 
fegul
Premium
join:2004-08-23
united state | One word: Don't. | |
|
 | 
laserjobs
Premium
join:2004-05-02
Las Vegas, NV | Re: One word: How can we fight back? | |
|
CO_Chris
Premium
join:2001-08-28
Broomfield, CO | When are they going to learn? The FCC is the final word come on CA/MN | |
|
| 
davoice
join:2000-08-12
Saxapahaw, NC
| Re: When are they going to learn? No... in case you haven't noticed, the court system in America has the final word. The legislative and executive branches of our government have had their nuts clipped by the judicial branch for pretty much all of the last 30 years. And the executive branch (esp the Office of the President) doesn't seem willing to challenge the status quo by forcing some more sensible judge candidates into the mix.
- Davoice | |
|
| | russotto
join:2000-10-05
Collegeville, PA | Re: When are they going to learn? Unless they're going to argue that VoIP isn't interstate commerce, the courts are unlikely to overrule the FCC on this one, though. | |
|
| | |
davoice
join:2000-08-12
Saxapahaw, NC
1 edit | Re: When are they going to learn? I'm waiting for someone like the UN to chime in that VOIP and internet service is international commerce and thus only subject to international commerce laws. Just wait for the first European company to start terminating US based DIDs on a EU based softswitch and things will get very interesting.
Edit: And yes, that is technically possible. You could route SS& call setup traffic via an international ATM connection and provide the termination and setup for calls destined for the US via IP. I just don't think it's cost effective yet. But let a Euro carrier get some scale and you might see some interesting effects.
- Davoice | |
|
| | | | 
tapeloop
1959. I try to kick the ball. I miss.
Premium
join:2004-06-27
Airstrip One
| Re: When are they going to learn? said by davoice  :I'm waiting for someone like the UN to chime in that VOIP and internet service is international commerce and thus only subject to international commerce laws. Just wait for the first European company to start terminating US based DIDs on a EU based softswitch and things will get very interesting. Edit: And yes, that is technically possible. You could route SS& call setup traffic via an international ATM connection and provide the termination and setup for calls destined for the US via IP. I just don't think it's cost effective yet. But let a Euro carrier get some scale and you might see some interesting effects. The technical part may be correct, but that part about the UN isn't. The UN isn't so much a governing body so much as an organization where sovereign member nations pay dues. (Which the US hasn't been doing much of lately...  )
You're probably thinking of the WTO. In which case the existing international telecom agreements would probably apply, but I'm not too well-versed in that area. | |
|
| | | | |
davoice
join:2000-08-12
Saxapahaw, NC
| Re: When are they going to learn? Actually, the UN has been eyeing controlling the internet - along with the ITU. There has been quite bit of mumbling within UN committies about taking control of the internet away from the US (and entities like ICANN) and bringing it into the UN.
- Davoice | |
|
| | | | | |
tapeloop
1959. I try to kick the ball. I miss.
Premium
join:2004-06-27
Airstrip One
| Re: When are they going to learn? said by davoice :Actually, the UN has been eyeing controlling the internet - along with the ITU. There has been quite bit of mumbling within UN committies about taking control of the internet away from the US (and entities like ICANN) and bringing it into the UN. Have any links with such info? I haven't heard anything about this UN push. | |
|
| | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | | |
| | | | russotto
join:2000-10-05
Collegeville, PA | It's done all the time the other way around -- companies in Canada sometimes route Canada-to-Canada calls through the US because it's cheaper that way. Or it was; that loophole might have been fixed since I heard of it. | |
|
navalpatel
join:2003-07-28
Lubbock, TX
| Oi This is actually a good thing. This issue needs to be resolved and I think it will be decided by the Supreme Court. The ideal solution would probably be allowing the FCC to impose only Federal designated taxes, which are imposed on normal telephone providers as well.
A tax is still a tax... | |
|
|
| manifest
bitches
join:2004-08-14
Hartford, CT | Re: Double Taxation Ummmm, you do not pay taxes on your internet service in the US at least. You only pay sales tax(if you state has sales tax). | |
|
| | 
d_man60112
join:2004-06-09
Cortland, IL | Re: Double Taxation EVerything is double and even triple taxed! | |
|
| | hottboiinnc
ME
join:2003-10-15
Toledo, OH
1 edit | Ohio only pays tax on DSL, and on services for businesses- but is not enforced anymore. T1s and so on are not being taxed.
VoIP is already taxed for everyone though..You have to pay your 3% to the Feds. | |
|
Meridion0
join:2004-12-25
Centerville, IA | State tax I would prefer state tax over government because of the fact that our government waves billions of the dollars in the air on a lot of pointless projects. | |
|
| 
Gio7
Cynical
join:2000-08-19 | Re: State tax As if our state govt's don't do the same or worse in many cases. | |
|
| 
n2jtx
join:2001-01-13
Glen Head, NY | New York is the same if not worse than the Feds. Our legislature is ranked #50 in terms of effectiveness.
--
I support the right to keep and arm bears. | |
|
| | hedyd4u
Premium
join:2003-12-16
Schenectady, NY | Re: State tax New York is #1 in passing budgets in an untimely fashion. | |
|
| Kearnstd
Elf Wizard
Premium
join:2002-01-22
Mullica Hill, NJ | VOIP is a data service and should not be taxable. | |
|
oliphant
I Have 8 Boobies
Premium
join:2004-11-26
Corona, CA | Awe...poor greedy states ...will have to live on the billions they already steal from their residents. | |
|
NetDroid2
join:2004-08-16
Excelsior, MN
| Doesn't look like it passed...... »wcco.com/localnews/local_story_3···842.html
Quote from site:
"Minnesota can't regulate calls through cyberspace as it does calls through traditional phone lines, a federal appeals court ruled." | |
|
| 
okayhere
@optonline.net
| Re: Doesn't look like it passed...... Okey,Dokie,
Free US calling to 49 states, Minnesota won't play fair, so nix them from the calling over voip..
When will the hicks from the mid-west stop meddling in national politics!! Tax something else, like political fund raising, corporate welfare, incestual families- cousins upon cousins- or wait, is that Utah or Minnesota?
the ONLY tax is the USF paid for internet providers to give broadband access to the poor... a minor surcharge could be theoretically added for voip, since you'd be saving $10-20 in fees so, you could expect to pay maybe 10% of those charges anyway for voip.. but adding various federal, state, and local taxes would effectively KILL the public switch telephone network... and the voip calling that connect to it, DEAD as a democratic party in 2004...
Now for some devine advice, stop medling with voip, only a flat 10% of traditional pots phone taxes should be applied, meaning the fee would be $1-2, well absorbable by the voip providers in the current climate of number potability and competition... under this plan it will flourish
Next idea, move cell phone towers into 2.4ghz wifi spectrum and nix all those taxes saying its an 'internet wireless voip' solution  you'd save 35% of your cell phone bill from taxes... | |
|
|
|
|
Minny Fights to Tax VoIP
Re: When are they going to learn?
) Fortunately there was compromise thanks to Japan, the EU and Canada(eh).
