Armed Polite Society
Main Forums => Politics => Topic started by: dm1333 on December 13, 2018, 06:45:33 AM
-
The California Public Utilities Commission is proposing this.
https://www.usatoday.com/story/tech/2018/12/12/california-text-tax-what-we-know-so-far/2293656002/
My favorite part!
According to the filing, the CPUC is proposing to tax traditional text messages known as SMS or MMS. Unlike iMessages on iPhones or using the text feature in WhatsApp, the texts the CPUC would tax are ones sent over a mobile phone's built-in messaging app, (iPhone users will know these as "green bubbles" in the Messages app). The CPUC is also seeking to retroactively tax users for the last five years.
-
Crap like that is why such noble purveyors of satire such as The Onion and The Babylon Bee have no real future.
When real life becomes it's own parody of sanity what's left?
:facepalm:
-
How is that even legal?
-
How is that even legal?
That's my thought as well.
Interesting on how they rag on the ISPs regarding "net neutrality", but are happy to use them to collect their taxes.
-
So, all the messenger apps are exempt. Why would anyone use SMS if a nontaxed alternative is available?
I eagerly await the shock and outrage about people using evil loopholes when their tax doesn't work.
-
“Government’s view of the economy could be summed up in a few short phrases: If it moves, tax it. If it keeps moving, regulate it. And if it stops moving, subsidize it.”
-
Retroactive for just 5 years? I'm surprised that they don't make it retroactive for the past 25 years.
Yeah, I know texting has really only been a thing for 10 years, at most, and smart phones with text have really only been ubiquitous for about 15 years, but why let facts and reality stand in the way of PROFIT!
-
“Government’s view of the economy could be summed up in a few short phrases: If it moves, tax it. If it keeps moving, regulate it. And if it stops moving, subsidize it.”
Uhm... that's standard government...
California's government?
If it moves, tax it.
It if keeps moving, tax it more.
If it stops moving, institute crushing death taxes on the British pattern.
-
They should definitely do this! CA deserves it... >:D
-
They should definitely do this! CA deserves it... >:D
Just an odd thought, but maybe it could apply to everyone everywhere...
If the government has the technology or the ability to coerce businesses to attribute every text to every person, maybe that ability could be used to track every vote from every citizen.
If we are going to have dystopia, I'm much in favor of the individual voter being sent the bill (whether monetary, or paying with a loss of their own rights) for the actions of the person they voted for, rather than democratizing the misery.
-
How is that even legal?
It generally isn't?
The only way it would be work is if it was somehow a tax that had been "missed", IE some statutory obligation for the texting plans to be taxed in a certain way, and nobody read/enforced the law until recently and they're looking to fulfill their obligation as far into the past as practical.
Like, say, there's some obligation to tax data transmissions at some rate that was passed in the '60s and ignored when data transmissions actually became a thing.
That said, it'd still generate lawsuits.
-
Remember the standard joke every time a tax increase was passed?
"If they could tax air, they would."
I guess they're getting close.
Terry
-
It generally isn't?
The only way it would be work is if it was somehow a tax that had been "missed", IE some statutory obligation for the texting plans to be taxed in a certain way, and nobody read/enforced the law until recently and they're looking to fulfill their obligation as far into the past as practical.
Like, say, there's some obligation to tax data transmissions at some rate that was passed in the '60s and ignored when data transmissions actually became a thing.
That said, it'd still generate lawsuits.
No need for actual valid legal arguments. They will find a friendly liberal judge who will invent some twisted reasoning and declare it legal. IMO, that is the big difference these days is we have a whole lot more political judges who seem to have no fear of making law.
-
Remember the standard joke every time a tax increase was passed?
"If they could tax air, they would."
I guess they're getting close.
Terry
Air is at least a tangible substance. When you break it down, they are actually taxing electrons and electromagnetic waves.
-
California's already taxing rain...
https://www.dailynews.com/2017/08/18/rain-tax-is-back-and-la-county-residents-could-get-soaked-guest-commentary/
Or at least they're trying to.
Maryland did that a couple of years ago, too.
https://www.forbes.com/sites/travisbrown/2014/01/03/when-it-rains-it-pours-tax-dollars-in-maryland/#5f0e66807c69
Although I think that was overturned by the Hogan administration.
-
California's already taxing rain...
https://www.dailynews.com/2017/08/18/rain-tax-is-back-and-la-county-residents-could-get-soaked-guest-commentary/
Or at least they're trying to.
Maryland did that a couple of years ago, too.
https://www.forbes.com/sites/travisbrown/2014/01/03/when-it-rains-it-pours-tax-dollars-in-maryland/#5f0e66807c69
Although I think that was overturned by the Hogan administration.
I think Oregon did something similar as well. It may not have been a tax, but maybe a fine or something for collecting rainwater , which they say doesn't belong to you, even falling directly on your own property.
-
Oh, lots of states already do that.
You're not allowed to collect or otherwise impede rain's journey from the sky to the ground.
-
They will find a friendly liberal judge who will invent some twisted reasoning and declare it legal. IMO, that is the big difference these days is we have a whole lot more political judges who seem to have no fear of making law.
Assuming they tax receiving texts (the article said that part was unclear: betting they would try to tax both ends), all we need do is find out the number of any such judge, and start texting
-
How is that even legal?
If they say it is.
-
I think Oregon did something similar as well. It may not have been a tax, but maybe a fine or something for collecting rainwater , which they say doesn't belong to you, even falling directly on your own property.
Well, the next logical thing to tax is sunshine. Same reasoning. No one should benefit from the sunshine for free.
-
Well, the next logical thing to tax is sunshine. Same reasoning. No one should benefit from the sunshine for free.
You may be joking, but as fast as CA is going solar, at some point they'll start taxing solar power in one way or another to make up for the drop in taxes from regular utilities. Square footage of solar panels on the roof - mark my word. And/or big disposal taxes for all the batteries.
-
You may be joking, but as fast as CA is going solar, at some point they'll start taxing solar power in one way or another to make up for the drop in taxes from regular utilities. Square footage of solar panels on the roof - mark my word. And/or big disposal taxes for all the batteries.
Oh, I believe you, though the tax won't be based solely on the sqaure footage of the panels. California will also tax the electricity used, as they do now, but requiring power meters installed at all homes to monitor the power useage.
-
Oh, I believe you, though the tax won't be based solely on the sqaure footage of the panels. California will also tax the electricity used, as they do now, but requiring power meters installed at all homes to monitor the power useage.
Somebody needs to make that a letter writing campaign to California legislators, and any other libtard controlled state, Colorado comes to mind.
-
Retroactive for just 5 years? I'm surprised that they don't make it retroactive for the past 25 years.
Yeah, I know texting has really only been a thing for 10 years, at most, and smart phones with text have really only been ubiquitous for about 15 years, but why let facts and reality stand in the way of PROFIT!
Just part of their oft-used technique of manipulating compromise.
The 5-year backtracking for taxes is a giveaway.
"We" still haven't got wise to that strategy.
Terry, 230RN
-
How are they going to monitor it? What if someone in California sends a text to or receives a text from someone in Nevada, or Arizona -- or Massachusetts? I don't think California can legally tax messages that travel interstate.
-
How are they going to monitor it? What if someone in California sends a text to or receives a text from someone in Nevada, or Arizona -- or Massachusetts? I don't think California can legally tax messages that travel interstate.
I imagine they think they can do it by Area code.* SMS or MMS sent from area codes in CA, or received by Area codes in CA. Lind like how if you have vehicle plates from a state other than where you live, you send the tax money back to the state that issues the plates.
*And yes, I see the obvious problem with that, but tax weasels are stupid.
-
*And yes, I see the obvious problem with that, but tax weasels are stupid evil.
FTFY
-
FTFY
The two are not mutually exclusive.
-
I think Oregon did something similar as well. It may not have been a tax, but maybe a fine or something for collecting rainwater , which they say doesn't belong to you, even falling directly on your own property.
In the last town I lived in, they were floating the opposite idea- a 'runoff tax.' They were planning on a residential tax based on roof/driveway/sidewalk/patio/deck square footage. I moved away before it was either implemented or tossed out.
-
How are they going to retroactively collect 5 years of text taxes from people who have moved out of state?
-
How are they going to retroactively collect 5 years of text taxes from people who have moved out of state?
I am sure they will try. Force people to fight them in court until someone finds a federal judge with the balls to shut them down.
-
I am sure they will try. Force people to fight them in court until someone finds a federal judge with the balls to shut them down.
I Kalifornia? :rofl: :rofl: :rofl:
-
Will the Kalifornia tax apply to people like tourists who visit? How will they collect it?
If they won't be collecting the text tax from out of state people, it would seem that there's a business opportunity here . . . establish a "phone residence business" in someplace like Nevada, so Kalifornians can get their phones registered to an out of state address. >:D
-
Update...
California has backed down from its plan to tax texts.
https://www.cnn.com/2018/12/16/tech/california-text-tax-vote-canceled/index.html
"The FCC put the text tax's future in doubt when it issued a new rule on December 12 determining text messages constitute an "information service" — not a "telecommunications service." CPUC commissioner Carla Peterman withdrew the text tax propsal "in light of the FCC's action."
How DARE that bastard Trump stop California from collecting its fair share? Everyone knows it was really he who imposed that rule, because he's the text and Twitter president!
Suck it, California.
-
How DARE that bastard Trump stop California from collecting its fair share? Everyone knows it was really he who imposed that rule, because he's the text and Twitter president!
The state might not be so ambitious about collecting all sorts of new taxes if it wasn't so limited in regards to a number of other taxes. Specifically their thing about not being able to value homes at their actual/estimated actual value until it is actually sold, which means that there are quite a few properties paying taxes at valuations almost 40 years old.
I know my explanation isn't entirely correct, but there's a cap on how fast they can raise the rates, regardless, and it hasn't kept up with property value increases.
That said, like most libertopias, they definitely see any excuse to spend(and therefore tax) more.
-
The state might not be so ambitious about collecting all sorts of new taxes if it wasn't so limited in regards to a number of other taxes. Specifically their thing about not being able to value homes at their actual/estimated actual value until it is actually sold, which means that there are quite a few properties paying taxes at valuations almost 40 years old.
I know my explanation isn't entirely correct, but there's a cap on how fast they can raise the rates, regardless, and it hasn't kept up with property value increases.
That said, like most libertopias, they definitely see any excuse to spend(and therefore tax) more.
I'm fairly certain that one constitutional provision is the only thing protecting the country from a mass invasion of progressive locusts fleeing California. And for that I am extremely grateful.
-
Glad to hear that this proposal has been dropped. Both the states and federal government love taxes that are simply added to your bill monthly and get get a continuous revenue stream. Telephone, Cable bills, and gasoline/fuel taxes are the best examples that comes to mind.
-
Glad to hear that this proposal has been dropped. Both the states and federal government love taxes that are simply added to your bill monthly and get get a continuous revenue stream. Telephone, Cable bills, and gasoline/fuel taxes are the best examples that comes to mind.
Yup. Also relates to most people getting their paycheck after taxes have already been taken out, so it's "less noticeable". Goes back to what many of us here bring up all the time: if there was a way to do it, make people write one big check for taxes every year. Seeing the actual dollar amount and "feeling the pain" would certainly change the national tax scene.
-
"The state might not be so ambitious about collecting all sorts of new taxes if it wasn't so limited in regards to a number of other taxes."
California might not be so damned ambitious about collecting all sort of new taxes if they weren't being driven by the current socialist power structure screeching SPEND SPEND SPEND SPEND SPEND!!!!
They might also be more successful in collecting more tax revenue if they weren't so freaking hostile to business.
https://www.investors.com/politics/editorials/california-companies-leave-taxes/
California's socialists are on an unsustainable path, and it's already starting to eat them alive. But they don't care.
-
The other side of that is too many voters fall for the viewpoint that we need to tax more to pay off debt or avoid budget deficits. They forget that out of control spending, corruption, and waste lead to the debt, not lack of tax revenue.
-
California's socialists are on an unsustainable path, and it's already starting to eat them alive. But they don't care.
They doubled down on that in the last election. Pretty much a mega super majority that has nothing to slow them down, let alone stop them. At this point I don't think a reasonable correction can be made.
It will have to be something like the state being at the point of declaring bankruptcy to reverse the current political demographic. Even then, there will still be a large group crying, "Tax the rich more!" or, "The Federal government needs to save us and give us free stuff!"
-
"Even then, there will still be a large group crying, "Tax the rich more!" or, "The Federal government needs to save us and give us free stuff!""
They already started that chorus when California almost went tits up during the financial crisis, and yet the legislature and residents learned nothing from it.
California has done well during the recovery, but the legislature has done nothing but push out more spending, push out more businesses, and push more people out of the middle class into the lower class and poverty.
When the NY Times, champion of liberal government excess, starts raising questions, then you know you're not on the right path. https://www.nytimes.com/2018/02/13/business/economy/california-recession.html?rref=collection%2Ftimestopic%2FCalifornia%20Budget%20Crisis&action=click&contentCollection=us®ion=stream&module=stream_unit&version=latest&contentPlacement=1&pgtype=collection
-
California has done well during the recovery, but the legislature has done nothing but push out more spending, push out more businesses, and push more people out of the middle class into the lower class and poverty.
Part of why they have done so well is certain companies and the income they generate in Silicon Valley, which somewhat counteracts the tax loss of other businesses pulling out. Were there to be a cultural change at those companies that got them to move to Texas, for example, that would be an interesting day. Especially with the trickle down effect to all the tech companies that only exist because of their proximity to the Googles, etc.
-
The silicon valley exodus has already started.
https://www.businessinsider.com/silicon-valley-tech-elite-is-leaving-san-francisco-2018-3
as the leaders go, the businesses will follow.