
“Netflix tax” may be coming soon to your bill - becewumuy
http://www.cbsnews.com/news/netflix-tax-streaming-services-soon-coming-to-your-bill/
======
emodendroket
> They’re calling it a utility, so it can be taxed like water and electricity.

Curious how it's not a utility when we start talking about regulating who
provides Internet service and under what terms, but then it is one when they
want to tax your use of it.

~~~
thedufer
"it" in the article is Netflix (generally, video streaming). It sounds like
you're talking about internet service. It seems perfectly reasonable to call
one of those a utility and one not.

~~~
emodendroket
It doesn't seem reasonable to call Netflix a utility but not Internet service,
though.

------
throwaway76543
A municipal tax on cable TV can be enforced because there's a physical line to
a residence in the municipality.

What's stopping users from ordering netflix to an "address" in a tax-free
municipality? For that matter, how are they determining this in the first
place? I never told netflix where I live; they only have a billing address.
But billing addresses aren't where tax is due; I regularly pay municipally
taxed services for one address at another billing address.

~~~
Spooks
wouldn't they go off the billing address if they could not determine it in
another way?

~~~
dawnerd
I pay Netflix with my paypal account that has a fake address that doesn't
exist anywhere in the world.

------
1_2__3
So... What exactly is the cost to government being justified here? Usually a
tax is to pay for something, in this case it seems to be just "hey we want
some of that money, give us some". What the fuck.

~~~
cle
I think it's more like "We can't cover our costs with current tax revenue,
let's increase tax revenue."

------
NTripleOne
Dear whoever thought this was a good idea,

Do you know what else has no tax? Piracy.

~~~
dawnerd
Don't give them any ideas. I'm sure they'd try to tax torrents if they could.

~~~
NTripleOne
That wasn't _quite_ my point, but I know what you're getting at. I just meant
it in a more "people are probably just gonna go back to piracy if you start
taxing them on things they expect to not be taxed on" kinda way.

------
Cyph0n
If this is the best answer the cable company lobby could come up with, Netflix
has already won.

~~~
user5994461
In the USA maybe, in the rest of the world Netflix is a joke.

~~~
obj-g
Care to elaborate? I work in Spain which got Netflix earlier this year and
literally everyone in my office got a subscription.

~~~
user5994461
Okay. I didnt expect that. Maybe they're stepping up their game ^^

Do they have a decent catalogue in Spain? and they have the series translated
in Spanish as well?

------
DenisM
I see a lot of comments here in shock and disbelief. In the spirit of at least
trying to consider the most charitable view if the events I would like to
offer my justification for what happens.

Municipalities tax consumption on their territory. By contrast, the federal
government taxes income and/or profit. The individual states tax one or the
other or both. This division has to do, in part, with practicality of
administering the tax.

The primary purpose of taxes is to fund the projects for the common good, plus
the overhead. The secondary purpose is to promote or suppress certain
activities, such as tobacco use. Tying a certain tax to a certain purpose is
an exception rather than the rule. Most taxes go into the common pool.

Had there been a movie theater in town it would have been taxed. The same is
true if both the server and the viewer were in the same town - the server
would be taxed as a business and the viewer would be taxed as a consumer.

Moving the server to a different location leads to a situation where the
consumption tax is not paid in either jurisdiction. Thus an arbitrary act of
placement has dramatic consequences for the revenue of municipalities. It also
puts local business at disadvantage, undermining the business tax base and
jeopardizing jobs, so further eroding the funding of the common good.

Yeah, I prefer to pay less myself. I also run a Saas business and I would
rather not have to collect the taxes. Still if I am concerned with the
fairness of it, I have to admit that uniformity trumps my personal preference.

~~~
bogomipz
A consumer is already paying tax on the "utility" be it cable or wireless, its
a line item on your cable/wireless bill. This tax is in addition to other
regulatory fees local governments also collect from each subscriber. Why
should the consumer also be taxed on the bits they move through that pipe
they've already paid tax on?

~~~
DenisM
Great question.

The distinction I'm trying to make is between taxing a stream of bits and
taxing a stream of dollars.

Similarly, municipalities are not taxing the weight of the items purchased at
the store, but their monetary value.

------
BoorishBears
How do people so clueless end up in a public office that can even make a
decision like this?

~~~
dagw
Which bit do you find clueless. Finding a way to use an obscure law about cell
phones to tax people on their streaming services hardly seems clueless to me
(I doubt I would have thought of it), in fact it's kind of inspired in a
twisted sort of way.

~~~
BoorishBears
It's the difference between knowing what you can do, and knowing what you
should do.

Who ever came up with this is very clever in finding a loophole, and
completely clueless in thinking that it's even marginally acceptable to try
and exploit said loophole.

------
_pdp_
I live in UK and I haven't been watching broadcast TV since 2013 - streaming
all that I need. So, I will find it annoying if I am hit with an additional
TAX just because I utilize the service that I already pay for to the best of
my abilities - mind you that I also pay additional subscription fees for
online streaming content and faster fiber. I totally support the TAX on
plastic bags to prevent littering the environment but TAX on online content?
What is the point of that?

~~~
DanBC
> streaming all that I need.

Are you streaming live broadcasts? Because that requires a tv licence.

> but TAX on online content? What is the point of that?

I guess to provide investment into the infrastructure, supported by heavy
users. I'm not sure what the evidence is about usage of networks and
streaming.

~~~
_pdp_
Don't watch broadcast cuz it is full of ads. I watch selectively :) it is also
more productive.

~~~
laurent123456
Even recorded ones, as long as it's from the BBC, require a TV license.

------
Bytes
This is absolutely ridiculous. Who is coming up with these terrible policies?

~~~
wmeredith
Corporations paying for regulatory capture. Call your representatives.

------
dvl
Netflix already have to did it in Brazil due cable TV lobby pressure.

------
tyingq
Ugh. I had to check the url twice to make sure this wasn't a story from the
Onion.

------
Buttons840
What if Netflix dropped their price to compensate in California. The
combination of the tax along with Netflix's good gesture would give them huge
positive publicity.

~~~
tvanantwerp
Since the trend is toward dropping cable in favor of Netflix, et al., already,
I doubt they need positive publicity by way of cutting into their revenues
because of the poor decisions of a few local legislators. Especially when it
would be cheaper to lobby, stir up consumer unrest, and possibly oust those
legislators.

------
xfactor973
So what the city gets an extra $1 or something. That seems pretty silly to tax

------
pharrlax
9.4% tax on $8 a month is around 75 cents.

People will complain about anything.

~~~
deelowe
Huh? People are complaining because it's a pointless tax. Cable taxes cover
the costs of ROW maintenance and regulations. Netflix doesn't need any of
this. We should be pissed. Taxes without reason is theft, plain and simple.

~~~
throwaway729
I would be OK with this tax iff it was conditioned on a competitive municipal
broadband offering with net neutrality and anti-snooping laws.

