly did not) and then did the exact opposite of what they said they'd do with everything else, which in my view qualifies as pure lies. That doesn't exactly put the blame on the voters in my opinion. So yes, fingers are being pointed at the politicians because they are nearly all liars, crooks and criminals of the highest order.
I don't know how it is in Canada, but our tax system here in the US is unjust, and insanely complex. We don't mind paying taxes because we all know the roads need to be paid for by someone, but our government taxes us for roads, and then later changes their mind and spends it on wars and making new government agencies to bully its citizens with, which is not what we voted for in the first place. Then they confiscate our wealth with deficit spending, which is even worse than taxes. Now our income is worth less because the cost of goods is more. Then they need more money (because they made it less valuable, remember) and tax us from any new angle they can find, which even further increases the damage they did by printing more money in the first place. It's a vicious, and stupid cycle which has absolutely nothing to do with our "nuttiness" about paying taxes.
NY tried something similar last year. Newegg started out complying with NY's sales tax, but then told them to shove it. Plenty of references here - Newegg Defies New York Sales Tax Law
First, I'm a Canadian. I live in a federal state system, same as you do, ok?
Second, I'm a lawyer. I understand how parmountcy and shared field theories of constitutional law work (probably much better than you).
Third, I don't give a rat's ass about how you go about fixing your domestic problems or how you fix your fiscal policy. That's because they are not mine to fix; they are YOURS to fix. Find your own unique American solution, by all means. Take as much American excpetionalism as you can carry; fill your boots.
Fourth, I'm not naive about sprinking rational liberal Western European pixie dust over Middle America. I don't think for **one moment** that America's political culture is going to change. America has never been terribly rational about taxes and that it not going to change.
Which is exactly my point: that's why the ultimate tax bill will get only bigger before you are left with no other choice but than to pay it. But make no mistake, Western European pixie-dust or no, the bill comes due. Whether you like it - or not. The bill doesn't care much about why you incurred it. It only wants to be paid.
And that "some day maybe far off in the future" day of bill paying? It's on the horizon and it is a lot nearer than you think.
.Robert
Not so much as you might think. Federal commitments are just that - Federal. If the Feds don't, or can't, send the money to the States to cover Federal commitments, the States aren't actually under any obligations to find money to pay for those Federal commitments.
Nope. Feds can't pay their bills, they can't. Doesn't obligate the States to pay the Fed's bills.
Won't argue with that. But much of that "dollar's worth of government for much less than a dollar" has been at the Federal level. States aren't allowed to play those games, generally.
So, when the piper comes calling for his payment, the Feds will be raising taxes on everyone and everything to make up the differences. But the State governments won't be in that pickle - they have no deficit spending to make up, and the Feds can't really require the States to spend money (well, they DO do so now and then. But the Courts generally tell them to take a flying leap if the States don't want to play).
So, in ten or twenty years (I'm betting closer to ten than twenty, myself), the Feds are going to be in a serious crack. But the States will, in general, be fine.
"I do not agree with what you say, but I will defend to the death your right to say it"
....That's the price you will ultimately have to pay for spending money for decades that you simply do not have....
That is pure and unadulterated BS. We here, as most Americans cannot spend more money than we have or can borrow. Most credit cards have a limit. You also forget, that someone who has the authority to print money, (or program computer bits in a financial system) without going to jail, can never go bankrupt. Throughout most of human history, the medium of exchange we call money has always had some intrinsic value. This has no longer been true for the last 80 or so years, but instead its value is defined arbitrarily by those that have taken the authority upon themselves to create money out of thin air. One day, perhaps soon, this whole system of funny money will collapse under its own weight of worthlessness.
The problem is, that nobody is sure what this collapse will look like. Maybe it will be like it was with my grandmother in Germany. She told me of a man in her town that took a wheelbarrow full of money to a bake shop in order to buy a few loaves of bread. While he was inside inquiring where to bring the money, somebody dumped the money on the sidewalk and made off with a wheelbarrow.
All theory is gray
There seems to be a disconnect here. When the issue is one of an ability of a State government to pay its bills which it uses Federal money to do, - and the money stops - there are two choices:
1 - find the money (that means taxes)
2 - stop the program
It's all well and good to shrug and say "not my problem". When the roads are crumbling and the bridges falling down, my guess is that Americans at all local and state levels may share another view.
By the way, issuing long term debt and deficit financing are two different things. A state that does not issue a security to the public to finance a debt does not mena that they have not borrowed from finacial institutions to accumulate debt. Most do. Some do both. I doubt California, for exmaple, shares your sunny "not our problem" optomism.
.Robert
I am not a lawyer, but I believe that there is a dormant commerce clause issue when states try to tax sales of businesses that do not have a physical presence in the state.
Viral software licensing is not freedom, it is in fact GNU/Socialism.
"When the shit does finally hit the fan the biggest customer of your cattle, energy, labor, oil and practically everything else Canada produces will vanish. Despite your discipline and rigorous public governance you're still going to be screwed"
This is, regrettably, mostly true. Which is why watching your public policy decisions over the years is something we pay very close attention to in Canada. And it does, in fact, scare the shit out of us.
.Robert
You can't charge sales tax in one state for business done in another state,
True.
I'm not going to research the location of the servers to be certain - but iTunes, probably hosted in Washingston state or California. How would Mississippi have any right to tax a transaction between Louisiana and California?
It doesn't matter where the servers are, it is where the business is. Apple has a business presence in all 50 states (AFAIK), so Apple isn't allowed to claim that the servers are in Cupertino so we only charge sales tax for California residents.
I regularly travel between Texas and Louisiana, I sure as hell don't have to pay Texas state tax on Louisiana gas when I cross back, the same thinking should apply.
Well, actually you should pay the applicable Texas sales tax (if any) when you cross back (nobody does though). But the onus is on YOU to remit the tax to Austin, and not on the Louisiana gas station to collect the Texas sales tax and send it to Austin.
Maybe we should collect taxes from you. While you were ice skating in your northern paradise of universal health care, we were arming ourselves to the teeth to contain the many countries with insane governments. The fact is that the standard of living in most of the USA is lower than that of Canada and Western Europe, so new taxes are a big deal.
First, I'm a Canadian. I live in a federal state system, same as you do, ok?
No, you don't (and I'm a canuck). The powers of a Canadian province are far less than the powers of a US state. Not long ago, when the government of Ontario was talking about banning firearms, someone had to point out that the criminal code is exclusively a federal area, so a province can't do that.
Third, I don't give a rat's ass about how you go about fixing your domestic problems or how you fix your fiscal policy. That's because they are not mine to fix; they are YOURS to fix. Find your own unique American solution, by all means. Take as much American excpetionalism as you can carry; fill your boots.
You should care, they are Canada's problems as well. Given that Canada is the USA's largest trading partner, and vice versa, a recession in the US is going to have dramatic effects in Canada.
I well understand the overall complexities of monetary policy. Spending money you do not have means borrowing it. You didn't have it, now you borrowed it. There. No you have it to spend.
We're clear on that part, right?
I'm not talking about pating the mortgage and groceries. Governments don't work that way. But in the end, they entire monetary system still depends upon governments paying it back - and being charged interest in the meanwhile.
At the ned of tha day, when the interest on your debt forms such a great portion of your overall budget that it squeezes out vital programs, you will have no choice but to raise the tax. There is a level of service that people will not accept being cut-off. The bill comes due.
Put another way, the people you borrow the money to fuind the difference between what you collect and what you spend? They want their interest. That's the deal. They'll probably float the pricnipal again, but that only goes so far. Time comes, they want it for other things, too. Like, say, buying stuff for themselves instead of lending it to America. That's the problem about looking to china to fund your deficit (a problem tied to a very undervalued Chinese currency, doubtless) but there it is just the same.
Fiscal and Monetary policy is easy when you owe most of the money to yourselves internally. But America crossed that Rubicon long, long ago. There is a very real price to all of this.
.Robert
I believe that was soundly decided against in Quill Corp. v. North Dakota.
upon the advice of my lawyer, i have no sig at this time
The problem is, the way the tax codes are from each state it is actually impossible for mail order and internet companies to pay them without added infrastructure.
And it's not just state tax - you need to tax for the county/parish/etc the person lives in, as well.
Take Minnesota for example. There is a 6.5% statewide sales tax. If you live in Hennepin County, you need to pay an additional .15% sales tax for the Twins Stadium levy. Now the impossible part - Minnesota also has a $770 Use Tax exemption. Let's say I buy a $300 item through an internet site or catalog - how do I know whether to tax the person or not? Minnesota also requires this to be filed as a separate form (in fact, only 22 of the 48 states with Use Tax have a line item on the state Sales Tax for it).
I personally would sue my state for double taxation if they pass such a law without provision for exempting me from Use Tax (which none of these proposals have ever had from what I've seen). I'd much prefer the voluntary Streamlined Sales Tax Project. I already do pay my Use Tax, so I'd love an easier way to do it.
Last I checked, we've spent $15,000,000,000.00 on a war in Afghanistan and lost a couple hundred Canadian soldier's **lives** there fighting a war because of some nutbars who attacked AMERICA. They attacked you - not us. Mainly because of shit you do and have done - and NOT because of some shit we do and have done.
We fairly clear on that part?
Still, given the audacity of the motherfuckers in attacking our closest allies and best friends, spending all that blood and treasure to assist America in kicking their asses was the least we could do for our best friends. And unlike most of the the Western Europeans, we actually put our guys in harm's way in Afghanistan. Our troops are there to fight. Not to be stationed in a base with orders not to fight and just fly a flag and call it "helping".
We fairly clear on that part too?
Still, that's the least Canada could do, given 9/11.
The least you could do, otoh, might be to maybe acknowledge that and say thank you (and sorry for making the war unwinnable and your sacrifice meaningless with that second front in Iraq thing. Real sorry about that guys.)
Just sayin'.
.Robert
Which is exactly my point: that's why the ultimate tax bill will get only bigger before you are left with no other choice but than to pay it. But make no mistake, Western European pixie-dust or no, the bill comes due. Whether you like it - or not. The bill doesn't care much about why you incurred it. It only wants to be paid.
And that "some day maybe far off in the future" day of bill paying? It's on the horizon and it is a lot nearer than you think.
We're still paying off debt we incurred during WWII. I doubt this new debt is anything less than net 60 years either. That's one of the unfortunate side-effects of this spending -- it's going to affect not only my children, but probably my grandchildren and great-grandchildren, and maybe even great-great-grandchildren. Our politicians rely on building the tax base by future population growth, not paying off bills due in any particular rush, as you seem to be suggesting.
So, will the downloads that Radio and Televsion stations make from their content providers be covered by this?
1. No, speaking as another Canadian, their federal system is significantly different. There is a much stronger divide between state and federal law than there is between provincial and federal law.
2. In terms of debt:GDP ratio, the US is roughly where we were at in the early 90s after the PCs got finished with things, and they're going into a recession, not coming out of one, so I really agree this is going to get ugly quickly.
upon the advice of my lawyer, i have no sig at this time
For example, a federal law trumps a state law, unless it happens to be in the state constitution, in which case only the federal constition can override or restrict it.
Go back and read the Supremacy Clause again. It clearly says that federal law trumps state constitutions and state law.
This Constitution, and the laws of the United States which shall be made in pursuance thereof; and all treaties made, or which shall be made, under the authority of the United States, shall be the supreme law of the land; and the judges in every state shall be bound thereby, anything in the Constitution or laws of any State to the contrary notwithstanding.
What?
At the ned of tha day, when the interest on your debt forms such a great portion of your overall budget that it squeezes out vital programs, you will have no choice but to raise the tax. There is a level of service that people will not accept being cut-off. The bill comes due.
All we have to do is stop paying out 250 billion dollars a year overseas to fund that "bullshit that we do to other countries" and we'd have a pretty good chunk of yearly payments taken care of right there. Last poll I saw, the American people don't support messing around with other countries, it is our government which does that all on its own, even after we've voted for them on their promise not to. There is a lot more going on here than that too, like the fact that many of our government agencies are utter wastes of taxpayer money. Take the FTC for example: Do they regulate trade? No. Did they do anything to even bother talking to the oil companies when they were raping us at the pump? No. Those are costly services we can do without. Add them up and we can pay off this stupid debt pretty quick AND make people happier at the same time.
So you're right that we can't afford this debt in the long-run, but I disagree that raising taxes is the *only* solution. Cutting idiotic government spending is equally possible, although it is politically impossible to imagine that happening with this current batch of scum (right and left). We desperately need political change here in the US, not more taxes.
I thought states weren't allowed to tax interstate commerce? Or do they only tax in-state transactions?
If you think an American State government has more power than a Provincial government in the massively decentralized Canadian constitutional system, then to be blunt: you don't have a **clue** what you are talking about, Mr. Canuck.
We traded off multiple coexisting criminal powers at the federal and provinicial levels as just being bad public policy. Instead, we gave provinces exclusive jurisdiction over "Property and civil rights". Money and the regulation of commerce and contracts is where the power is in an industrial economy. The power is not in deciding what's porn and what isn't, my misguided friend.
Moreover, our courts (to be fair, the Privy Council in the U.K., but nevermind that) also downplayed the Canadian federal power that comes with managing interprovincial trade, whereas the American constitutional powers went essentially nuts justifiying every new Federal department and regulatory authority with reference to insterstate trade regulation in America's constitution (and that little matter of the Civil War certainly didn't hurt a sharp realingment in fafor of the Federal constitutional authority in the USA, either).
Anyways - you are not simply a little wrong; you are DEAD wrong.
.Robert
Haley Barbour is a stanch Republican and a Republican presidential favorite. Him signing this is not a done deal.
Wow, that is interesting, and here I was thinking that gas was legal, as were the books from the book store.
On a related note - I often grab a couple of Fried Boudain Balls in the morning at the gas station before I start driving back. If I haven't taken a dump before I cross the state line (which I never stop to do - rest stops ewww) am I liable for the Fried Boudain Balls as well?
I'm tempted to file the paperwork to pay the taxes on it just to make the state officials laugh.
The preceding post was not a Slashvertisement.
Actually, it's my understanding that you pay federal tax (GST) on products bought out-of-province but not provincial taxes (at least in Ontario with PST).
But is having such a huge debt really a big deal anyway? I mean, as long as we keep paying the immediately due part, it doesn't even matter if the overall debt is growing. It's not like we can pay the debt we have now anyway.
In summary, fuck it.
So, I setup a proxy "service" in my state and charge a monthly fee. The charge is enough to keep the proxy fast and encrypted and not retain **any** log files.
$5/month for 5GB of download? $10/month for 10GB ....
Or you can just use tor.
Actually, most of the "blue" states make a net contribution in federal taxes, while the "red" states take that contribution. If the federal government's aid to the states collapses, it will be the south that pays while the north shrugs and continues much as things are now. It could conceivably lead to another civil war along the old lines, over the same reason: Economics. The south simply doesn't have the money or natural resources to survive without the assistance of the north. -_-
#fuckbeta #iamslashdot #dicemustdie
Our politicians rely on building the tax base by future population growth
Afaict in developed countries there is very little population growth. Some countries are even in population decline!
immigration can help aleviate this to some degree but that has issues of it's own.
note: i'm known as plugwash most places but i screwd up registering that here somehow in the past and now can't register
Here in the US I'm opposed to raising taxes to that of a Western European nation on the basis that we already on average work more hours per week than any other country. I'll consider letting my government raising taxes when I get the same pay I do now for working Western European hours.
my UID occurs in pi starting at the 384,199 digit after the decimal point.
There are not software sales. As we have all learned, software is licensed. No sale, not tax. You want to tax it? Make it a sale, and let me do with it as I please.
Please show me where taxes on the citizens hurt the economy
Well let's see. I can pay some money to the government to keep some homeless crackheads alive, or I can put useful people to work with my own money. Seems to me that useful people deserve money more.
They only way out of this is education, and education costs money.
No, the way out of this is to make stuff. Education helps you do that, but the real thing you need is individual initiative. Another way you could improve the American economy, and really only the American economy, is by getting rid of free trade.
This is my sig.
Maybe the feds should apply a flat rate to all sales, and then divide those monies up to all states based on population.
We have exactly that in Australia. Its called the Goods and Services Tax.
http://michaelsmith.id.au
If you walk into a CD store and buy a CD, you pay tax on it.
If you buy a CD from Amazon, you are also supposed to pay tax on it (lots of people don't declare it but under the law you are supposed to do it)
Why shouldn't the same thing apply just because the music is digital bits on your hard disk or iPod instead of digital bits of a round shiny bit of plastic?
You might want to find out about that tax fraud you've been committing.
Jeez, thanks a million for the advice.
While you're down there, would you like to blow me?
Hah -- captcha = counsels.
and let them know that you support a 10th Amendment resolution putting the federal government back in its rightful place as an agent of the states.
They should tax porn downloads, so the state gets a piece of each ass.
Ceci n'est pas une signature.
In many states, property tax is the primary source of income for local (county, city, fire district...) governments. Conveniently, those governments provide services to people using that property (social services, road maintenance, putting out fires...).
The economist-minded folks might also point out that if someone has a lot of land and not much income, the land isn't being used very effectively, so having to sell because taxes are too high will increase the efficiency of used. (I have some philosophical issues with this line of reasoning, but it's got a point.)
On the plus side, it means that if you live in a rural area but work and shop in the city, your house in the country gets a paved road, a sheriff's department, and fire protection. It also means school districts in areas with high house prices are better funded that districts in poor areas where parents are less able to compensate for a school's shortcomings. It's not a perfect system, but it works fairly well.
Ceci n'est pas une signature.
I'd rather cut spending FIRST....I think we could shed a LOT of cruft, before we actually need to raise taxes any more.
Light travels faster than sound. This is why some people appear bright until you hear them speak.........
...you will have no choice but to raise the tax...
There is one other choice and that is the one governments have traditionally taken when they went bankrupt, that is they had a crushing burden of debt. All governments nowadays have given themselves the power to create money out of nothing with which they can pay off whatever debt they may have. This of course causes runaway inflation of that particular color of Money, but the debt is paid off with worthless paper. Nowadays of course in a global economy, all the different colors of money bleed into one another and are intertwined. It is clear that such a fiscal collapse will eventually come worldwide because the United States is not the only government head over heels in debt. When, not if, that happens, there will arise from the ruins a world monetary and governmental system that will come to power on the promise to prevent such another such world wide economic meltdown in the future. The new system will include the mandatory issuance some sort of numerical identifier to every person. We have presently the precursor to this sort of thing with our Social Security and other national identification numbers. Cash will no longer be in existence and every transaction will be tracked.
It remains to be seen whether the world is on the brink of such a collapse already today, or whether there will be a period of recovery before such a meltdown finally does happen.
All theory is gray
It's one thing to ahve to stay up to date on 50 sales tax numbers, it's another for every state county city, etc . . . in the US.
That's been the major beef with the retailers -- all the local tax rates. I'm in CA and live in San Mateo county. I worked in Marin county. Since the fools at UPS would often arbitrarily refuse to deliver (even from Amazon) without an adult to receive and sign for a package, I had all my deliveries sent to my work address. However, companies that charged sales taxes on online purchases always calculated the tax on the higher rate at my billing address rather than the lower rate at the delivery address.
As for the jerks at UPS, I called and asked them why an unseen book had to be signed for and received by an adult at home -- the usual option to just sign the back of the non-delivery tag to release them from responsibility was not offered. They said it was a driver decision. If a particular driver found there were an unusual number of losses because someone was following him around and stealing packages, he could decide on the spot to make everyone receive all their packages in person.
Then the idiots said they could re-deliver the following day if I would stay home from work. I told them they could stuff that idea, too.
Their next offer was that I could pick it up at their office after I got off work. I pointed out that I left for work before they opened and got home after they closed and they were closed on Saturday and Sunday. They had no more suggestions except for them to send it back to Amazon after three useless delivery attempts.
To make up for their lack of imagination, I told them they could damned well put it back on a trruck and divert the delivery to my work address thirty miles from home. They thought that was quite the novel solution and complied.
In an even more bizarre event, my ex was getting DSL and the router was to be sent to her home some thirty miles south. She got a phone call that the delivery guy had been unable to find her address. Well, yeah -- she lived on a short street, about six blocks long. Some twenty years before, the state had put a freeway through, leaving two blocks on either side of the freeway. Apparently UPS had not gotten around to updating their maps in twenty years, then got on the wrong side and found a freeway in their path. Since I was going to install it for her, I called them and they refused to let me give them directions on exactly how to get to her house. It seems the drivers were so smart they didn't need directions. Then they gave me the same guff about picking it up at their offices. I told them the same thing about being open only during her work hours. Then I asked them to divert the shipment to the UPS office a couple of blocks from where she worked. No dice -- THEY DIDN'T HAVE THE ADDRESS OF THEIR OTHER OFFICE AND COULDN'T LOOK IT UP!!! Holy Jesus, these guys lied worse than anyone in the Bush administration. So I again said to divert it to my own home address, thirty miles away and they were happy to do the extra work for us.
The truly weird ending was that, after all their crap, I happened to go to her house the following day to receive some furniture to put it into her garage. I opened the screen door at the front of the house and the router box fell out from the screen and front doors.
These guys give a whole new meaning to the word "dorks".
Maybe the feds should apply a flat rate to all sales, and then divide those monies up to all states based on population.
If I felt it were worth it and tried really hard, I could possibly think up a dumber way to apportion the tax than basing it on population, which bears absolutely no relationship to online sales.
I'd rather cut spending FIRST....I think we could shed a LOT of cruft, before we actually need to raise taxes any more.
We don't have to raise taxes, all we have to do is eliminate tax cuts for the rich. The easiest way to do this is to simply institute a flat tax; manipulation of inflation is enough to prevent hoarding of cash. It's not the only way, though; Just simplify the tax code, as Bush promised to do (didn't the tax code get about four times longer under his watch?)
"You're right," Fisheye says. "I should have set it on 'whip' or 'chop.'"
Your understanding is incorrect. PST is technically required in all case to be remitted by the taxpayer. That's the theory. It rarely is. Collection of PST is enforced, however, by CCRA if the purchase crosses the US/Canadian border. It is otherwise on a corss-provincial sale if the product must be registered (i.e., a car).
The liability to pay PAT depends upon the residency of the purchaser - not where it is bought. It is a consumption tax. If it is consumed here, it is to be paid here.
.Robert
I'm not sure how they'd enforce it, but according to the language in the bill, if you're a MS resident, the tax applies regardless of where you happen to be when you make the purchase.
The Civil War was over economics now? Revisionist history, indeed.
It was about slavery. It was *always* about slavery. Absent that key factor, there would have been no secession and no Civil War.
Marxist analysis of historical conflicts on an macro-economic level is usually a helpful analytical tool. But it's *just a tool*. It does not explain cause and effect - and it rarely explains passions and hatreds that lead to civil war.
Charles and Mary Beard got it wrong.
.Robert
Say, you've got some money up there in Canada, don't you? And trees, we'll probably be needing some more of those by then. It's just been too damn cold up there to bother annexing you, but we've been working on that. Remember we have a habit of taking any land between us and an ocean, and there's one opening up above you.
Some people are honest still. My state has a use tax. So, when I buy from an online retailer, one that doesn't have a presence in my state, it's up to me to file and pay the tax, based on shipping address, to my state DOR. Although they'd probably never know if I just didn't pay it. Their minor purchases.
What is the difference between buying software online versus buying the package in a store? Not much really. Now, if they were to tax "subscriptions" in which gives you the ability to listen to, but not save, something, that may be another case entirely.
Cowboy Neal, is that you? Congratulations, you've made Goatse seem respectable.
Slaves are cheap labor.
Give me a couple bran muffins, a loaf of bread, and a bottle of soda, and I'll give them a download they can tax all they want.
"I got your taxes RIGHT HERE, pal....."
Knowing Google's lust for data collection, the Soviet Union is still alive and well inside the psyche of Sergey Brin....
Now if I download something slightly dodgy, you make sure the money goes to the company concerned so I don't get dragged of to court to pay the **AA's!
No didn't think so, it's going the way of all taxes. To pay for that government official's house repairs or free trip to Bermuda on one of those "assess if they do things the same as us" type of trips!
Windows guys please stop pissing on everyone and the Linux guys stop pissing in the wind, hoping to hit Windows guys!
While you're correct in that Canada does have troops in Afganistan, to imply Western Europe isn't is just as ignorant.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/War_in_Afghanistan_(2001%E2%80%93present)
You'll see that the UK and Germany individually are providing more troops than Canada and that's before including all the other European countries. Canada's troop count is more inline with France's contribution. So that's 3 countries doing as much if not more than Canada.
While I do support a flat tax or something like the FairTax....I'm not so much in thinking soaking the rich is the mindset we should have...especially nowdays, with the definition of 'rich' getting lower and lower.
The top like what 10% or the money makers in the US already pay abou 90% of the taxes....how much more do you soak them before it becomes a negative incentive to try to succeed?
I was looking at my paycheck...and I'm FAR from rich (I'm back on W2 hourly for now)...with fed, state and employment taxes...'m at a freaking 33% tax rate?!?! Add on local sales taxes and what have you...and that really soaks up my paycheck.
Frankly, I'd be happy with any system that let me pay a flat 17% or so tax rate.
Light travels faster than sound. This is why some people appear bright until you hear them speak.........
They attacked you - not us. Mainly because of shit you do and have done - and NOT because of some shit we do and have done.
Really? I didn't know that Canada had implemented Sharia law. The people who attacked the U.S. did so because the U.S. is not muslim.
The truth is that all men having power ought to be mistrusted. James Madison
You simply will not have a *choice* but to increase taxes in the USA to at least Canadian and possibly Western European levels if you don't deal with it soon enough.
Eat my ass -- when the US provides womb-to-tomb medical care and all the other benefits like the rest of these places, I'll give a moment's consideration to your solution.
Otherwise your proposition is nothing more than social engineering at its worst.
The rich have enough money that paying 90% tax leaves plenty of money for living.
You almost had me...until you didn't end it with 'eh', comrade.
You simply will not have a *choice* but to increase taxes in the USA to at least Canadian and possibly Western European levels if you don't deal with it soon enough. (My bet - you won't deal with it soon enough. Americans are nutty when it comes to taxes.) You'll put it off and put it off and then put it off somemore until there is no wiggle room left at all. And then you will point fingers at your politicians - instead of you the voters - which is *precisely* where the blame will lie.
I dunno. Unless someone provides a alternative currency the rest of the world is stuck with the USD and its inflationary policies.
You may say the US needs to raise taxes, but taxes decreases inflation and spurrs deflation so perhaps the lack of taxes is what is currently needed. The debt could go on forever (as long as no one provides an alternative currency) and not really hurt American citizens.
Of course if China decides one day that it wants to let its currency float and switch from a manufacturing to a service and management society, then we'll have problems.
"I am the king of the Romans, and am superior to rules of grammar!"
-Sigismund, Holy Roman Emperor (1368-1437)
This has been done in the past and there are people who would like to try this again. Imputed income is money that you never saw but they claim that you received the benefit of. To give an example, there was an attempt in the early 1990's by the US Congress to chrage people for imputed income on their mortgages. If the taxing authority (IRS) determined that your house payment was less than what the going rate for rent in your neighborhood was, they imputed that the difference was income on which you would be taxed. To put numbers to this, if you have $1000 a month house payments and houses in your area lease for $1500 a month you have an imputed income of $500 a month. At the end of the year they tag an additional, imaginary $6000 on your annual income on which they want real money paid for taxes. This idea could be applied to sales/use taxes for goods received.
Now move this to software. If the MSRP of MS Office is $600 (I don't have an exact number) then you are imputed to have earned $600 if you download OpenOffice. Therefore you own sales tax on $600 dollars even though you didn't pay any money. That would be about $50 here in Texas that you owe.
They can dream up about any way to gain tax revenue.
They tax food because they're a poor state with a conservative government and a lot of residents can't afford much else besides food and housing.
I say tax the digital downloads and get rid of the tax on food.
America has never been terribly rational about taxes and that it not going to change.
Typical comment of an intellect ossified by ideology. *Your* view on taxes is the only possible one, right? Get out of your little bubble once in a while and learn there's many different ways of doing things.
Thank you. Seriously. Thank you.
The top like what 10% or the money makers in the US already pay abou 90% of the taxes....how much more do you soak them before it becomes a negative incentive to try to succeed?
You do not have a right to profit.
Frankly, I'd be happy with any system that let me pay a flat 17% or so tax rate.
I would be in favor of a flat tax as well.
"You're right," Fisheye says. "I should have set it on 'whip' or 'chop.'"
Believe it or not, the sun still comes up every morning
What part of Canada are we talking about? Not in the winter if you live above the Arctic Circle, it doesn't. :P
They attacked you - not us. Mainly because of shit you do and have done - and NOT because of some shit we do and have done.
Really? I didn't know that Canada had implemented Sharia law. The people who attacked the U.S. did so because the U.S. is not muslim.
Well, that and because the West (including the US) has been a scapegoat for the hardships that those people have faced for years. To be fair there is some truth there. During the Cold War we spent a great deal of time in the region screwing around. Take a loot at Kermit Roosevelt, Jr and Operation Ajax for an example. Never-the-less, the "enemy" that those people were attacking was not the US. It is the entire Western World, Canada included and any Muslim that dares to have even a slightly differing view than their extremist one.
Tea Party. Here is comes again... :-)
Can I use my iTunes gift card to pay the tax?
Who is this "Mississippi Bill" person, and why does he thing he can tax things?
If he can do then so can I. I want to tax stuff too. First thing I want to tax is "People who don't know when something is a joke".
But in the US...I thought you pretty much were 'born' with all rights, excepted by those curtailed or modified by law.
If that's true...so far, there is no law against profit, so it must be a right everyone has, no?
Light travels faster than sound. This is why some people appear bright until you hear them speak.........
I am a Mississippian. I am a software developer.
This bill both shames and horrifies me.
1: interstate commerce clause of the US constitution. HELLO!
2: No state has no jurisdiction to force businesses in other states to pay its taxes.
3: 7% of gross income of the business, not gross income of sales in the state? So all it takes is 15 states to enact a similar law to force every software company sending software to those states to pay 105% of gross income in state taxes.
In the ever increasingly likely event that the America and Mississippi have gone sufficiently insane to allow this...
This will either end the sale of software in the state(s) that enact this law.
4: the degree of ignorance and stupidity that this bill displays fills me with rage.
Thank you.
Nathan
I don't see why everyone is so up in arms about a luxury tax. No one blinks when you have to pay extra for that new GulfStream jet. Taxing computer users in Mississippi is the same sort of thing...
Note, by the way, that Ms, like pretty much all the States (and unlike the Federal government), are required to balance their budgets.
You CLEARLY don't live in California.
We require our politicians to pass a balanced budget. They don't. The republican party here took a valiant stand (I think it was last year) and absolutely refused to pass the budget until it was at least balanced against made-up income projections. They didn't even mince words to the public. The democrats absolutely refused to pass a constitutional budget, even after that disgusting idea was proposed. (The states fiscal problems aren't just in the Democrat party, but this one seems to be centered there.) The budget hasn't been balanced for many years. We are in a dire deficit.
Furthermore, we require our politicians to pass a budget on time. The last several years have been unconstitutionally (and inexcusably) late.
So yes, we're among the states "required to balance their budgets". If only it worked that way.
(CA has, or at least had, the 5th largest economy in the world. Now if only we could get rid of these filthy, corrupt, crooked, state ruining, power hungry jerks!)
I won't join Slashcott. OTOH, If Beta goes live, I just won't be back until it's fixed. Sorry Dice.
to the person responding to you. S/he made a comment, and it probably had an effect on scoring of your comment. Slashdot, as it currently functions, has an asshat way of allowing -- without citations or proof -- other users to just do hit-and-run. Neither a freaking low account number nor high number of "esteemed" posts should be qualification for anyone to knock down someone's scores. It should take an odd number, like in voting, to tip one way or the other. It would be nice if the currently broken /. system "hunted" for votes when a comment is downgraded. Even up-scored comments need to be reigned in, too. But, as i said numerous times in the past, /. is irrefutably, and incorrigibly broken as regards the submission of stories and as regards scoring of comments.
Previously: "Linux... Toward the Sunrise..." Now: "Linux... Toward the-- No, now, part of Every Sunrise"
That is correct, although nobody has pointed out the 10th ammendment (for what little power it still has left). While a federal law trumps state law, if the federal constitution makes the law illegal then it has no power at all. In theory federal laws can only cover areas provided for in the constitution. Unfortunately, one of those areas is regulation of interstate commerce, and that has been used to justify federal laws for just about anything...
Funny, it's seems obvious this is designed to catch people using rent deals to hide income. Which is something no one I've met would thing is fair, but you never mention it. You may hate taxes, we all do, but that doesn't mean you need to become so biased you can't talk in a fairly.
>But seriously, people like to justify property by making it some natural right.
But seriously, people like to justify life itself by making it some natural right. Obviously, if someone could better use the oxygen you breathe, by all means, we should take it from you and give it to him.
Property is survival. A human depends on secure access to calories, and the land we grow wheat upon is now our mechanism of survival. The transition to ordered society based around agriculture is permanent.
> we don't give animals property rights to their habitats
What? And so what are we citizens to our government? Animals lucky to be allowed to live? Government is a human social construct designed to govern humans, nothing more nothing less. Perhaps you're arguing we treat them like second-class citizens? Slaves even? Weird, considering "protected" endangered species may as well have "equal" rights to us humans.
So much for a government of, for, and by the people.
If property is theft, theft from whom? Your town? Your country?
How can one steal what isn't owned?
Oh, and it's Proudhon, not Marx.
You missed the key point of the OP. Al Capone was prosecuted under the stipulation you quoted because that's INCOME tax. The OP specially asked about law relating to SALES tax.
Granted, that is correct. I did indeed misread that. The problem is the mixed jurisdictions here. Sales tax is local not federal and Al Capone was prosecuted under federal laws. Also, stolen property is conceptually (unearned) income in the same way that Gift Taxes are applied as income coming from gifts.
Although US federal income taxes apply to the profits from the sales of illegal drugs (and stolen property), I do not believe I've ever heard of States, etc. going after "lost" sales taxes from those sales. Given the way things are going in California, Arnold could possibly lead the way in that.
Another interesting question is, do bribes to public officials count as sales and should sales tax apply? I think so. It's not called "buying" for nothing. And given the current climate, should you pay capital gains tax on a bribe to a City Councilman who later gets elected Mayor? Would the shame of being treated as an inanimate commodity bring integrity back to the governments of the world? Probably not, alas.
"electrically transferred digital products"? What, like digital TV? Cable TV? Satellite Radio? That *will* be interesting! (IHNRTFA) (I Have Not Read The Funny Article)
Last I checked, we've spent $15,000,000,000.00 on a war in Afghanistan and lost a couple hundred Canadian soldier's **lives** there fighting a war because of some nutbars who attacked AMERICA. They attacked you - not us. Mainly because of shit you do and have done - and NOT because of some shit we do and have done.
We fairly clear on that part?
Still, given the audacity of the motherfuckers in attacking our closest allies and best friends, spending all that blood and treasure to assist America in kicking their asses was the least we could do for our best friends. And unlike most of the the Western Europeans, we actually put our guys in harm's way in Afghanistan. Our troops are there to fight. Not to be stationed in a base with orders not to fight and just fly a flag and call it "helping".
We fairly clear on that part too?
Still, that's the least Canada could do, given 9/11.
The least you could do, otoh, might be to maybe acknowledge that and say thank you (and sorry for making the war unwinnable and your sacrifice meaningless with that second front in Iraq thing. Real sorry about that guys.)
Just sayin'.
In the case of Iraq, You coulda / shoulda said No.
It was/is a illegal war in all respects. Started by an egomaniac with a thorn in his arse, and an oily film of greed in his eyes.
Yes, I heard the 'You're either with us, or against us" crap. Doesn't make it right.
But since our Northern neighbors are there, and helping, no matter the pretense, I for one do sincerely Thank You for your Nations sacrifice in the face of fear, uncertainty and doubt.
Thank You, Canada.
So, what does any of this have to do with digital taxes in Mississippi again ?
The top like what 10% or the money makers in the US already pay abou 90% of the taxes
Well, yes, that may be true, but the top 10% of money makers make something like 98% of the money. If you actually break it down by percentage of income earned to percentage of taxes paid, it quickly becomes clear that the top wage earners actually pay a lower percentage of their income to taxes than do the lower incomes. And that doesn't even include the billions of dollars of tax-free income that are 'earned' by the 'overseas' (read: Cayman Islands) branches of US corporations. In fact over a quarter of large US corporations (>$250,000,000 in assets or >$50,000,000 in gross receipts) paid no US income taxes in 2005. About two-thirds of U.S. companies and foreign firms doing business in this country paid no federal income taxes from 1998 to 2005. Sure some of those companies legitimately lost money, but hard to believe they all did.
The reality is that while the rich like to complain about their high tax rate, few people in that top tax bracket actually pay anything close to the amount they owe. When you earn a million or more a year, you can afford to hire a very good accountant. You complain about your high taxes paid, but remember, if the rich actually paid the same percentage you did, everyone's tax rate would go down.