- December 14, 2010 6:29 am
In the never-ending assault on our wallets, taxes swoop in to pummel us when we’re done and spitting up blood. Though, given the current economic climate it’s certainly understandable governments are trying just about anything and everything they can to make a buck. With that said, one popular solution that has been proposed in several countries around the world before is a tax on SMS/Text messages. The latest person to call for such a thing — the UK Transport Union leader, Bob Crow.
His 1 cent per text proposal would generate upwards of £1 billion extra for the economy. However, it’s hardly a drop in the bucket when you look at the bigger picture — a staggering (and growing) 2010/11 budge deficit of £149 billion.
From a capitalists perspective, it makes sense to tax SMS messages like you would any other communication service. For consumers however, it’s just *insert local currency here* out of our wallets.
I often start posts regarding stupid copyright decisions and laws on a negative and cynical note. I figured why not switch it up — this one ends favorably for the accused. So, in the spirit of adventure and trying to always stay fresh, here it is: The accused in this story gets an apology and flowers…that’s it. Whew. Since that’s over, if you’d like to know the reasons why flowers and an apology were warranted, continue on…
How’s this for stupidity — Sandra Burt of Clackmannanshire, Scotland was contacted by the PRS (Performance Rights Society) because of her frequent “performances” at work. Mind you, the only reason she had to sing her days away was because the same organization contacted her employer and demanded a performance royalty for playing a radio within earshot of customers. (Let’s not even begin on how stupid a performance royalty is in the first place as content owners already have several other taxes and royalties that get levied before hand). Since her employers complied with the local Satan, Sandra had no other choice but to begin singing. All seemed well until she herself received a letter claiming she was to pay a performance fee for singing popular music to a crowd. The stupidity is overwhelming though unsurprising from such an organization.
Again, coming back to where we started, all ended up just fine and dandy for Sarah after a mountain of public uproar. After which the PRS sent dear Sandra another letter. This second letter sang a more apologetic tune for “a big mistake” and came complete with flowers to boot. How nice. The question however is how do these sorts of “big mistakes” even happen in the first place? Don’t these organizations of some sort of fact checking or system of checks and balances? Oh well, at least Sandra is free (literally) to sing ’til her hearts content without fear of prosecution.
Don’t you like happy endings…
Slashdot > BBC
This is pretty much disgusting and makes me actually lean towards hating any label or collection agency. If you’ve been out of the loop, the RIAA’s Radio Performance tax is currently the biggest scam this side of hell. Remember in the good ‘ol days when new artists and labels would “beg” (by way of monetary payments) radio stations to play new music. Such a model promotes upcoming new artists and music which equates into more money spend on the respective artists down the road. Everyone’s happy right? Ha. With morons such as the RIAA involved, you though grossly wrong.
The whole idea of the Performance Rights Act is to pull a complete 180 on the typical model that radio stations play in promoting music. Instead of being paid to play music, now radio stations themselves are going to have to pay the RIAA and fellow scam artist companies to promote music. Kind of backwards don’t you think? This grand plan could very easily collapse. If radio stations refuse to play big label content and instead go independent, good-bye tax, good-bye income. Of course, the chances of that are pretty much 0 and they know that. What will happen however is those local bands looking to make it big will now have an ever greater mountain to climb. If radio stations have to pay to play music, why bother with smaller bands that don’t indirectly pay them? Why not just play the big names. Hey, they’re paying for it right?
Of course, RIAA and their love child “SoundExchange” will continue to beat their chest highlighting all the good they stand for, helping musicians, and doling out royalties from bogus taxes accordingly. Though, as TechDirt notes, they seem to have a small hoarding problem when money is concerned. You know, $100 million or so dollars sitting in their bank accounts — give or take.
Leaving off, a commenter on TechDirt also highlighted another point by posting a section of the wordage:
“Establishes a flat annual fee in lieu of payment of royalties for individual terrestrial broadcast stations with gross revenues of less than $1.25 million and for noncommercial, public broadcast stations.”
……………………..
“(D) Notwithstanding the provisions of subparagraphs (A) through (C), each individual terrestrial broadcast station that has gross revenues in any calendar year of less than $1,250,000 may elect to pay for its over-the-air nonsubscription broadcast transmissions a royalty fee of $5,000 per year, in lieu of the amount such station would otherwise be required to pay under this paragraph. Such royalty fee shall not be taken into account in determining royalty rates in a proceeding under chapter 8, or in any other administrative, judicial, or other Federal Government proceeding.
`(E) Notwithstanding the provisions of subparagraphs (A) through (C), each individual terrestrial broadcast station that is a public broadcasting entity as defined in section 118(f) may elect to pay for its over-the-air nonsubscription broadcast transmissions a royalty fee of $1,000 per year, in lieu of the amount such station would otherwise be required to pay under this paragraph.”
I’m not a lawyer. Though, they aren’t exactly the most “honest” sources of information so I guess that can be seen as a small blessing. Does anyone care to clear up verbal lingo above? Am I correctly assuming that radio stations can simply “cash out” (for lack of better words) on their royalty tax in favor of a lower yearly payment? Gee, that’s not questionable at all….
TechDirt
Image Source
- October 14, 2009 11:40 am
You know, it’s rather sad that yet another startup and seemingly “open” service is pushing for taxes that have no basis for being issued in the first place. Why the fuss? Pandora, though not new is still rather young in the current scope of reality. You may remember earlier this year how Pandora was putting up a fight against the RIAA and other cronies in regards to increased webcasting rates as the current monetary plan just wasn’t working for them. The rate was unjustified and stupid. Plain and simple. Well, they backed down, gave in, and subsequently lost all respect in my book. Naturally, the whole process left a sour taste in their mouth as they have as of late been helping the very people they opposed just a few months back…again. If they have to get ripped off, everyone should be ripped off.
The ‘ol switcheroo started in July when Pandora began urging users to support the BS that is the Radio Performance Tax. After a couple weeks of urging, they toned down their efforts to a point that they were pretty much invisible.
- **Any “performance tax” is in all reality a double charge. Radio stations already pay the songwriters to license the music. The added exposure and free promotion should be enough for the actual artist performing the song. Not to mention, whenever anyone, radio stations included, purchases music, a handful of various taxes that supposedly go to the artists and songwriters are already levied. Performance taxes are nothing more than a scam to milk the content further.
As is usual however, the content owners want more money. The stupidity shows no signs of slowing down however as Pandora is again reminding users that they too should support ripping off terrestrial radio and end users alike by supporting the Radio Performance Act.
See what’s going on? Pandora is jealous that terrestrial radio still gets away without having to pay a performance fee while they do. Yes the entire Performance Tax is stupid. Still, just because you got the raw end of the deal and lost your spine, don’t support another tax that chips away at what’s left of the music industry.
Peeved?
TechDirt
Image Source
Do you enjoy online shopping because you don’t have to deal with the crowd. Or do you enjoy saving a little by not paying state taxes? If the government has their way that will be ending soon. The reason? Fewer people are shopping in brick and mortar stores, thereby reducing local income from local taxes, something online shopping currently evades because under an old law, a store has to have a physical store in that state for the state to collect sales tax. With the current economy, governments all over the country are having trouble getting out of the red ink. Head on over to Cnet for a full rundown of the article. It’s pretty lengthy so grab a snack or something and prepare to read. It’s very interesting.
Source: Cnet
It’s all common knowledge that Microsoft isn’t having the greatest sales results lately. Between the Vista flop, various other OS issues, as well as just a rather dated looking product line across the board and your have the formula for disappointing sales. You know Microsoft is digging through to the bottom of the barrel when they start re-iterating the notion of the “Apple Tax”. It’s also no secret that Apple products come with a premium. Not only are you paying for the product, you are paying for the ecosystem of Apple products that are designed from the ground up to co-exist as well as the name. Yes everyone also knows you pay for the brand. But how is that different from any other market. You’re always paying for some brand or another. I see this is as a desperate attempt by Microsoft to try and pull in new users or convince them to switch back. It is a rather pathetic attempt at that even if it is true. Maybe if they designed and produced products, year after year that people actually wanted, I’m sure the situation would be different. Microsoft is in a slump right now. If they want to get out of it Apple is going to have to fail and fail big and at the same time Microsoft is going to have to literally re-invent the computer to catapult itself back up.
Source: Cent
