| |
IIandyouyouohme
Anon
2008-Nov-15 12:17 pm
City TaxesSatellite service is a different service than cable TV. There is no local infostructure to muck up the area and a dish on my house is my property.
Let's tax people who have a radio in their car!
or
Let's make all vehicle registrations the same for cars, trucks, boats, tractors, snow mobiles and water craft!
The reason there are different fees is because each one of those vehicles is different. Just like satellite is different from cable.
How about a sidewalk usage tax when we walk down the street?
Sheesh!
|
|
| |
to mod_wastrel
Re: "The city claims..."Well, at least a sale is taking place which is arguably taxable...
Just wait until solar cells are cheap enough to deploy on every rooftop and cities start taxing the sun to replace the lost tax revenue from the local power company... |
|
| |
to mod_wastrel
said by mod_wastrel:When the only "presence" that some service has in a locality or state is a wave being broadcast from space, It says it's an amusement tax. Not a wire-transmission tax. Whether the city should tax amusement is a different question. But, if they do, it should be applied consistently. Mark |
|
| |
to jl747
Re: I thought I was being taxed before.Why? No money is changing hands for the use of TV via rabbit ears, whereas a sat provider is conducting business continually and extracting revenue from the customer base in a given region. Taxes are always attached to money flows (credits for pouring money into a community, taxes for exchange of money for goods/services). |
|
| |
to jmmilner
Re: Cities are greedy for taxes; good reason for state controlPerhaps, but a state cannot "give" rights to a city that Federal law prohibits. On a more humorous note, I presume you meant "clever" instead of "cleaver", but in this case I think cleaver might be just a appropriate as clever.  |
|
1 edit |
to Dogfather
Re: Or Else...said by Dogfather:No kidding. Here in California, providing services for illegals and welfare is always the top priority with police, fire and transportation being at the bottom of the list. The reason being is simple. It's easier to get a tax increase passed for the police but try to pass a tax to provide services to illegals and bottomless welfare and it would fail miserably. Well I don't think California state Government would be so stupid as to try and tax this, Desperate? Maybe. In any case I hope I don't see any sort of tax on My Dish Network and yes I get SSI as I'm permanently Disabled and It is restrictive, Getting a mortgage or even an insurance policy on ones house is impossible or very nearly as Poverty is what I'm forced to live at. |
|
| |
to IIandyouyouohme
Re: City Taxessaid by IIandyouyouohme :
Let's tax people who have a radio in their car!
or
ok so a 10% on free radio so 0 X 0.10 = 0 |
|
|
your moderator at work
hidden :
|
| |
to GPSrob
Re: I thought I was being taxed before.said by GPSrob:...a sat provider is conducting business continually... in outer space. |
|
| |
to mod_wastrel
Re: "The city claims..."I would bet you the "poor" get a tax break.
You just cant tax the un-taxable.
AHAHAHAHahahahahahaaaaaaaa..... |
|
|
your moderator at work
hidden :
|
| |
to mod_wastrel
Re: I thought I was being taxed before.I really can't tell if half the people here are willfully ignorant or actually ignorant.
The transaction of money for goods or services takes place within the community and the service is consumed in the community. They have every right to tax that transaction, just as they do any other via sales taxes.
The reasonableness of an "entertainment" tax or whatever they called it is questionable, but similar to the sales tax, if video services are taxed as entertainment it shouldn't matter the medium over which they're consumed. Frankly I think it's a stupid idea, because they'd need to tax broadcasters, youtube, hulu, ipods, ISPs, you name it. Then tax books for when people stop watching TV due to high taxes.
It's utterly ridiculous, but that precedent was already set with the acceptance of the tax as applied to cable customers. |
|
| |
to mod_wastrel
Re: "The city claims..."What crap! They should have no legal tight to tax an invisible signal from a SATELLITE in ORBIT.
Are they F'ing mad?
What's next? An extra tax for all people who have an FM radio that can tune in a station from another city??
People in Chicago - REVOLT! Stop taking this BS Demoncratic tradition of getting slammed up the rear in so many ways. Even at the same RATE (percentage) we pay MORE EVERY YEAR AUTOMATICALLY when rates go up (because tax is a % of what we pay)- there is no reason to ADD MORE TAX - EVER! |
|
| |
JoeM9
Anon
2008-Nov-15 1:28 pm
People in Chicago - revolt!What BS! They should have no legal tight to tax an invisible signal from a SATELLITE in ORBIT.
Are they F'ing mad?
What's next? An extra tax for all people who have an FM radio that can tune in a station from another city?
People in Chicago - REVOLT! Stop taking this BS Demoncratic tradition of getting slammed up the rear in so many ways. Even at the same RATE (percentage) we pay MORE EVERY YEAR AUTOMATICALLY when rates go up (because tax is a % of what we pay)- there is no reason to ADD MORE TAX - EVER! |
|
| |
jcurrier311
Anon
2008-Nov-15 1:30 pm
Lovin' the PoliticsSo the city is going to pay the $500 million on court fees needed to get this passed just to make up for the $469 million budget gap! |
|
| |
to mod_wastrel
Re: Cities are greedy for taxes; good reason for state controlIllinois is effectively two states, Chicago and "downstate" (which usually means "not Chicago"). So it is a clever power-sharing that acts as a cleaver. |
|
| |
to GPSrob
Re: I thought I was being taxed before."Amusements" and "entertainments" that operate within a locality's jurisdiction are not the same as those that do not. There is an expectation of a greater need for police and fire protection, just as with sales taxes for local businesses. There is no such need related to satellite. A local govt. has NO jurisdiction over the transmission, delivery, or reception of satellite signals.
Please, do NOT enjoy the sunlight... someone might decide to tax it. |
|
 Dogfather
Premium Member
join:2007-12-26
Laguna Hills, CA
1 edit |
to zoom314
Re: Or Else...You're talking about a State that considered a soda tax and per mile driving tax to support their corrupt and irresponsible spending habits. They will tax anything, animal, mineral or vegetable. Gotta pay for leeches somehow. |
|
| |
to jmmilner
Re: Cities are greedy for taxes; good reason for state controlSmile when you say that, pilgrim. |
|
| mod_wastrel |
to amigo_boy
Re: "The city claims..."See my post below about "amusement" taxes. The city has no jurisdiction here, so a tax is inappropriate... if one wants to look at it consistently, that is. |
|
| |
to mod_wastrel
Re: I thought I was being taxed before.And what additional local services does cable service as an amusement/entertainment require to warrant taxing it as such?
There is no difference. The sale is within the community. The consumption of the service is within the community. The physical medium is irrelevant. It's either applicable to all or none, not some.
It's a ridiculous premise, but the arguments against it are moot because no one gave a damn when it was applied to CATV. |
|
| |
to Dogfather
Re: Or Else...said by Dogfather:You're talking about a State that considered a soda tax and per mile driving tax to support their corrupt and irresponsible spending habits. They will tax anything, animal, mineral or vegetable. Gotta pay for leeches somehow. Like I drink Soda, Yuck, May as well drink pure sugar mixed with Water and some CO2. Per mile driving tax in California? Since when? Remember I've lived in California all My life, So that has never happened. |
|
|
Dogfather
Premium Member
join:2007-12-26
Laguna Hills, CA
3 edits |
Driving and soda taxes didn't happen because it would have led to revolution (and Davis got ousted). But common sense doesn't stop Sacramento from concocting and trying to force down our throats such schemes. » articles.latimes.com/200 ··· urning18You have a short memory if you don't remember Cruz BustaMecha wanting billions in new taxes or the Deb Ortiz soda tax » www.cbsnews.com/stories/ ··· 71.shtml (which would have applied to all sweetended soft drinks including some fruit juices), triple car tax, per mile driving tax and sales taxes on all services in addition to products. As bad as Ah-nold has been, we would be a 3rd world Mexican satellite state if Bustamecha got into office. Sacramento leftists simply have zero concept of responsible governance or respect for the hard working taxpayers who unwillingly support their greed and corruption. |
|
 Combat ChuckToo Many Cannibals
Premium Member
join:2001-11-29
Verona, PA |
to battleop
Re: Electsaid by battleop:Paging all Obama Kool Aide drinkers! Paging all Obama Kool Aide drinkers! I just wonder if and when they'll figure it out. |
|
| |
to GPSrob
Re: I thought I was being taxed before.Cable uses local public and private property to deliver its services. An "entertainment" tax on cable is no more appropriate than an "entertainment" tax on any service that does not increase the need for govt. intervention or oversight, however, cable DOES have local govt. intervention and oversight; satellite does not.
Look, there's nothing you can say to make me agree with you. Give it up before you become ridiculous. |
|
| |
said by mod_wastrel:Cable uses local public and private property to deliver its services. It seems like you're saying the "entertainment" tax is really a franchise tax. Can you confirm the cable company is not held to a franchise tax, and that this tax is it? said by mod_wastrel:tax on any service that does not increase the need for govt. That may be true. In AZ we have a "value" tax on our vehicles. The value of our vehicle doesn't increase the need for govt. That tax may be wrong. But, if it only applied to Pontiacs and not Dodge vehicles, that would be worse. Right? Mark |
|
Pascal
join:2003-11-16
Streamwood, IL |
Pascal
Member
2008-Nov-15 2:29 pm
federal law prevents cities from taxing DBSAccording to DirecTV, "federal law prevents cities from taxing direct broadcast satellite services."
Can anyone cite the law to which they refer? |
|
 pnh102Reptiles Are Cuddly And Pretty
Premium Member
join:2002-05-02
Mount Airy, MD |
to JoeM99
Re: "The city claims..."said by JoeM99 :
People in Chicago - REVOLT! Stop taking this BS Demoncratic tradition of getting slammed up the rear in so many ways. Even at the same RATE (percentage) we pay MORE EVERY YEAR AUTOMATICALLY when rates go up (because tax is a % of what we pay)- there is no reason to ADD MORE TAX - EVER! You're talking about people who voted for someone who claims it is patriotic to pay taxes. You'd have better luck talking to a wall. |
|
| pnh102 |
to jl747
Re: I thought I was being taxed before.said by jl747:If that is the case. They should be able to tax you for using only rabbit ears to get your television stations. Kinda like how they do it in most European countries. You pay a tax on every TV you own just for the privilege of watching. |
|
| pnh102 |
to DaveDude
Re: Tax the rich.said by DaveDude:and watch the rich move out of the city. It is always fun when that happens. |
|
