Internet tax battle revisited

http://news.com.com/Politicians+weigh+renewal+of+Net+access+tax+ban/2100-1028-6185868.html?part=dht&tag=nl.e703

So basically, the intention was to get everyone use to the internet, make it a necessary commodity of life, and then start taxing it.

Gotta love the way some politicians think.

article wrote:

previous attempts at renewing the ban for more than two to four years have failed, in part because of resistance from state and local government lobby groups. State government representatives caution against making the moratorium permanent, saying it would deprive states indefinitely of vital revenue sources and that its original purpose--boosting the nascent Internet to commercial viability--has essentially been accomplished.

The problem is that the money has to come from somewhere.  Sales tax from online purchases are rarely paid by individuals, so state and local governments can't get money that way.  Their alternative is to raise sales tax and property tax in their areas for real life purchases.  That annoys everyone, and penalizes people who don't have enough money to buy crap online. 

Further, the aging, selfish, boomer generation have whined so much about Property Taxes and Insurance, that my insurance company won't renew my insurance policy on a rental I have.  All those douchebags that wanted to refinance their house over the last few years found out that when you refinance, you get an appraisal.  If the house value goes up, your taxes go up, dummy.

People don't want to pay taxes, but they sure do love those shiny new roads and streetlights and electical grids and water mains, etc. 

I don't want to pay connection taxes any more than you do, but infrastructure isn't free and we've got a war to pay for....

ScanIAm wrote:



The problem is that the money has to come from somewhere.  Sales tax from online purchases are rarely paid by individuals, so state and local governments can't get money that way.  Their alternative is to raise sales tax and property tax in their areas for real life purchases.  That annoys everyone, and penalizes people who don't have enough money to buy crap online. 

Further, the aging, selfish, boomer generation have whined so much about Property Taxes and Insurance, that my insurance company won't renew my insurance policy on a rental I have.  All those douchebags that wanted to refinance their house over the last few years found out that when you refinance, you get an appraisal.  If the house value goes up, your taxes go up, dummy.

People don't want to pay taxes, but they sure do love those shiny new roads and streetlights and electical grids and water mains, etc. 

I don't want to pay connection taxes any more than you do, but infrastructure isn't free and we've got a war to pay for....

The government is resposnable for infrastructure of the web?
I thought it was all private companies that took care of this?

I am fairly certain that private companies own the lines at least.

phreaks wrote:



ScanIAm wrote:  The problem is that the money has to come from somewhere.  Sales tax from online purchases are rarely paid by individuals, so state and local governments can't get money that way.  Their alternative is to raise sales tax and property tax in their areas for real life purchases.  That annoys everyone, and penalizes people who don't have enough money to buy crap online.  Further, the aging, selfish, boomer generation have whined so much about Property Taxes and Insurance, that my insurance company won't renew my insurance policy on a rental I have.  All those douchebags that wanted to refinance their house over the last few years found out that when you refinance, you get an appraisal.  If the house value goes up, your taxes go up, dummy. People don't want to pay taxes, but they sure do love those shiny new roads and streetlights and electical grids and water mains, etc.  I don't want to pay connection taxes any more than you do, but infrastructure isn't free and we've got a war to pay for....

The government is resposnable for infrastructure of the web?
I thought it was all private companies that took care of this?

I am fairly certain that private companies own the lines at least.

Not the the infrastructure of the web, the infrastructure of the country.  That includes:

roads
powerlines
hospitals
firestations
police stations
schools
traffic control
water
sewage
etc.

Plus, you have to hire people to manage these entities.  Then you have to hire people to pay the people who manage the entities.  Then you have to hire people to make sure that people pay their taxes so you can pay for the people and entities that they use.

ScanIAm wrote:



phreaks wrote:  ScanIAm wrote:  The problem is that the money has to come from somewhere.  Sales tax from online purchases are rarely paid by individuals, so state and local governments can't get money that way.  Their alternative is to raise sales tax and property tax in their areas for real life purchases.  That annoys everyone, and penalizes people who don't have enough money to buy crap online.  Further, the aging, selfish, boomer generation have whined so much about Property Taxes and Insurance, that my insurance company won't renew my insurance policy on a rental I have.  All those douchebags that wanted to refinance their house over the last few years found out that when you refinance, you get an appraisal.  If the house value goes up, your taxes go up, dummy. People don't want to pay taxes, but they sure do love those shiny new roads and streetlights and electical grids and water mains, etc.  I don't want to pay connection taxes any more than you do, but infrastructure isn't free and we've got a war to pay for.... The government is resposnable for infrastructure of the web? I thought it was all private companies that took care of this? I am fairly certain that private companies own the lines at least.

Not the the infrastructure of the web, the infrastructure of the country.  That includes:

roads
powerlines
hospitals
firestations
police stations
schools
traffic control
water
sewage
etc.

Plus, you have to hire people to manage these entities.  Then you have to hire people to pay the people who manage the entities.  Then you have to hire people to make sure that people pay their taxes so you can pay for the people and entities that they use.

Ummm, what do those things have to do with the the Internet?
Are they going to begin taxing trips to the library as well?

How about levying a tax to enter the grocery store?

I don't see how those things you pointed out are relevant.

None of those things have to do with buying a meal or paying for groceries or owning land, either.  We pay taxes so that we have these things. 

Cities, counties, and states are losing tax revenue on internet sales because most people don't pay taxes on their purchases.  Further, the citizenry have whined their way into paying less and less property taxes, so where does the money for these things come from?

One option is a tax on internet usage.  There are plenty of other options, but I guarantee that each of them will also balk at paying.

There is plenty of precent for this, and since internet usage is a luxury, not a neccessity, it has a better chance of being taxed.

ScanIAm wrote:



None of those things have to do with buying a meal or paying for groceries or owning land, either.  We pay taxes so that we have these things. 

Cities, counties, and states are losing tax revenue on internet sales because most people don't pay taxes on their purchases.  Further, the citizenry have whined their way into paying less and less property taxes, so where does the money for these things come from?

???

money.cnn.com wrote:

Nationwide, property tax collections rose 7 percent in 2004, to more than $324 billion. Over the past five years, they've climbed 36.6 percent, about 6.4 percent a year.

"Unlike income, or even sales taxes, property taxes are not accurate indicators of your cash at hand," said Ahern. They can go up faster than income.

http://money.cnn.com/2005/06/07/pf/taxes/property_taxes_up/index.htm

~ Notice the top 5 highest property tax states. Yup that's me on the bottom. ~ Phreaks

ScanIAm wrote:



One option is a tax on internet usage.  There are plenty of other options, but I guarantee that each of them will also balk at paying.

There is plenty of precent for this, and since internet usage is a luxury, not a neccessity, it has a better chance of being taxed.

I'm already taxed on my internet usage as it is delivered over the cable lines, which are already taxed. So you are a proponent of a tax on tax?

This is where you and I have differing opinions. I believe the money I earn is mine, you believe it's the governments'.


Interesting read here, (not totally relavent to this conversation, but interesting nontheless) if you're interested.

http://www.vernonjacobs.com/tax-trends.htm

phreaks wrote:



ScanIAm wrote:  None of those things have to do with buying a meal or paying for groceries or owning land, either.  We pay taxes so that we have these things.  Cities, counties, and states are losing tax revenue on internet sales because most people don't pay taxes on their purchases.  Further, the citizenry have whined their way into paying less and less property taxes, so where does the money for these things come from?

???

money.cnn.com wrote: Nationwide, property tax collections rose 7 percent in 2004, to more than $324 billion. Over the past five years, they've climbed 36.6 percent, about 6.4 percent a year. "Unlike income, or even sales taxes, property taxes are not accurate indicators of your cash at hand," said Ahern. They can go up faster than income. http://money.cnn.com/2005/06/07/pf/taxes/property_taxes_up/index.htm ~ Notice the top 5 highest property tax states. Yup that's me on the bottom. ~ Phreaks

It's articles like this that are used to back up the claim that less property taxes should be paid.  You have to realize, though, that taxes are assessed on a percentage basis, not a monetary basis, so even if they climbed 6.4 percent a year, property values went up at least that much.  What didn't go up was the percentage of property value.  In many places (including Florida) people are pushing through the concept of extending homeowner's exemption to all residences (including 2nd, 3rd, rentals) and exempting the first $300k of the house from any tax at all.

If this happens, states, counties, and cities have to make up the difference by raising other taxes.  People get all excited about an income tax break and then complain about how high property taxes are without recognizing the 2 are related.

phreaks wrote:

ScanIAm wrote:  One option is a tax on internet usage.  There are plenty of other options, but I guarantee that each of them will also balk at paying. There is plenty of precent for this, and since internet usage is a luxury, not a neccessity, it has a better chance of being taxed.

I'm already taxed on my internet usage as it is delivered over the cable lines, which are already taxed. So you are a proponent of a tax on tax?

I think you'll find, if you do the math on your bill, that you aren't taxed on the tax. 

I'm not a proponent of this bill, I'm simply pointing out that the money has to come from somewhere. 

phreaks wrote:

This is where you and I have differing opinions. I believe the money I earn is mine, you believe it's the governments'.

I believe that most of it is yours, and some of it is ours (societies).  You are welcome to buy/invade your own uninhabited land somewhere, and build your own society where all money earned goes to you  

In the current society we live in, though, many of us decided we would be willing to give up some of our money in order to have safe food, paved roads, and educated children. 

phreaks wrote:

Interesting read here, (not totally relavent to this conversation, but interesting nontheless) if you're interested.

http://www.vernonjacobs.com/tax-trends.htm

Alas, I get booted from half of the links I try to hit due to our draconian firewall system, but I'll try to take a look.

ScanIAm wrote:



phreaks wrote: This is where you and I have differing opinions. I believe the money I earn is mine, you believe it's the governments'.

I believe that most of it is yours, and some of it is ours (societies).  You are welcome to buy/invade your own uninhabited land somewhere, and build your own society where all money earned goes to you   

Would be nice if that’s where most of the money went.
For the US, more than half of the federal budget goes to “entitlement spending.” That’s welfare, social security, Medicare and Medicate. Not to mention the billions handed out in farm subsidies to pay famers not to farm.  Nor the billions of dollars to house, feed, and secure the millions in prison on drug-possession charges. Nor the billions spent going after the gang crime created by said drug laws.
And let’s not forget that the federal government isn’t even supposed to be able levy a direct tax on individuals (It was done with a constitutional amendment and a law that was *supposed* to be temporary during World War II, wonder who forgot to repeal it?).
</rant>
Well, anyway, the point is the government has way more money than it needs. What it needs to do is cut spending, not raise taxes. 

ScanIAm wrote:



phreaks wrote:  ScanIAm wrote:  None of those things have to do with buying a meal or paying for groceries or owning land, either.  We pay taxes so that we have these things.  Cities, counties, and states are losing tax revenue on internet sales because most people don't pay taxes on their purchases.  Further, the citizenry have whined their way into paying less and less property taxes, so where does the money for these things come from? ??? money.cnn.com wrote: Nationwide, property tax collections rose 7 percent in 2004, to more than $324 billion. Over the past five years, they've climbed 36.6 percent, about 6.4 percent a year. "Unlike income, or even sales taxes, property taxes are not accurate indicators of your cash at hand," said Ahern. They can go up faster than income. http://money.cnn.com/2005/06/07/pf/taxes/property_taxes_up/index.htm ~ Notice the top 5 highest property tax states. Yup that's me on the bottom. ~ Phreaks

It's articles like this that are used to back up the claim that less property taxes should be paid.  You have to realize, though, that taxes are assessed on a percentage basis, not a monetary basis, so even if they climbed 6.4 percent a year, property values went up at least that much. 

Has your property value increased over 30% over the last 5 years?

I know mine certainly hasn't, in fact right now it has decreased (since 2 years ago) due to the current 'slump'. Yet my taxes have almost doubled.

ScanIAm wrote:



What didn't go up was the percentage of property value.  In many places (including Florida) people are pushing through the concept of extending home-owner's exemption to all residences (including 2nd, 3rd, rentals) and exempting the first $300k of the house from any tax at all.

Not sure what you're referring to, but we can't claim any property tax  'exemptions' in this neck of the woods. Again, my state has one of the highest property taxes in the country, and is one of only five states that don't even allow tax exemptions on Social Security (yup, we tax our retiree's social security checks)

ScanIAm wrote:



If this happens, states, counties, and cities have to make up the difference by raising other taxes.  People get all excited about an income tax break and then complain about how high property taxes are without recognizing the 2 are related.

You're from Florida, so perhaps you are simply applying the Floridian model of a relatively low tax burden (along with an (apparently) myriad of tax exemptions and shelters to your entire line of thinking on this matter).

If you own property in RI or receive any kind of income what-so-ever, you are paying taxes on it, no matter what. Meanwhile our schools are outdated, the roads are horrendous, there's a one year 'waiting' period for any kind of disability insurance and the kids don't have many decent parks. It goes on and on.

Our natural gas is only cheaper than 6 other states (mainly due to taxes), tobacco, booze and liquid gas are also in the upper echelons of the tax ladder compared to most other states.

Example, I pay $12.42 per cubic foot for natural gas to heat my home (and it gets really cold in winter) here, you pay $10.58.

Check it:

The chart below compares Florida taxes under the proposed Constitutional Amendment to other states.

State	Property Tax	Sales Tax	Personal Income Tax	State Max. Tax Total
Rhode Island	Yes	7%	3.75% - 9.9%	16.9% plus property taxes
California	Yes	7.25%	1% - 9.3%	16.55% plus property taxes
New Jersey	Yes	7%	1.4% - 8.97%	15.97% plus property taxes
Vermont	Yes	6%	3.6% - 9.5%	15.5% plus property taxes
Michigan	Yes	6%	3% - 9%	15% plus property taxes
Minnesota	Yes	6.5%	5.35% - 7.85%	14.35% plus property taxes
South Carolina	Yes	6%	2.5% - 7%	13% plus property taxes
Arkansas	Yes	6%	1% - 7%	13% plus property taxes
Mississippi	Yes	7%	3% - 5%	12% plus property taxes
Indiana	Yes	6%	3.4%	9.40% plus property taxes
Florida	NONE	8.5%	NONE	8.5%

Do the math, roughly 17% of my income is absorbed by the state, then factor in federal income tax (another 32%) and property and excize tax, now add the sin tax for my smokes, lottery and booze.  And let's not forget the 7% tax on anything I purchase (on top of the 'sin' tax for sinful items).  Now, factor in the 8% Income tax that Massachusetts claims for giving me the priveledge of working there.  No wonder I have no dough even though I break my blocks every day working 12 hours.

There has to be a better way, cuz I will never get ahead with this current scheme.

ScanIAm wrote:



phreaks wrote: ScanIAm wrote:  One option is a tax on internet usage.  There are plenty of other options, but I guarantee that each of them will also balk at paying. There is plenty of precent for this, and since internet usage is a luxury, not a neccessity, it has a better chance of being taxed. I'm already taxed on my internet usage as it is delivered over the cable lines, which are already taxed. So you are a proponent of a tax on tax?

I think you'll find, if you do the math on your bill, that you aren't taxed on the tax. 

No, I'm not taxed on a tax, but I am already taxed on the cable lines that deliver my internet and taxed on the actual service itself.

ScanIAm wrote:



I'm not a proponent of this bill, I'm simply pointing out that the money has to come from somewhere. 

Like the person above me so eloquently put it, stop frivolous government spending. How much tax dollars are wasted due to keeping drug users incarcerated alone.

Drug laws were enacted due to racism. Stop locking people up for living their lives, even out-patient treatment would be cheaper.

There are tons of ways to cut spending, but ever since he 60's, taxes have increased exponentially each year.

ScanIAm wrote:



phreaks wrote: This is where you and I have differing opinions. I believe the money I earn is mine, you believe it's the governments'.

I believe that most of it is yours, and some of it is ours (societies).  You are welcome to buy/invade your own uninhabited land somewhere, and build your own society where all money earned goes to you  

In the current society we live in, though, many of us decided we would be willing to give up some of our money in order to have safe food, paved roads, and educated children. 

You only say that because you pay a disproportionately smaller amount of taxes than I do.

[emphasis added for effect]

ScanIAm wrote:



phreaks wrote: Interesting read here, (not totally relavent to this conversation, but interesting nontheless) if you're interested. http://www.vernonjacobs.com/tax-trends.htm

Alas, I get booted from half of the links I try to hit due to our draconian firewall system, but I'll try to take a look.

EDIT: I almost forgot... I live in RI and Work in Mass. So I get the double whammy on state income taxes.

ScanIAm wrote:



Cities, counties, and states are losing tax revenue on internet sales because most people don't pay taxes on their purchases.  Further, the citizenry have whined their way into paying less and less property taxes, so where does the money for these things come from?

One option is a tax on internet usage.  There are plenty of other options, but I guarantee that each of them will also balk at paying.

There is plenty of precent for this, and since internet usage is a luxury, not a neccessity, it has a better chance of being taxed.

May I change some wordings from the above paragraph, so we have to pay for riding on bicycles on roads and streets:

Modified wrote:

Cities, counties, and states are losing tax revenue on people traveling on bike because most these people don't pay for gasoline on their ride.  Further, the citizenry have whined their way into paying less and less property taxes, so where does the money for these things come from?

One option is a tax on road usage for bikes.  There are plenty of other options, but I guarantee that each of them will also balk at paying.

There is plenty of precent for this, and since bike usage is a luxury, not a neccessity, it has a better chance of being taxed.

God knows if they'll charge fees for walking on the street one day...

If government need more income, it should adjust tax rates, instead of creating another type of tax. Complex tax rules suppress economy.

I thought this was interesting:

USA Today wrote:

Bottom line: Taxpayers are now on the hook for a record $59.1 trillion in liabilities, a 2.3% increase from 2006. That amount is equal to $516,348 for every U.S. household. By comparison, U.S. households owe an average of $112,043 for mortgages, car loans, credit cards and all other debt combined.

Unfunded promises made for Medicare, Social Security and federal retirement programs account for 85% of taxpayer liabilities. State and local government retirement plans account for much of the rest.

http://usatoday.printthis.clickability.com/pt/cpt?action=cpt&title=USATODAY.com&expire=&urlID=22498576&fb=Y&url=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.usatoday.com%2Fprintedition%2Fnews%2F20070529%2F1a_lede29.art.htm&partnerID=1660