Villaraigosa's "Telephoney Tax"? Does the tax that shouldn't even be on the ballot violate Federal Law, as well?
***** MEDIA ALERT *****
I HOPE SOME NEWSPAPER AND RADIO REPORTERS FOLLOW-UP ON THIS...
Is the City's Telephone User's Tax going to be stepping on any Federal laws?
At Budget Day, it was clear that there would be no internet tax. Today we see that VoIP (Voice over-Internet Protocol) will be taxed.
From LA Times: House votes to extend ban on Internet taxes -- approves a four-year moratorium. With the current moratorium set to expire at the end of the month, the House voted 405 to 2 to extend the politically popular exemption until 2011.
The House bill would prevent state and local governments from taxing the various ways people get Internet service, including high-speed phone and cable lines. It allows nine states that had Internet access taxes in place before the moratorium was enacted in 1998 to continue to collect them. California is not among the states.
Entire LA Times article
Zuma's Batcomputer found this from the ordinance: The term "Communications Services" includes transmission, conveyance, or routing in which computer processing applications are used to act on the form, code or protocol of the content for purposes of transmission, conveyance or routing without regard to whether those services are referred to as voice over internet protocol (VoIP) services or are classified by the Federal Communications Commission as enhanced or value added, and includes video and/or data services that are functionally integrated with "Communications Services."
[Oh no...Telephone tax=9 percent for new technologies such as Voice over Internet Protocol (or VoIP) services.]
Any leagalese types that can make a clarification as to whether this "telephony tax" (which shouldn't even be on the ballot) is a besmirch to the City by having to declare a financial emergency to provide services that are supposed to be covered in the first place -- it's gonna cost at least $5 million to put it on the ballot -- so the question is, does any of this "modernization" of the communication tax step on Federal law, too? (Just aksing.)
Found this on an article about VoIP printed yesterday: "The House bill also narrows the definition of Internet access, allowing state and local governments to tax Internet-related services such as VOIP (voice over Internet Protocol). Opponents of a permanent extension, including some lawmakers, have expressed concerns that the original tax moratorium could be interpreted to ban taxes on services such as VOIP."
ZD: Does this mean antonio is allowed to? will this "narrowing" of definition be in effect BEFORE feb 5 '08? are you allowed to place something on the ballot before it is changed? (What if the final bill isn't isn't approved.)
zumadogg@gmail.com
I HOPE SOME NEWSPAPER AND RADIO REPORTERS FOLLOW-UP ON THIS...
Is the City's Telephone User's Tax going to be stepping on any Federal laws?
At Budget Day, it was clear that there would be no internet tax. Today we see that VoIP (Voice over-Internet Protocol) will be taxed.
From LA Times: House votes to extend ban on Internet taxes -- approves a four-year moratorium. With the current moratorium set to expire at the end of the month, the House voted 405 to 2 to extend the politically popular exemption until 2011.
The House bill would prevent state and local governments from taxing the various ways people get Internet service, including high-speed phone and cable lines. It allows nine states that had Internet access taxes in place before the moratorium was enacted in 1998 to continue to collect them. California is not among the states.
Entire LA Times article
Zuma's Batcomputer found this from the ordinance: The term "Communications Services" includes transmission, conveyance, or routing in which computer processing applications are used to act on the form, code or protocol of the content for purposes of transmission, conveyance or routing without regard to whether those services are referred to as voice over internet protocol (VoIP) services or are classified by the Federal Communications Commission as enhanced or value added, and includes video and/or data services that are functionally integrated with "Communications Services."
[Oh no...Telephone tax=9 percent for new technologies such as Voice over Internet Protocol (or VoIP) services.]
Any leagalese types that can make a clarification as to whether this "telephony tax" (which shouldn't even be on the ballot) is a besmirch to the City by having to declare a financial emergency to provide services that are supposed to be covered in the first place -- it's gonna cost at least $5 million to put it on the ballot -- so the question is, does any of this "modernization" of the communication tax step on Federal law, too? (Just aksing.)
Found this on an article about VoIP printed yesterday: "The House bill also narrows the definition of Internet access, allowing state and local governments to tax Internet-related services such as VOIP (voice over Internet Protocol). Opponents of a permanent extension, including some lawmakers, have expressed concerns that the original tax moratorium could be interpreted to ban taxes on services such as VOIP."
ZD: Does this mean antonio is allowed to? will this "narrowing" of definition be in effect BEFORE feb 5 '08? are you allowed to place something on the ballot before it is changed? (What if the final bill isn't isn't approved.)
zumadogg@gmail.com
Posted by Zuma Dogg @ 10/17/2007 07:47:00 PM
21 Comments:
Cell phones are not internet based and VOIP is. Given that, VOIP is not taxable under the city measure.
Somehow, Jack Hoff has managed to spackle himself into a wall all the way into Northridge...here's a report:
SCENE: Mitch Englander walks into his boss' office this afternoon.
Boss: You Jack Hoff?
Mitch: Only on road trips. Why do you ask?
Boss: No, ARE you Jack Hoff?
Mitch: What are you talking about??
Boss: Well, don't be shocked, but some bloggers on Mayor Sam think you’re hacking into city computers and tracking their correspondence. Then they say you're blogging all day on Mayor Sam.
Mitch: (rolls eyes) Ooookay, and WHO are these “bloggers”?
Boss: Lemme see here…(reads email) Zuma Dogg and a Captain Jack Sparrow. They’re very upset.
Mitch: Understandable. It must be difficult for them to download porn if I’m hacking their systems…
Boss: Well, you should probably stop hacking their systems.
Mitch: How can I stop something I never even started?! (Laughs)
The Boss laughs. Everyone laughs. For the first time in many days, laughter rings from the DONE offices in City Hall and the CM office Northridge. A rainbow rises over the City of Angels. There is laughter and love everywhere.
Just to stay on topic...
Has the judge ruled on the "old" tax yet? Does the proposed new "reduction" include a retroactive aspect that would foreclose on lawsuits seeking repayment of past illegal taxes? How much would be owed back to the public for the illegal tax? Isn't this the bigger issue?
The Judge repealed the tax. I was on a new Sprint Cell. The tax was $10.00. I complained. Sprint said when they were notifed they would refund to account.The next month the tax bill was $4.13. No refund was given. I was charged for each of my phones; my cell phone and my broadband connection. I think Sprint felt it was legal when it was assessed; and wasnt repealed until later so therefore there was no refund.
I was a 10% tax which was assessed on my $101.00 a month bill. The "reduced" assessment will be $9.01.
VOTE AGAINST THE TAX!
Zine's excuse for voting yes to place phone tax on ballot was ridiculous. He said "we should at least give the voters a chance to decide." Can he really be as stupid as he looks? If he would have showed some guts this fraud tax ballot would never be on the ballot. Sounds like Zine is flip flopping again and won't support the tax but believes he did the right thing for the people by giving them the choice. Watch Mecha Cholo Mayor use police officers to campaign for this bullshit. Sadly, they are in a horrible position and have to do what the asshole wants even though all you hear is police officers can't stand Antonio.
What clowncil should do is cut their salaries, cut their field staffers and their cars, Mayor cut his 26 city staffer cars, cut his staff, get rid of special event waivers, spend the wasted $82 million on gang programs someplace else, stop wasting money on studies, start enforcing getting rid of all the illegal vendors in LA and fining them like the County does, and on and on.
Daily News is the only one that prints the truth. Forget the LA Slimes ever reporting the truth.
.......And City Council Valley members Dennis Zine and Greig Smith claim they weren't even told about how the new tax will cover more services until the day of the vote to put it on the February ballot. Zine complained that the proposal "should be candid and forthright; not smoke and mirrors, bait and switch."
But after a last-minute arm-twisting (or, perhaps, deal-making) powwow with the mayor, Zine and Smith agreed to play along, making the council's vote unanimous - as it had to be to get on the February presidential ballot.
Sure, the new tax might be a lie wrapped within a lie, but that wasn't going to stop them from fraudulently declaring it an "emergency" measure - meaning it will need only 50 percent of the public's approval, and not the usual two-thirds.
dailynews.com
Would somebody who understands something about government start posting here? What a wasteland.
Pirate Hunter = captured by cannibals in the Papua jungle
All Antonio knows is if it rings its a phone. So yes they will tax VOIP until its challenged in court and declared illegal like everything else they do.
The Los Angeles City Council is notorious for ingoring legal advice and moving ahead with things they know will cause them to be sued and they will lose.
It is Tammany Hall politics at its worst.
Most folks cannot afford to challenge them, thus they get away with a ton of bad stuff.
Zuma's Batcomputer was correct as HELL, y'all...when everyone else's was WRONG, yeah, yeah!!!
Remember when the newspapers were saying labor union increase would be about 13%, and ZD was saying AT LEAST 25% (and was actually predicting 28%, based on Batcomputer calculations)...
LA Times had a story that backs up what ZD's Batcomputer was saying all along: Use the LAT calculator: story/calculator
latimes.com: What would it be like to get a 25% pay raise between now and early 2012?...Some of the lucky "longtime" (LA Coalition) workers -- they've worked for the city for 4 1/2 years or more -- are eligible to get that 25% raise, for a total of $200 million over five years.
25.2%...BUT, LA Times' calculator leaves off a possible $115/month effective 6/30/12.
ZUMATIMES.COM: News Before It Happens. Actual accurate statistics as opposed to newspapers that give you bad info, a day late.
AND NOW: ZD's Batcomputer is saying Mayor's Phone Tax includes illegal internet tax (VoIP). Can anyone dispute this?
Found this on an article about VoIP printed yesterday: "The House bill also narrows the definition of Internet access, allowing state and local governments to tax Internet-related services such as VOIP (voice over Internet Protocol). Opponents of a permanent extension, including some lawmakers, have expressed concerns that the original tax moratorium could be interpreted to ban taxes on services such as VOIP."
ZD: Does this mean antonio is allowed to? will this "narrowing" of definition be in effect BEFORE feb 5 '08? are you allowed to place something on the ballot before it is changed? (What if the final bill isn't isn't approved.)
All I know is, booty calls better be tax-exempt after what he put us through.
Why waste time on such a small amount to be gained from a phone tax....A better revenue stream would come from increasing or establishing an local exit tax for funds being wired or transfered to foreign countries. This would keep some of the legally earned money here, as well as tax the illegal workers funneling money back to their true home and families. Ka-zillions would be made.
10:42 that is freaking brilliant!
sometimes I amaze myself, usually only when watching Jeopardy, though.
Zuma, do I get extra credit points?
12:53,10:42,
You have been highlighted on the 'OUTTAKES" Thread.
Thanks,
Red Spot
cool, whatever that is..
anyways, if that were to go to the ballot, it would pass without much fuss from registered voters.
Red Spot, I agree with 10:42. That is the best suggestion I've heard all year.
The only problem I forsee is a Federal Judge nixing the idea claiming it interferes with interstate commerce (it would be a stretch, but we've observed first-hand how the left-wing secular-progressive-activist judges have ruled on other issues before).
ZD right on something? Now, there is something to celebrate. Doesn't happen all that much.
Oh well, even a blind squirrel finds a nut now and then.
SOrdidly sordid..a fedeeral judge will review it, but it would not restrict or interfere with interstate or international commerce, its a transaction fee, similar to freight leaving the harbor, there is a fee that is paid.
It could also be based not on individual transactions, but based on the gross of the total monthly transactions sent internationally by the business processing the transaction, similar to a sales tax.
It would have to be lobbied and wordsmithed to death, but rather than waste all their time on the telephone tax, split the duties up and work on both.
Post a Comment
Subscribe to Post Comments [Atom]
<< Home