Satellite, Cable Spar Over New Tax Bill

Fringe Reception

Super Moderator, Chief Content Editor
Staff member
#1
Satellite, Cable Spar Over New Tax Bill - 2011-05-12 00:17:24 | Broadcasting & Cable

From the article:

"Rep. James Sensenbrenner (R-Wis.) and two co-sponsors have introduced the State Video Fairness Act of 2011, which is being celebrated by DISH and DirecTV as a bill to "protect consumers and promote competition by preventing the imposition of discriminatory taxes on satellite television and other innovative competitors to cable television." ...
 

MrPogi

Moderator, , Webmaster of Cache Free TV
Staff member
#2
I know that someone will chime in with "These (Video Service) taxes help to level the playing field", but I don't believe the government should be in the business of deciding what businesses to keep in business or put out of business.

Also, the amount of taxes and "FEES" I have to pay on a product or service enters into any buying decision I make. When I buy a car, for example, I also consider how much in sales tax and registration fees it will cost me (and though not a tax, I consider the cost of insurance, too).

This is one reason I don't have Pay TV. If I got the "Economy Basic" package, the price is about $18. But add tax and fees, and you're above $20. Throw in a couple cable box rentals, and you're pushing $30. and I can get more channels free OTA!

My phone company charges only about $12 a month for local unlimited calling. But after you add all the taxes and fees, it's over $30. That's one of the reasons I use a Magic Jack, it costs me about $2 a month including the electric to run a mini computer 24/7.

I'm really sick of governments adding new taxes and "fees" to everything. They serve only to fatten government payrolls at my expense. Income, sales, and property taxes should provide enough money for governments to perform their required functions. If not, they need to reign in their spending, just like I do.

“Anyone may arrange his affairs so that his taxes shall be as low as possible; he is not bound to choose that pattern which best pays the treasury. Over and over again the Courts have said that there is nothing sinister in so arranging affairs as to keep taxes as low as possible. Everyone does it, rich and poor alike and all do right, for nobody owes any public duty to pay more than the law demands.” - Justice Leaned Hand.
learned_hand.jpg

“The legal right of a taxpayer to decrease the amount of what otherwise would be his taxes, or altogether avoid them, by means which the law permits, cannot be doubted.”

~U.S. Supreme Court,
Gregory v. Helvering, 293 U.S. 465 (1935)​
supreme_court.jpg
 
Last edited:

Similar threads

Top