Slashdot Mirror


Connecticut Considers Digital Download Tax

SonicSpike writes in with a story about the latest state contemplating raising revenues by taxing the net. "Downloading music, movies, e-books and Apps could soon cost Connecticut residents more as lawmakers consider a tax on digital downloads. The bill, proposed by the General Assembly's Finance, Review and Bonding Committee, would have consumers pay the 6.35% sales tax on any electronic transfer. Supporters say the bill would level the playing field for brick-and-mortar retailers in the state who are already required to charge Connecticut sales tax to consumers who purchase these products in their stores. About 25 states around the country have already begun taxing digital downloads."

23 of 244 comments (clear)

  1. Re:Nahh by ColdWetDog · · Score: 4, Insightful

    Couldn't you just use an access point across the street ( and likely in another state) and bypass the whole problem?

    --
    Faster! Faster! Faster would be better!
  2. Three things... by readandburn · · Score: 5, Interesting

    1) The article is pretty much the summary? 2) "About" 25 other states? They can't even do the research to see exactly how many states already do this? 3) Half the states ("about" anyway) already do this, yet it is news on Slashdot now? Yes, I must be new here.

  3. I am not surpised by Dolphinzilla · · Score: 3

    if they thought they could tax the air we breath they'd do it....

    1. Re:I am not surpised by hairyfeet · · Score: 5, Interesting

      But if they didn't how could Sen Porkman and Congressman Kickbackus waste money like drunks in vegas and throw away billions on useless military shit? I mean look at the F35, stealth makes it both a lousy fighter (lack of engagement time due to no external fuel tanks and lack of firepower due to no missile hardpoints) AND a lousy bomber (both the fuel and hardpoints problems) so you'll end up with the F15 having to babysit the damned thing so it don't get its ass kicked, then of course there is the Ford carrier, we already have TEN to the next largest countries TWO but hey, who cares if we are ass deep in red ink,gotta show our military muscles right?

      Frankly we could probably lower taxes AND pay for our social programs if we just got rid of really dumb shit. Get rid of the dumbass F35 for more F15s and add some stealth eagles if you want something "stealth", fix the damned border so we aren't wasting billions in law enforcement and security theater when a terrorist could literally drive a rider truck with a bomb right across the border and into any city they wanted, get rid of all the loopholes that let corps like GE pay ZERO taxes on billions in profits, tax the living shit out of the speculators that are constantly flipping stocks and instead reward actual long term investment so that companies can actually do things that will grow their businesses without fear that the speculators will tank their stock price, basically bring common fucking sense back into the system because lord knows we are severely lacking in it ATM.

      --
      ACs don't waste your time replying, your posts are never seen by me.
    2. Re:I am not surpised by TFAFalcon · · Score: 3, Insightful

      Do you think prices would decrease if corporate taxes were abolished? No. Corporations would just pocket the money and invest it in more bonuses.

      Meanwhile, income taxes would increase to make up for the reduced tax income.

      Also, people pass on their taxes to their customers and employers too. So why not have identical taxes for corporations and individuals? Why not tax people on profit instead of income? Why should a person that spends all of his income on basic needs like food and shelter pay taxes, while a corporation that spends it's entire earning on production costs pay nothing?

      You might argue that the corporation employs people - but then so does the individual. He keeps farmers and his landlord employed at the least.

    3. Re:I am not surpised by daniel_i_l · · Score: 4, Insightful

      Actually, microeconomics theory shows that the prices would drop and the corporations would make a higher profit. Some companies will be willing to slightly lower the prices. This will pressure other companies to lower prices until an equilibrium is reached. Eventually, the abolished taxes will go partly to the consumers and partly to the producers.

    4. Re:I am not surpised by W3BMAST3R101 · · Score: 5, Insightful

      That works when you aren't in a monopoly or cartel-controlled market, which all of ours are now.

      Thanks to the polices of the State that encourage this behavior.

    5. Re:I am not surpised by TFAFalcon · · Score: 3, Insightful

      And this theory has shown itself to work in the digital marketplace? Products are 50% cheaper when downloaded compared to the retail version right?

  4. How by wisnoskij · · Score: 3, Insightful

    How do they actually make these online taxes work? force every single online payment gateway to tax every transaction from your state and send you the money?

    --
    Troll is not a replacement for I disagree.
  5. Can I pay by koan · · Score: 3, Funny

    in Bitcoin and Quatloos

    --
    "If any question why we died, Tell them because our fathers lied."
  6. "Levelling the playing field" by J'raxis · · Score: 3, Insightful

    "We steal from these guys over here. So we should steal from you, too."

    Naturally the brick-and-mortar stores are going to favor fairness in the application of the tax laws. But why do we never see them saying, "You don't tax all these business, so stop taxing us?" Or, "Taxing these businesses is going to double your tax base, so how about cutting the tax rate in half?"

    No, instead, the government wants more money and more control over a greater number of people and businesses. So they sell it to local businesses as "levelling the playing field" and these businesses eat it right up and support the ever-increasing growth of government.

  7. Texas does this by LittleBigScript · · Score: 3, Informative

    Apple aleady does this in the App Store when I purchase in Texas. If I purchase an app in another state, Apple still charges me for Texas sales tax. I guess it is a shipment to my home, not to my device.

  8. Re:So what? by K.+S.+Kyosuke · · Score: 4, Funny

    So only stupid people pay real money for "ephemeral" products?

    I don't know about that, but for sure only ephemeral people pay for stupid products.

    --
    Ezekiel 23:20
  9. Empty Rhetoric by lightknight · · Score: 4, Insightful

    "Supporters say the bill would level the playing field for brick-and-mortar retailers in the state who are already required to charge Connecticut sales tax to consumers who purchase these products in their stores."

    An argument could easily be made that the playing field is already level. The advantage of ordering online is one of cost, with typically lower prices and less of a drain on local infrastructure (it costs the state / local government more to provide fire / police protection / emergency medical services / roads / etc. to a few dozen brick-and-mortar stores than to a single warehouse), and possibly hard to get items (ones which cannot be carried locally, for lack of space in a store; commercial space being at a premium). The advantage to brick-and-mortar stores is time, with the more popular items you are typically looking for already in stock, hence the price premium ("I need this item today").

    As such, the advantages on both sides balance each other out fairly well.

    This tax, of course, is then a simple cash grab. Going off a stereotype of legislatures, we will assume that the state coffers are beginning to, if not already are, empty. As such, someone took a look at things that are considered popular enough to tax (demand is unlikely to change, so it's *free* money they can skim off the top, without impacting the industry; this is also an economics-FAIL, but the people in charge love to hear things that confirm their bias), and barfed up a semi-palatable reason for this new tax.

       

    --
    I am John Hurt.
    1. Re:Empty Rhetoric by artor3 · · Score: 4, Interesting

      Why shouldn't online purchases be taxable? Slashdotters always complain when people demand different laws for things "on the internet". Why is this an exception?

      We need to fund the government somehow. Having a mile-wide loophole for purchases made on the information super-highway is archaic and counterproductive. I'd prefer no sales tax at all, since it's a regressive tax, but if we're going to have one, it should be applied everywhere.

    2. Re:Empty Rhetoric by cob666 · · Score: 3, Insightful

      In the case of the this story, the sales tax would apply to people that live in CT and buy something online from a vendor that does not have a physical presence in CT and currently pay no income tax. This is troublesome on many levels, the first being that why does the state of CT have the authority to force an entity in a different state to collect sales tax payable to CT (not to mention that in order to collect CT sales tax the vendor would have to have a CT sales tax permit that currently costs $100). Is every vendor in the entire country supposed to just up and order a CT sales tax permit? That is just absurd.

      Now what happens when other states implement the same thing? Is every vendor expected to have a sales tax permit for every state in the country that collects sales tax? There are quite a few states that have different tax rates depending on where you live (or rather based on where the vendor is located). So, once you alter the methodology from vendor location to consumer location the whole concept breaks down pretty quickly.

      But, what really bothers me is that the state of CT ALREADY has a system in place to collect sales tax for citizens of CT. The CT sales and use tax includes a use section, which means that if you buy something and the cost did not include CT sales tax then you are responsible for paying the use tax (which is identical to the sales tax percentage) when you file your state tax return. Wouldn't it be easier to enforce this than to try to go after venders located in states that CT could have ZERO jurisdiction over?

      --
      Do what thou wilt shall be the whole of the Law - Aleister Crowley
  10. Re:Nahh by wrathpwn · · Score: 4, Interesting

    What about a VPN connection to another state? And if that works, would it become illegal?

  11. Sales tax... by Roogna · · Score: 5, Insightful

    I realize the world doesn't work like this. But in my opinion if they're going to tax the purchase it should then fall under all the rules of buying from a Brick and Mortar store too, such as the First-sale doctrine. After all, if I buy a book from a brick and mortar I'm legally allowed to sell that book to someone else. On the other hand, when I download from iTunes I have no way to sell that item, because I didn't purchase it, I "licensed" it. Which the businesses love to remind us. If I'm then being taxed as if I'd purchased it, then the states should require the companies by law to treat it like any physical purchase and allow me to transfer the ownership of it.

  12. Re:Nahh by readandburn · · Score: 5, Informative

    PayPal is never a solution to anything.

  13. The real problem by chowdahhead · · Score: 3

    In CT, we have the highest state tax on gasoline and among the highest in tax per capita. We probably have the most underfunded state pension fund in the country. The state enacted a tax credit last year that it can't afford, and is being blamed, in part, for the budget deficit we now have. CT has had a spending problem for years, and the answer isn't raising taxes.

  14. Re:Nahh by readandburn · · Score: 4, Insightful

    PayPal is.

  15. Re:Nahh by Ihmhi · · Score: 5, Insightful

    That would never work. After all, people never regularly cross the border into Pennsylvania or Delaware to buy fireworks or fill their trunk with tax-free cigarettes. Nope, never happens.

  16. Re:Nahh by penix1 · · Score: 3, Insightful

    A better way to "level the playing field" would be to eliminate the sales tax for the brick and mortar stores. That would also increase the chances of those living in border states coming to the brick and mortar stores to avoid the taxes in their states.

    But no, they won't even consider that because it just may lower their revenue in the short term and we all know no politician thinks beyond the next election.

    --
    This is a sig. This is only a sig. Had this been an actual sig you would have been informed where to tune for more sigs.