Beta

×

Welcome to the Slashdot Beta site -- learn more here. Use the link in the footer or click here to return to the Classic version of Slashdot.

Thank you!

Before you choose to head back to the Classic look of the site, we'd appreciate it if you share your thoughts on the Beta; your feedback is what drives our ongoing development.

Beta is different and we value you taking the time to try it out. Please take a look at the changes we've made in Beta and  learn more about it. Thanks for reading, and for making the site better!

Oracle Top Execs Answer Sun Employee Questions

ScuttleMonkey posted more than 5 years ago | from the duck-and-cover dept.

Sun Microsystems 207

The Register writes "Sun invited Oracle president Charles Phillips and chief corporate architect Edward Screven to an employee-only town hall this Wednesday, where they took questions on what's coming. They said they'd be 'crazy' to close Java, that Oracle 'needs' MySQL, and all Sun's processors look appealing. They hedged on OpenOffice — Phillips said he couldn't comment on any product line — and on Sun's work in high-performance computing. Screven made it pretty clear the Sun vision of cloud computing does not fit with Oracle's; Oracle sees itself as a provider of infrastructure like virtualization to make clouds, not a provider of hosted services. As for who's staying and who's getting cut at Sun: Phillips said Oracle needs Sun, but warned 'tough decisions' will be coming. Don't forget, this is the company that couriered pink slips to the PeopleSoft staff it cut following that acquisition."

cancel ×

207 comments

Sorry! There are no comments related to the filter you selected.

Fuck fags (-1, Offtopic)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#27706801)

HR 25 IH

111th CONGRESS

1st Session

H. R. 25

To promote freedom, fairness, and economic opportunity by repealing the income tax and other taxes, abolishing the Internal Revenue Service, and enacting a national sales tax to be administered primarily by the States.

IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

January 6, 2009

Mr. LINDER (for himself, Mr. KINGSTON, Mr. WESTMORELAND, Ms. GINNY BROWN-WAITE of Florida, Mr. YOUNG of Alaska, Mr. ALEXANDER, Mr. TIAHRT, Mr. AKIN, Mr. MCCAUL, Mr. PRICE of Georgia, Mr. HENSARLING, Mr. GINGREY of Georgia, Mr. DEAL of Georgia, Mr. WITTMAN, Mr. BURTON of Indiana, Mr. PENCE, Mr. POE of Texas, Mr. BROWN of South Carolina, Mr. BARTLETT, Mr. STEARNS, Mr. CARTER, Mr. FRANKS of Arizona, Mr. BRADY of Texas, Mr. SULLIVAN, Mr. CONAWAY, Mr. THORNBERRY, Mr. BILBRAY, Mr. DUNCAN, Mr. CULBERSON, Ms. FALLIN, Mr. BACHUS, Mr. KING of Iowa, Mr. LAMBORN, Mr. LUCAS, and Mr. NEUGEBAUER) introduced the following bill; which was referred to the Committee on Ways and Means

A BILL

To promote freedom, fairness, and economic opportunity by repealing the income tax and other taxes, abolishing the Internal Revenue Service, and enacting a national sales tax to be administered primarily by the States.

            Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representatives of the United States of America in Congress assembled,

SECTION 1. SHORT TITLE; TABLE OF CONTENTS.

            (a) Short Title- This Act may be cited as the 'Fair Tax Act of 2009'.

            (b) Table of Contents- The table of contents for this Act is as follows:

                        Sec. 1. Short title; table of contents.

                        Sec. 2. Congressional findings.

TITLE I--REPEAL OF THE INCOME TAX, PAYROLL TAXES, AND ESTATE AND GIFT TAXES

                        Sec. 101. Income taxes repealed.

                        Sec. 102. Payroll taxes repealed.

                        Sec. 103. Estate and gift taxes repealed.

                        Sec. 104. Conforming amendments; effective date.

TITLE II--SALES TAX ENACTED

                        Sec. 201. Sales tax.

                        Sec. 202. Conforming and technical amendments.

TITLE III--OTHER MATTERS

                        Sec. 301. Phase-out of administration of repealed Federal taxes.

                        Sec. 302. Administration of other Federal taxes.

                        Sec. 303. Sales tax inclusive Social Security benefits indexation.

TITLE IV--SUNSET OF SALES TAX IF SIXTEENTH AMENDMENT NOT REPEALED

                        Sec. 401. Elimination of sales tax if Sixteenth Amendment not repealed.

SEC. 2. CONGRESSIONAL FINDINGS.

            (a) Findings Relating to Federal Income Tax- Congress finds the Federal income tax--

                        (1) retards economic growth and has reduced the standard of living of the American public;

                        (2) impedes the international competitiveness of United States industry;

                        (3) reduces savings and investment in the United States by taxing income multiple times;

                        (4) slows the capital formation necessary for real wages to steadily increase;

                        (5) lowers productivity;

                        (6) imposes unacceptable and unnecessary administrative and compliance costs on individual and business taxpayers;

                        (7) is unfair and inequitable;

                        (8) unnecessarily intrudes upon the privacy and civil rights of United States citizens;

                        (9) hides the true cost of government by embedding taxes in the costs of everything Americans buy;

                        (10) is not being complied with at satisfactory levels and therefore raises the tax burden on law abiding citizens; and

                        (11) impedes upward social mobility.

            (b) Findings Relating to Federal Payroll Taxes- Congress finds further that the Social Security and Medicare payroll taxes and self-employment taxes--

                        (1) raise the cost of employment;

                        (2) destroy jobs and cause unemployment; and

                        (3) have a disproportionately adverse impact on lower income Americans.

            (c) Findings Relating to Federal Estate and Gift Taxes- Congress finds further that the Federal estate and gift taxes--

                        (1) force family businesses and farms to be sold by the family to pay such taxes;

                        (2) discourage capital formation and entrepreneurship;

                        (3) foster the continued dominance of large enterprises over small family-owned companies and farms; and

                        (4) impose unacceptably high tax planning costs on small businesses and farms.

            (d) Findings Relating to National Sales Tax- Congress finds further that a broad-based national sales tax on goods and services purchased for final consumption--

                        (1) is similar in many respects to the sales and use taxes in place in 45 of the 50 States;

                        (2) will promote savings and investment;

                        (3) will promote fairness;

                        (4) will promote economic growth;

                        (5) will raise the standard of living;

                        (6) will increase investment;

                        (7) will enhance productivity and international competitiveness;

                        (8) will reduce administrative burdens on the American taxpayer;

                        (9) will improve upward social mobility; and

                        (10) will respect the privacy interests and civil rights of taxpayers.

            (e) Findings Relating to Administration of National Sales Tax- Congress further finds that--

                        (1) most of the practical experience administering sales taxes is found at the State governmental level;

                        (2) it is desirable to harmonize Federal and State collection and enforcement efforts to the maximum extent possible;

                        (3) it is sound tax administration policy to foster administration and collection of the Federal sales tax at the State level in return for a reasonable administration fee to the States; and

                        (4) businesses that must collect and remit taxes should receive reasonable compensation for the cost of doing so.

            (f) Findings Relating to Repeal of Present Federal Tax System- Congress further finds that the 16th amendment to the United States Constitution should be repealed.

TITLE I--REPEAL OF THE INCOME TAX, PAYROLL TAXES, AND ESTATE AND GIFT TAXES

SEC. 101. INCOME TAXES REPEALED.

            Subtitle A of the Internal Revenue Code of 1986 (relating to income taxes and self-employment taxes) is repealed.

SEC. 102. PAYROLL TAXES REPEALED.

            (a) In General- Subtitle C of the Internal Revenue Code of 1986 (relating to payroll taxes and withholding of income taxes) is repealed.

            (b) Funding of Social Security- For funding of the Social Security Trust Funds from general revenue, see section 201 of the Social Security Act (42 U.S.C. 401).

SEC. 103. ESTATE AND GIFT TAXES REPEALED.

            Subtitle B of the Internal Revenue Code of 1986 (relating to estate and gift taxes) is repealed.

SEC. 104. CONFORMING AMENDMENTS; EFFECTIVE DATE.

            (a) Conforming Amendments- The Internal Revenue Code of 1986 is amended--

                        (1) by striking subtitle H (relating to financing of Presidential election campaigns), and

                        (2) by redesignating--

                                    (A) subtitle D (relating to miscellaneous excise taxes) as subtitle B,

                                    (B) subtitle E (relating to alcohol, tobacco, and certain other excise taxes) as subtitle C,

                                    (C) subtitle F (relating to procedure and administration) as subtitle D,

                                    (D) subtitle G (relating to the Joint Committee on Taxation) as subtitle E,

                                    (E) subtitle I (relating to the Trust Fund Code) as subtitle F,

                                    (F) subtitle J (relating to coal industry health benefits) as subtitle G, and

                                    (G) subtitle K (relating to group health plan portability, access, and renewability requirements) as subtitle H.

            (b) Redesignation of 1986 Code-

                        (1) IN GENERAL- The Internal Revenue Code of 1986 enacted on October 22, 1986, as heretofore, hereby, or hereafter amended, may be cited as the Internal Revenue Code of 2009.

                        (2) REFERENCES IN LAWS, ETC- Except when inappropriate, any reference in any law, Executive order, or other document--

                                    (A) to the Internal Revenue Code of 1986 shall include a reference to the Internal Revenue Code of 2009, and

                                    (B) to the Internal Revenue Code of 2009 shall include a reference to the provisions of law formerly known as the Internal Revenue Code of 1986.

            (c) Additional Amendments- For additional conforming amendments, see section 202 of this Act.

            (d) Effective Date- Except as otherwise provided in this Act, the amendments made by this Act shall take effect on January 1, 2011.

TITLE II--SALES TAX ENACTED

SEC. 201. SALES TAX.

            (a) In General- The Internal Revenue Code of 2009 is amended by inserting before subtitle B (as redesignated by section 104(a)(2)(A)) the following new subtitle:

'Subtitle A--Sales Tax

                        'Sec. 1. Principles of interpretation.

                        'Sec. 2. Definitions.

'Chapter 1. Interpretation; Definitions; Imposition of Tax; etc.

'Chapter 2. Credits; Refunds

'Chapter 3. Family Consumption Allowance

'Chapter 4. Federal and State Cooperative Tax Administration

'Chapter 5. Other Administrative Provisions

'Chapter 6. Collections; Appeals; Taxpayer Rights

'Chapter 7. Special Rules

'Chapter 8. Financial Intermediation Services

'Chapter 9. Additional Matters

'SEC. 1. PRINCIPLES OF INTERPRETATION.

            '(a) In General- Any court, the Secretary, and any sales tax administering authority shall consider the purposes of this subtitle (as set forth in subsection (b)) as the primary aid in statutory construction.

            '(b) Purposes- The purposes of this subtitle are as follows:

                        '(1) To raise revenue needed by the Federal Government in a manner consistent with the other purposes of this subtitle.

                        '(2) To tax all consumption of goods and services in the United States once, without exception, but only once.

                        '(3) To prevent double, multiple, or cascading taxation.

                        '(4) To simplify the tax law and reduce the administration costs of, and the costs of compliance with, the tax law.

                        '(5) To provide for the administration of the tax law in a manner that respects privacy, due process, individual rights when interacting with the government, the presumption of innocence in criminal proceedings, and the presumption of lawful behavior in civil proceedings.

                        '(6) To increase the role of State governments in Federal tax administration because of State government expertise in sales tax administration.

                        '(7) To enhance generally cooperation and coordination among State tax administrators; and to enhance cooperation and coordination among Federal and State tax administrators, consistent with the principle of intergovernmental tax immunity.

            '(c) Secondary Aids to Statutory Construction- As a secondary aid in statutory construction, any court, the Secretary, and any sales tax administering authority shall consider--

                        '(1) the common law canons of statutory construction;

                        '(2) the meaning and construction of concepts and terms used in the Internal Revenue Code of 1986 as in effect before the effective date of this subtitle; and

                        '(3) construe any ambiguities in this Act in favor of reserving powers to the States respectively, or to the people.

'SEC. 2. DEFINITIONS.

            '(a) In General- For purposes of this subtitle--

                        '(1) AFFILIATED FIRMS- A firm is affiliated with another if 1 firm owns 50 percent or more of--

                                    '(A) the voting shares in a corporation, or

                                    '(B) the capital interests of a business firm that is not a corporation.

                        '(2) CONFORMING STATE SALES TAX- The term 'conforming State sales tax' means a sales tax imposed by a State that adopts the same definition of taxable property and services as adopted by this subtitle.

                        '(3) DESIGNATED COMMERCIAL PRIVATE COURIER SERVICE- The term 'designated commercial private courier service' means a firm designated as such by the Secretary or any sales tax administering authority, upon application of the firm, if the firm--

                                    '(A) provides its services to the general public,

                                    '(B) records electronically to its data base kept in the regular course of its business the date on which an item was given to such firm for delivery, and

                                    '(C) has been operating for at least 1 year.

                        '(4) EDUCATION AND TRAINING- The term 'education and training' means tuition for primary, secondary, or postsecondary level education, and job-related training courses. Such term does not include room, board, sports activities, recreational activities, hobbies, games, arts or crafts or cultural activities.

                        '(5) GROSS PAYMENTS- The term 'gross payments' means payments for taxable property or services, including Federal taxes imposed by this title.

                        '(6) INTANGIBLE PROPERTY-

                                    '(A) IN GENERAL- The term 'intangible property' includes copyrights, trademarks, patents, goodwill, financial instruments, securities, commercial paper, debts, notes and bonds, and other property deemed intangible at common law. The Secretary shall, by regulation resolve differences among the provisions of common law of the several States.

                                    '(B) CERTAIN TYPES OF PROPERTY- Such term does not include tangible personal property (or rents or leaseholds of any term thereon), real property (or rents or leaseholds of any term thereon) and computer software.

                        '(7) PERSON- The term 'person' means any natural person, and unless the context clearly does not allow it, any corporation, partnership, limited liability company, trust, estate, government, agency, administration, organization, association, or other legal entity (foreign or domestic.)

                        '(8) PRODUCE, PROVIDE, RENDER, OR SELL TAXABLE PROPERTY OR SERVICES-

                                    '(A) IN GENERAL- A taxable property or service is used to produce, provide, render, or sell a taxable property or service if such property or service is purchased by a person engaged in a trade or business for the purpose of employing or using such taxable property or service in the production, provision, rendering, or sale of other taxable property or services in the ordinary course of that trade or business.

                                    '(B) RESEARCH, EXPERIMENTATION, TESTING, AND DEVELOPMENT- Taxable property or services used in a trade or business for the purpose of research, experimentation, testing, and development shall be treated as used to produce, provide, render, or sell taxable property or services.

                                    '(C) INSURANCE PAYMENTS- Taxable property or services purchased by an insurer on behalf of an insured shall be treated as used to produce, provide, render, or sell taxable property or services if the premium for the insurance contract giving rise to the insurer's obligation was subject to tax pursuant to section 801 (relating to financial intermediation services).

                                    '(D) EDUCATION AND TRAINING- Education and training shall be treated as services used to produce, provide, render, or sell taxable property or services.

                        '(9) REGISTERED SELLER- The term 'registered seller' means a person registered pursuant to section 502.

                        '(10) SALES TAX ADMINISTERING AUTHORITY- The term 'sales tax administering authority' means--

                                    '(A) the State agency designated to collect and administer the sales tax imposed by this subtitle, in an administering State, or

                                    '(B) the Secretary, in a State that is neither--

                                                '(i) an administering State, nor

                                                '(ii) a State that has elected to have its sales tax administered by an administering State.

                        '(11) SECRETARY- The term 'Secretary' means the Secretary of the Treasury.

                        '(12) TAXABLE EMPLOYER-

                                    '(A) IN GENERAL- The term 'taxable employer' includes--

                                                '(i) any household employing domestic servants, and

                                                '(ii) any government except for government enterprises (as defined in section 704).

                                    '(B) EXCEPTIONS- The term 'taxable employer' does not include any employer which is--

                                                '(i) engaged in a trade or business,

                                                '(ii) a not-for-profit organization (as defined in section 706), or

                                                '(iii) a government enterprise (as defined in section 704).

                                    '(C) CROSS REFERENCE- For rules relating to collection and remittance of tax on wages by taxable employers, see section 103(b)(2).

                        '(13) TAX INCLUSIVE FAIR MARKET VALUE- The term 'tax inclusive fair market value' means the fair market value of taxable property or services plus the tax imposed by this subtitle.

                        '(14) TAXABLE PROPERTY OR SERVICE-

                                    '(A) GENERAL RULE- The term 'taxable property or service' means--

                                                '(i) any property (including leaseholds of any term or rents with respect to such property) but excluding--

                                                            '(I) intangible property, and

                                                            '(II) used property, and

                                                '(ii) any service (including any financial intermediation services as determined by section 801).

                                    '(B) SERVICE- For purposes of subparagraph (A), the term 'service'--

                                                '(i) shall include any service performed by an employee for which the employee is paid wages or a salary by a taxable employer, and

                                                '(ii) shall not include any service performed by an employee for which the employee is paid wages or a salary--

                                                            '(I) by an employer in the regular course of the employer's trade or business,

                                                            '(II) by an employer that is a not-for-profit organization (as defined in section 706),

                                                            '(III) by an employer that is a government enterprise (as defined in section 704), and

                                                            '(IV) by taxable employers to employees directly providing education and training.

                        '(15) UNITED STATES- The term 'United States', when used in the geographical sense, means each of the 50 states, the District of Columbia, and any commonwealth, territory, or possession of the United States.

                        '(16) USED PROPERTY- The term 'used property' means--

                                    '(A) property on which the tax imposed by section 101 has been collected and for which no credit has been allowed under section 202, 203, or 205, or

                                    '(B) property that was held other than for a business purpose (as defined in section 102(b)) on December 31, 2010.

                        '(17) WAGES AND SALARY- The terms 'wage' and 'salary' mean all compensation paid for employment service including cash compensation, employee benefits, disability insurance, or wage replacement insurance payments, unemployment compensation insurance, workers' compensation insurance, and the fair market value of any other consideration paid by an employer to an employee in consideration for employment services rendered.

            '(b) Cross References-

                        '(1) For the definition of business purposes, see section 102(b).

                        '(2) For the definition of insurance contract, see section 206(e).

                        '(3) For the definition of qualified family, see section 302.

                        '(4) For the definition of monthly poverty level, see section 303.

                        '(5) For the definition of large seller, see section 501(e)(3).

                        '(6) For the definition of hobby activities, see section 701.

                        '(7) For the definition of gaming sponsor, see section 701(a).

                        '(8) For the definition of a chance, see section 701(b).

                        '(9) For the definition of government enterprise, see section 704(b).

                        '(10) For the definition of mixed use property, see section 705.

                        '(11) For the definition of qualified not-for-profit organization, see section 706.

                        '(12) For the definition of financial intermediation services, see section 801.

'CHAPTER 1--INTERPRETATION; DEFINITIONS; IMPOSITION OF TAX; ETC

                        'Sec. 101. Imposition of sales tax.

                        'Sec. 102. Intermediate and export sales.

                        'Sec. 103. Rules relating to collection and remittance of tax.

'SEC. 101. IMPOSITION OF SALES TAX.

            '(a) In General- There is hereby imposed a tax on the use or consumption in the United States of taxable property or services.

            '(b) Rate-

                        '(1) FOR 2011- In the calendar year 2011, the rate of tax is 23 percent of the gross payments for the taxable property or service.

                        '(2) FOR YEARS AFTER 2011- For years after the calendar year 2011, the rate of tax is the combined Federal tax rate percentage (as defined in paragraph (3)) of the gross payments for the taxable property or service.

                        '(3) COMBINED FEDERAL TAX RATE PERCENTAGE- The combined Federal tax rate percentage is the sum of--

                                    '(A) the general revenue rate (as defined in paragraph (4),

                                    '(B) the old-age, survivors and disability insurance rate, and

                                    '(C) the hospital insurance rate.

                        '(4) GENERAL REVENUE RATE- The general revenue rate shall be 14.91 percent.

            '(c) Coordination With Import Duties- The tax imposed by this section is in addition to any import duties imposed by chapter 4 of title 19, United States Code. The Secretary shall provide by regulation that, to the maximum extent practicable, the tax imposed by this section on imported taxable property and services is collected and administered in conjunction with any applicable import duties imposed by the United States.

            '(d) Liability for Tax-

                        '(1) IN GENERAL- The person using or consuming taxable property or services in the United States is liable for the tax imposed by this section, except as provided in paragraph (2) of this subsection.

                        '(2) EXCEPTION WHERE TAX PAID TO SELLER- A person using or consuming a taxable property or service in the United States is not liable for the tax imposed by this section if the person pays the tax to a person selling the taxable property or service and receives from such person a purchaser's receipt within the meaning of section 509.

'SEC. 102. INTERMEDIATE AND EXPORT SALES.

            '(a) In General- For purposes of this subtitle--

                        '(1) BUSINESS AND EXPORT PURPOSES- No tax shall be imposed under section 101 on any taxable property or service purchased for a business purpose in a trade or business.

                        '(2) INVESTMENT PURPOSE- No tax shall be imposed under section 101 on any taxable property or service purchased for an investment purpose and held exclusively for an investment purpose.

                        '(3) STATE GOVERNMENT FUNCTIONS- No tax shall be imposed under section 101 on State government functions that do not constitute the final consumption of property or services.

            '(b) Business Purposes- For purposes of this section, the term 'purchased for a business purpose in a trade or business' means purchased by a person engaged in a trade or business and used in that trade or business--

                        '(1) for resale,

                        '(2) to produce, provide, render, or sell taxable property or services, or

                        '(3) in furtherance of other bona fide business purposes.

            '(c) Investment Purposes- For purposes of this section, the term 'purchased for an investment purpose' means property purchased exclusively for purposes of appreciation or the production of income but not entailing more than minor personal efforts.

'SEC. 103. RULES RELATING TO COLLECTION AND REMITTANCE OF TAX.

            '(a) Liability for Collection and Remittance of the Tax- Except as provided otherwise by this section, any tax imposed by this subtitle shall be collected and remitted by the seller of taxable property or services (including financial intermediation services).

            '(b) Tax To Be Remitted by Purchaser in Certain Circumstances-

                        '(1) IN GENERAL- In the case of taxable property or services purchased outside of the United States and imported into the United States for use or consumption in the United States, the purchaser shall remit the tax imposed by section 101.

                        '(2) CERTAIN WAGES OR SALARY- In the case of wages or salary paid by a taxable employer which are taxable services, the employer shall remit the tax imposed by section 101.

            '(c) Conversion of Business or Export Property or Services- Property or services purchased for a business purpose in a trade or business or for export (sold untaxed pursuant to section 102(a)) that is subsequently converted to personal use shall be deemed purchased at the time of conversion and shall be subject to the tax imposed by section 101 at the fair market value of the converted property as of the date of conversion. The tax shall be due as if the property had been sold at the fair market value during the month of conversion. The person using or consuming the converted property is liable for and shall remit the tax.

            '(d) Barter Transactions- If gross payment for taxable property or services is made in other than money, then the person responsible for collecting and remitting the tax shall remit the tax to the sales tax administering authority in money as if gross payment had been made in money at the tax inclusive fair market value of the taxable property or services purchased.

'CHAPTER 2--CREDITS; REFUNDS

                        'Sec. 201. Credits and refunds.

                        'Sec. 202. Business use conversion credit.

                        'Sec. 203. Intermediate and export sales credit.

                        'Sec. 204. Administration credit.

                        'Sec. 205. Bad debt credit.

                        'Sec. 206. Insurance proceeds credit.

                        'Sec. 207. Refunds.

'SEC. 201. CREDITS AND REFUNDS.

            '(a) In General- Each person shall be allowed a credit with respect to the taxes imposed by section 101 for each month in an amount equal to the sum of--

                        '(1) such person's business use conversion credit pursuant to section 202 for such month,

                        '(2) such person's intermediate and export sales credit pursuant to section 203 for such month,

                        '(3) the administration credit pursuant to section 204 for such month,

                        '(4) the bad debt credit pursuant to section 205 for such month,

                        '(5) the insurance proceeds credit pursuant to section 206 for such month,

                        '(6) the transitional inventory credit pursuant to section 902, and

                        '(7) any amount paid in excess of the amount due.

            '(b) Credits Not Additive- Only one credit allowed by chapter 2 may be taken with respect to any particular gross payment.

'SEC. 202. BUSINESS USE CONVERSION CREDIT.

            '(a) In General- For purposes of section 201, a person's business use conversion credit for any month is the aggregate of the amounts determined under subsection (b) with respect to taxable property and services--

                        '(1) on which tax was imposed by section 101 (and actually paid), and

                        '(2) which commenced to be 95 percent or more used during such month for business purposes (within the meaning of section 102(b)).

            '(b) Amount of Credit- The amount determined under this paragraph with respect to any taxable property or service is the lesser of--

                        '(1) the product of--

                                    '(A) the rate imposed by section 101, and

                                    '(B) the quotient that is--

                                                '(i) the fair market value of the property or service when its use is converted, divided by

                                                '(ii) the quantity that is 1 minus the tax rate imposed by section 101, or

                        '(2) the amount of tax paid with respect to such taxable property or service, including the amount, if any, determined in accordance with section 705 (relating to mixed use property).

'SEC. 203. INTERMEDIATE AND EXPORT SALES CREDIT.

            'For purposes of section 201, a person's intermediate and export sales credit is the amount of sales tax paid on the purchase of any taxable property or service purchased for--

                        '(1) a business purpose in a trade or business (as defined in section 102(b)), or

                        '(2) export from the United States for use or consumption outside the United States.

'SEC. 204. ADMINISTRATION CREDIT.

            '(a) In General- Every person filing a timely monthly report (with regard to extensions) in compliance with section 501 shall be entitled to a taxpayer administrative credit equal to the greater of--

                        '(1) $200, or

                        '(2) one-quarter of 1 percent of the tax remitted.

            '(b) Limitation- The credit allowed under this section shall not exceed 20 percent of the tax due to be remitted prior to the application of any credit or credits permitted by section 201.

'SEC. 205. BAD DEBT CREDIT.

            '(a) Financial Intermediation Services- Any person who has experienced a bad debt (other than unpaid invoices within the meaning of subsection (b)) shall be entitled to a credit equal to the product of--

                        '(1) the rate imposed by section 101, and

                        '(2) the quotient that is--

                                    '(A) the amount of the bad debt (as defined in section 802), divided by

                                    '(B) the quantity that is 1 minus the rate imposed by section 101.

            '(b) Unpaid Invoices- Any person electing the accrual method pursuant to section 503 that has with respect to a transaction--

                        '(1) invoiced the tax imposed by section 101,

                        '(2) remitted the invoiced tax,

                        '(3) actually delivered the taxable property or performed the taxable services invoiced, and

                        '(4) not been paid 180 days after date the invoice was due to be paid,

            shall be entitled to a credit equal to the amount of tax remitted and unpaid by the purchaser.

            '(c) Subsequent Payment- Any payment made with respect to a transaction subsequent to a section 205 credit being taken with respect to that transaction shall be subject to tax in the month the payment was received as if a tax inclusive sale of taxable property and services in the amount of the payment had been made.

            '(d) Partial Payments- Partial payments shall be treated as pro rata payments of the underlying obligation and shall be allocated proportionately--

                        '(1) for fully taxable payments, between payment for the taxable property and service and tax, and

                        '(2) for partially taxable payments, among payment for the taxable property and service, tax and other payment.

            '(e) Related Parties- The credit provided by this section shall not be available with respect to sales made to related parties. For purposes of this section, related party means affiliated firms and family members (as defined in section 302(b)).

'SEC. 206. INSURANCE PROCEEDS CREDIT.

            '(a) In General- A person receiving a payment from an insurer by virtue of an insurance contract shall be entitled to a credit in an amount determined by subsection (b), less any amount paid to the insured by the insurer pursuant to subsection (c), if the entire premium (except that portion allocable to the investment account of the underlying policy) for the insurance contract giving rise to the insurer's obligation to make a payment to the insured was subject to the tax imposed by section 101 and said tax was paid.

            '(b) Credit Amount- The amount of the credit shall be the product of--

                        '(1) the rate imposed by section 101, and

                        '(2) the quotient that is--

                                    '(A) the amount of the payment made by the insurer to the insured, divided by

                                    '(B) the quantity that is 1 minus the rate imposed by section 101.

            '(c) Administrative Option- The credit determined in accordance with subsection (b) shall be paid by the insurer to the insured and the insurer shall be entitled to the credit in lieu of the insured, except that the insurer may elect, in a form prescribed by the Secretary, to not pay the credit and require the insured to make application for the credit. In the event of such election, the insurer shall provide to the Secretary and the insured the name and tax identification number of the insurer and of the insured and indicate the proper amount of the credit.

            '(d) Coordination With Respect to Exemption- If taxable property or services purchased by an insurer on behalf of an insured are purchased free of tax by virtue of section 2(a)(8)(C), then the credit provided by this section shall not be available with respect to that purchase.

            '(e) Insurance Contract- For purposes of subsection (a), the term insurance contract' shall include a life insurance contract, a health insurance contract, a property and casualty loss insurance contract, a general liability insurance contract, a marine insurance contract, a fire insurance contract, an accident insurance contract, a disability insurance contract, a long-term care insurance contract, and an insurance contract that provides a combination of these types of insurance.

'SEC. 207. REFUNDS.

            '(a) Registered Sellers- If a registered seller files a monthly tax report with an overpayment, then, upon application by the registered seller in a form prescribed by the sales tax administering authority, the overpayment shown on the report shall be refunded to the registered seller within 60 days of receipt of said application. In the absence of such application, the overpayment may be carried forward, without interest, by the person entitled to the credit.

            '(b) Other Persons- If a person other than a registered seller has an overpayment for any month, then, upon application by the person in a form prescribed by the sales tax administering authority, the credit balance due shall be refunded to the person within 60 days of receipt of said application.

            '(c) Interest- No interest shall be paid on any balance due from the sales tax administering authority under this subsection for any month if such balance due is paid within 60 days after the application for refund is received. Balances due not paid within 60 days after the application for refund is received shall bear interest from the date of application. Interest shall be paid at the Federal short-term rate (as defined in section 511).

            '(d) Suspension of Period To Pay Refund Only if Federal or State Court Ruling- The 60-day periods under subsections (a) and (b) shall be suspended with respect to a purported overpayment (or portion thereof) only during any period that there is in effect a preliminary, temporary, or final ruling from a Federal or State court that there is reasonable cause to believe that such overpayment may not actually be due.

'CHAPTER 3--FAMILY CONSUMPTION ALLOWANCE

                        'Sec. 301. Family consumption allowance.

                        'Sec. 302. Qualified family.

                        'Sec. 303. Monthly poverty level.

                        'Sec. 304. Rebate mechanism.

                        'Sec. 305. Change in family circumstances.

'SEC. 301. FAMILY CONSUMPTION ALLOWANCE.

            'Each qualified family shall be eligible to receive a sales tax rebate each month. The sales tax rebate shall be in an amount equal to the product of--

                        '(1) the rate of tax imposed by section 101, and

                        '(2) the monthly poverty level.

'SEC. 302. QUALIFIED FAMILY.

            '(a) General Rule- For purposes of this chapter, the term 'qualified family' shall mean 1 or more family members sharing a common residence. All family members sharing a common residence shall be considered as part of 1 qualified family.

            '(b) Family Size Determination-

                        '(1) IN GENERAL- To determine the size of a qualified family for purposes of this chapter, family members shall mean--

                                    '(A) an individual,

                                    '(B) the individual's spouse,

                                    '(C) all lineal ancestors and descendants of said individual (and such individual's spouse),

                                    '(D) all legally adopted children of such individual (and such individual's spouse), and

                                    '(E) all children under legal guardianship of such individual (or such individual's spouse).

                        '(2) IDENTIFICATION REQUIREMENTS- In order for a person to be counted as a member of the family for purposes of determining the size of the qualified family, such person must--

                                    '(A) have a bona fide Social Security number; and

                                    '(B) be a lawful resident of the United States.

            '(c) Children Living Away From Home-

                        '(1) STUDENTS LIVING AWAY FROM HOME- Any person who was a registered student during not fewer than 5 months in a calendar year while living away from the common residence of a qualified family but who receives over 50 percent of such person's support during a calendar year from members of the qualified family shall be included as part of the family unit whose members provided said support for purposes of this chapter.

                        '(2) CHILDREN OF DIVORCED OR SEPARATED PARENTS- If a child's parents are divorced or legally separated, a child for purposes of this chapter shall be treated as part of the qualified family of the custodial parent. In cases of joint custody, the custodial parent for purposes of this chapter shall be the parent that has custody of the child for more than one-half of the time during a given calendar year. A parent entitled to be treated as the custodial parent pursuant to this paragraph may release this claim to the other parent if said release is in writing.

            '(d) Annual Registration- In order to receive the family consumption allowance provided by section 301, a qualified family must register with the sales tax administering authority in a form prescribed by the Secretary. The annual registration form shall provide--

                        '(1) the name of each family member who shared the qualified family's residence on the family determination date,

                        '(2) the Social Security number of each family member on the family determination date who shared the qualified family's residence on the family determination date,

                        '(3) the family member or family members to whom the family consumption allowance should be paid,

                        '(4) a certification that all listed family members are lawful residents of the United States,

                        '(5) a certification that all family members sharing the common residence are listed,

                        '(6) a certification that no family members were incarcerated on the family determination date (within the meaning of subsection (l)), and

                        '(7) the address of the qualified family.

            Said registration shall be signed by all members of the qualified family that have attained the age of 21 years as of the date of filing.

            '(e) Registration Not Mandatory- Registration is not mandatory for any qualified family.

            '(f) Effect of Failure To Provide Annual Registration- Any qualified family that fails to register in accordance with this section within 30 days of the family determination date, shall cease receiving the monthly family consumption allowance in the month beginning 90 days after the family determination date.

            '(g) Effect of Curing Failure To Provide Annual Registration- Any qualified family that failed to timely make its annual registration in accordance with this section but subsequently cures its failure to register, shall be entitled to up to 6 months of lapsed sales tax rebate payments. No interest on lapsed payment amount shall be paid.

            '(h) Effective Date of Annual Registrations- Annual registrations shall take effect for the month beginning 90 days after the family registration date.

            '(i) Effective Date of Revised Registrations- A revised registration made pursuant to section 305 shall take effect for the first month beginning 60 days after the revised registration was filed. The existing registration shall remain in effect until the effective date of the revised registration.

            '(j) Determination of Registration Filing Date- An annual or revised registration shall be deemed filed when--

                        '(1) deposited in the United States mail, postage prepaid, to the address of the sales tax administering authority;

                        '(2) delivered and accepted at the offices of the sales tax administering authority; or

                        '(3) provided to a designated commercial private courier service for delivery within 2 days to the sales tax administering authority at the address of the sales tax administering authority.

            '(k) Proposed Registration To Be Provided- 30 or more days before the family registration date, the sales tax administering authority shall mail to the address shown on the most recent rebate registration or change of address notice filed pursuant to section 305(d) a proposed registration that may be simply signed by the appropriate family members if family circumstances have not changed.

            '(l) Incarcerated Individuals- An individual shall not be eligible under this chapter to be included as a member of any qualified family if that individual--

                        '(1) is in

Re:Fuck fags (-1, Offtopic)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#27706871)

Like I'm going to read all that.

Yeah Like this will EVER happen. (0, Offtopic)

pentalive (449155) | more than 5 years ago | (#27707141)

The Income tax is a huge lever for government control. Want more of a thing, give a tax deduction (like the deduction for kids or mortgage payments). Want less? tax it.

Re:Yeah Like this will EVER happen. (-1, Troll)

Locke2005 (849178) | more than 5 years ago | (#27707339)

a) Your post is completely offtopic b) Give the government the power to reward some industries and punish others through the tax code, and you make it much more lucerative to bribe government officials for favorable treatment than to spend your money competing in a free market. c) A tax deduction for kids is a government subsidy (pronounced "welfare") for breeders. A tax deduction for mortgage interest is a government subsidy to home owners and the real estate industry. The first is blatant discrimination against those that do not or cannot have kids. The second is blatant discrimination against those that cannot afford home ownership -- this subsidy to the rich is the antithesis of "progressive taxation".

If we hadn't been subsidizing children for the past 30 years, we wouldn't have so many more workers than jobs now (the "unemployment rate" actually measures the difference between the birth/immigration rate and the job creation rate). If we hadn't been subsidizing mortgage interest, there wouldn't have been as big a housing bubble, therefore not as big a slump.

Re:Yeah Like this will EVER happen. (0, Offtopic)

cyphercell (843398) | more than 5 years ago | (#27707425)

what about incentive for two kids, punishment for anything above 4. Example, 3 kids would give a deduction for having one. (+2 tax bonus -1 tax penalty = one child tax deduction).

Re:Yeah Like this will EVER happen. (0, Offtopic)

Locke2005 (849178) | more than 5 years ago | (#27707495)

What about incentivizing behavior that shortens your life expectancy, like smoking, drinking, and drug use, rather then disincentivizing these behaviors like we do now? Allowing a 1-for-1 replacement rate still results in population growth, simply because people are living longer. I do agree with the original post in the sense that if you subsidize breeders, you will get more offspring. I'm just not convinced that that is a societal good.

Re:Yeah Like this will EVER happen. (1, Troll)

cyphercell (843398) | more than 5 years ago | (#27708325)

Okay, I'll agree that excessive breeding is bad, but I don't see how it's fair to punish someone for having one or two (one for each partner) kids. In a way they are providing society with citizens to work as they retire. There is some leeway for having a child at different age groups. Better incentives for waiting until thirty, might cover quite a bit of losses with regards to someone who has a child at 16 and lives to 99. The comparison is having a child at 30 and living to 99, the child being better equipped to contribute to society could cover more than just the 14 working years you'd expect. This also, generally adds to the quality of life.

Most things that shorten life expectancy also devalue quality of life. I'd go against it.

On the other hand I'm not 100% sure I could advocate placing extra taxes on a 16 year old that is having a child. In this respect I suppose I would just provide a bonus for hitting the optimum age range - say 25-35. Everyone else is either too young or too old.

Re:Yeah Like this will EVER happen. (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#27708239)

Assuming a static environment in which no jobs are destroyed or created by innovation and that no jobs are ever shipped to another country then your assertion about unemployment rate is largely correct. However, you shouldn't worry since in about 10 years lots of baby boomers will retire and you can kiss that unemployment problem good bye.

Here's praying... (4, Insightful)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#27706869)

...that they don't decide to GPL Solaris. Really don't want to see my favorite OS pulled apart and canibalized to fuel the growing Linux hegemony. Let's keep some diversity and competition in the Unix market!

Re:Here's praying... (3, Funny)

CookieOfFortune (955407) | more than 5 years ago | (#27706897)

I like that term... Linux hegemony. :D

Re:Here's praying... (5, Funny)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#27706939)

Ha ha! It must infuriate you to know that we're going to gut your OS and leave it for dead! Onwards to Solaris my brethren, we have an operating system to pillage and a user base to rape!

Re:Here's praying... (5, Funny)

eln (21727) | more than 5 years ago | (#27707101)

and a user base to rape!

Dude, have you SEEN the user base? Not even with someone else's dick.

Re:Here's praying... (1, Insightful)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#27707401)

Ha ha! It must infuriate you to know that we're going to gut your OS and leave it for dead! Onwards to Solaris my brethren, we have an operating system to pillage and a user base to rape!

When you grab libumem, ZFS, and DTrace, make sure you take the scheduler as well. I'm tired of Linux live-locking on me.

Re:Here's praying... (3, Insightful)

ThePhilips (752041) | more than 5 years ago | (#27707671)

That would be really bad (and is very unlikely event).

Solaris 10 is pretty much last commercial Unix which does suck but only moderately. Because only alternatives are HP-UX (dead man crawling) and AIX (IBM Global Services' private toy).

[ OK, AIX too does suck only moderately, but it's just IBM is active in relatively few markets/regions (what/how they sell/support depends on region). You can buy it, but you will not get much support from them. ]

Many companies have strategic partnership with Sun solely for its ability to provide stable, well integrated with the hardware Unix.

P.S. Though, honestly, more and more companies which had enough intelligence in past to have good relationship with Sun, also used that intelligence other way around and evaluated/deployed Linux already long time ago - everywhere where it was feasible.

Re:Here's praying... (5, Funny)

kybred (795293) | more than 5 years ago | (#27708355)

... to pillage and a user base to rape!

Always rape BEFORE you pillage (and burn)!

Re:Here's praying... (1, Funny)

rackserverdeals (1503561) | more than 5 years ago | (#27706965)

Linux doesn't need Solaris to be GPL'd. All the cool new stuff that Solaris came out with years ago should be in Linux any day now.

Any day now...

Re:Here's praying... (1)

SanityInAnarchy (655584) | more than 5 years ago | (#27707029)

What, like ZFS [blogspot.com] ?

Where's all my cool Linux stuff on Solaris, though?

Re:Here's praying... (1)

rackserverdeals (1503561) | more than 5 years ago | (#27707069)

I think the work they are doing with ZFS on Fuse is commendable and I don't mean to belittle the efforts of any of the developers in my attempt at a funny dig above...

but, you wouldn't run a 0.5.0 beta version of a filesystem in production.

Re:Here's praying... (1)

fuzzix (700457) | more than 5 years ago | (#27707311)

Where's all my cool Linux stuff on Solaris, though?

Here [opensolaris.org] ?

OK, so it's not an "all". :-)

Wish dtrace was under a GPL compatible license... :-)

Re:Here's praying... (2, Insightful)

DaleGlass (1068434) | more than 5 years ago | (#27707785)

It doesn't matter what license dtrace is under.

dtrace exposes Solaris kernel internals. Porting that to Linux even if the license was compatible would be very non-trivial.

BSD and Solaris at least have a common ancestry, while Linux isn't related to anything else.

Re:Here's praying... (2, Informative)

diegocgteleline.es (653730) | more than 5 years ago | (#27708253)

Porting dtrace would be useless, Linux has pretty much catched up in that front - the only piece missing is the merge of utrace in the main kernel. In distros like Fedora, which include utrace, you already can use systemtap to probe both the kernel and userspace without problems (sure, it lacks the "final polish" of dtrace, but all the hard has been done)

Re:Here's praying... (1, Informative)

DaleGlass (1068434) | more than 5 years ago | (#27707341)

Btrfs is supposed to be the Linux FS that will be comparable to ZFS.

ZFS can be had through FUSE as well.

And for an alternative to dtrace there's systemtap.

Re:Here's praying... (2, Informative)

rackserverdeals (1503561) | more than 5 years ago | (#27707879)

ZFS on Fuse is not production ready.

Btrfs came from oracle and I think they're still the largest contributor.

Now Oracle will hve ZFS on an operating system they have a large financial interest in (most oracle deployments are still on solaris/sparc according to ellison) and now they own it.

I'ts going to be interesting to see what Oracle does. They could possibly use ZFS to get btrfs further along, but it's beneficial to their bottom line to keep some goodies all to Solaris.

Re:Here's praying... (3, Funny)

Tanktalus (794810) | more than 5 years ago | (#27708015)

Where's all my cool Linux stuff on Solaris, though?

I'm sure you could just compile cygwin ... :-P

Re:Here's praying... (1, Insightful)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#27707089)

Any day now...

zfs is a long time coming, the fuse situation isn't going anywhere. if linux had zfs then solaris would be pretty worthless.

zones linux has convered, with the competition with virutalization esx and xen seem to be doing well. I am not sure sun contributes much to this other than a token effort with their product.

more dtrace like work on linux would be great

Re:Here's praying... (5, Informative)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#27707615)

I'm a sysadmin for a government contractor and we support many Linux distributions and some real Unix, but most commonly deploy RHEL boxes. My experience with RHEL has been lackluster: yum is retarded, the package selection is silly (Debian does much better at this), software compatibility between versions is awful, and its init scripts and management tools are ridiculous.

Solaris offers solutions to a lot of these problems. The solaris systems management agent is well-designed and extremely helpful; there is nothing like this in the "enterprise" linux distributions I've seen. The solaris package management tool is simple and effective. The solaris backwards compatibility guarantee is invaluable, and the kernel contract system gives me a superior way to make sure essential services stay up. And these are smaller features.

Add to the above a superior IP stack, ZFS, zones (I have customized Xen and deployed it in a production environment and it's great, but doesn't replace zones), dtrace, etc., and you have a truly enterprise OS. No current Linux distro offers this. I'm sad to think that the great project that is Opensolaris might be canned.

No One Takes The Viral GPL Seriously Anymore (0, Insightful)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#27706979)

No company is stupid enough to encumber their products with the viral GPL anymore. The GNU crazies did a good job of marketing their kooky license as the default choice but companies have long since caught on and now stick to the free and developer friendly BSD/Apache open source licenses.

Android, Clang/LLVM, OS X's Darwin, etc are driving the Bearded GNU freaks crazy.

Love it!

Re:No One Takes The Viral GPL Seriously Anymore (1)

ta bu shi da yu (687699) | more than 5 years ago | (#27707083)

Actually, for OpenOffice.org that might be its saving grace. The best thing that could happen to the Open Source movement is if Oracle decides to stop actively developing OOo - in that way other projects will be actively hacked on without the stranglehold that Sun has had on the market. And those projects will probably use - you guessed it - the GPL.

Re:No One Takes The Viral GPL Seriously Anymore (3, Insightful)

RiotingPacifist (1228016) | more than 5 years ago | (#27707729)

I think the problem with open source office suits is an office suite dosen't get anybody laid [jwz.org] , so there is little enthusiasm from people not paid to do it. If you want to use an MS clone the Openoffice is fine, but there is never going to be any innovation unless it comes from another company, so the best hope is to open up the development and get all the companies on board with something, but given its slowness and dependance on java i don't think even that will result in a good product, its best for it to die and novell,linux foundation,red hat, etc, to put their effort into gnumeric,abiword,etc, (maybe rip out the good parts of openoffice and put them in libraries).

Re:No One Takes The Viral GPL Seriously Anymore (1)

Macrat (638047) | more than 5 years ago | (#27707843)

an office suite dosen't get anybody laid

Luckily the guy doing the NeoOffice port is married.

Re:No One Takes The Viral GPL Seriously Anymore (1)

RiotingPacifist (1228016) | more than 5 years ago | (#27707359)

Perhaps you don't understand GPL but its viral nature is great for its copyright owners, I can make a product that if any other company tries to improve they have to pay me for copyright OR release all their changes for free. If oracle GPL solaris, they get to keep their hold on it and see what the Linux community can do with it, while any company wanting to make money of the code base has to pay them.

Re:No One Takes The Viral GPL Seriously Anymore (1)

LingNoi (1066278) | more than 5 years ago | (#27707579)

I think it's you that doesn't understand ..

I can make a product that if any other company tries to improve they have to pay me for copyright

Wrong. You don't have to pay anyone if you already got the code freely under the GPL terms.

OR release all their changes for free.

Wrong. You have to make the changes available to whoever gets your derived product. That means only your customers so you're not releasing anything for free. You'd be giving it to whoever bought your product.

Re:No One Takes The Viral GPL Seriously Anymore (1)

RiotingPacifist (1228016) | more than 5 years ago | (#27707939)

If something is GPL AND i own the copyright to it (as oracle do with openoffice) a company can either GPL additional code (which despite what you claim means unless you really trust your customers it will be available for free shortly after) OR pay oracle for license's and release a closed source product.

Re:No One Takes The Viral GPL Seriously Anymore (3, Informative)

Tiger4 (840741) | more than 5 years ago | (#27708367)

You guys are talking past each other. But in essence that is how MySQL is set up. They will license you a proprietary source copy, or you can use the Open Source one under a differing set of terms. Of course the packages themselves are somewhat different too.

Re:No One Takes The Viral GPL Seriously Anymore (1)

larry bagina (561269) | more than 5 years ago | (#27707731)

actually, companies are loading up code with the GPL virus in order to encourage developers to license a less restrictive closed source version.

The GPL doesn't keep software FREE, the community does. If the open source model is superior to the closed source model, there's no need for the GPL.

Linux is GPLv2 only! (2, Insightful)

Xtifr (1323) | more than 5 years ago | (#27707077)

If they released it under the GPLv3, it still couldn't be cannibalized for Linux (which perversely insisted on staying with v2, which they'll now be stuck with forever), and could immediately become the FSF's OS of choice. Which would be pretty cool, IMO. GNU/Solaris would be a much better system, I think, than anything else out there currently including both GNU/Linux and Solaris. (GNU coreutils, among other things, kick ass on anything else out there.) Heck, I think it would probably edge out the still-unreleased-but-nearly-finished GNU/BSD, and that's been as close to my dream system as anyone's come up with for quite some time.

The flip side argument, though, is: who cares if it's "cannibalized" for something else, e.g. Linux. It's still there, right? Just like the BSDers point out that proprietary derivatives of their software don't affect them at all, since the free versions are still there, unchanged. Anyway, porting kernel code between Solaris and Linux, like porting between BSD and Linux, isn't going to be that easy in the first place; license incompatibility will mostly mean that the final 10% of whatever component you might have in mind (ZFS is probably a good example) will have to be rewritten, and not just the first 90%. :)

Re:Linux is GPLv2 only! (2, Informative)

rackserverdeals (1503561) | more than 5 years ago | (#27707133)

Have you looked into Nexenta [nexenta.org] . Solaris Kernel with a userland more familiar to Linux users. I've heard people refer to it as the Ubuntu of Solaris.

OpenSolaris Nevada (the distro from Sun) led by Ian Murdock (the Ian in Debian), is supposed to be more gnu-y too.

Re:Linux is GPLv2 only! (2, Interesting)

Philip K Dickhead (906971) | more than 5 years ago | (#27707199)

PORT to HURD! C'mon! I have GNUsletters that were MAILED to me in '89, promising the GNU OS! They had STAMPS on them! I could order TAPES of the EMACS sources from them!

Re:Linux is GPLv2 only! (1)

cyphercell (843398) | more than 5 years ago | (#27707365)

I'm bookmarking your comment, every time I feel like a horrible procrastinator I'm going to read it.

Re:Here's praying... (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#27707735)

...why would sharing be a bad thing, though? It's not as if Solaris would *lose* anything.

In fact, the opposite is true, since if Solaris were GPL'ed, code could flow in the opposite direction as well - you could also pull in code from Linux, then.

That's a Good Thing(tm).

Plug the damn leaks already (-1, Offtopic)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#27706877)

I hope the acquisition closes some of these damn leaks to The "anti-sun" Register by canning the a$$holes leaking information.

Re:Plug the damn leaks already (2)

rilles (1153657) | more than 5 years ago | (#27706885)

mySQL == OracleLite ? people will get fed up with it and want the 'real' version?

Re:Plug the damn leaks already (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#27706943)

Not sure how this got modded 'Offtopic', it seems completely on topic. Why does Oracle "need" mySQL, anyway?

Re:Plug the damn leaks already (5, Insightful)

rackserverdeals (1503561) | more than 5 years ago | (#27706995)

Phillips said MySQL has reach in "incremental markets" such as start-ups that Oracle can't get to on its own.

Basically, there is a customer out there that won't buy your product because it's too expensive for example. Instead of losing them to a competitor, you get them to use another product of yours, for free or hopefully with a service contract. Either way, they haven't gone to a competitor.

Your not making the money you would have made had you sold your flagship product, but you weren't going to make that anyway. Might as well get something, with the potential for more later, than turn them away.

Re:Plug the damn leaks already (1)

Nicholas Evans (731773) | more than 5 years ago | (#27707085)

I don't think they bough Sun for MySQL. If I had to guess, they don't even _care_ they got MySQL with it. They have dinky versions of Oracle for developers and stuff anyway.

Re:Plug the damn leaks already (1)

deanston (1252868) | more than 5 years ago | (#27707011)

That's one tactic I hope field sales reps don't use. MySQL and Oracle have different strengths. Oracle should just kill Lite/Express/whatever. Then first sell Oracle. If customer balk at the price convince them to use MySQL. Oracle should use MySQL to keep customers who may want to move away from Oracle Enterprise because of cost.

Re:Plug the damn leaks already (2, Interesting)

lgw (121541) | more than 5 years ago | (#27707693)

I thought that most commercial MySQL installs used InnoDB (owned by Oracle) as the back-end anyhow. Does owning the free front end wrapper to InnoDB change anything?

Re:Plug the damn leaks already (2, Insightful)

h4rm0ny (722443) | more than 5 years ago | (#27707739)


MySQL and Oracle (the database, not the company) aren't competitors. MySQL serves people who want cheap / free systems that are fast enough, but fairly simple. Oracle serves people who need real heavy-hitting solutions. What Oracle should be doing is using MySQL to keep customers away from PostgreSQL which also has the cheapness of MySQL but can meet a lot more (though not all) of Oracle's greater sophistication than MySQL.

Re:Plug the damn leaks already (1)

gandhi_2 (1108023) | more than 5 years ago | (#27707283)

your ternary operator has a syntax error.

Re:Plug the damn leaks already (1)

Ohio Calvinist (895750) | more than 5 years ago | (#27707771)

I don't think that is exactly what they are thinking, but they could help MySQL become more Oracle compatible (e.g. support some of the same views, SQL datatypes, etc...). Secondly, there are a lot of mid-sized shops (I've been at several) who are total Microsoft shops, because it plays nice with Active Directory, is cheaper than Oracle and is reasonably manufacturer supported. However, if you have MySQL with major-vendor backing/support available at little-no cost, it might get more middle-managers willing to use it for more and more applications; which is what many developers/technicians are asking them to do, because they embrace OSS, often use it in their personal/side-gig work, and to save money to sure up the budget.

There is a lot of business out there that if you called it Oracle MySQL instead of MySQL, with not so much as one line changed, would be more apt to use it.

Re:Plug the damn leaks already (1)

rackserverdeals (1503561) | more than 5 years ago | (#27707957)

Oracle will not likely make MySQL more like Oracle or make an easy migration path up to Oracle from MySQL since doing so will also create a migration path down from Oracle.

As for the MSAD/MSSQL, Sun just announced expanded interoperability between MySQL and Sun Identity Management Suite [tmcnet.com] which I believe works well with MS Active Directory.

I don't know much about it but your comment brought to mind the article I saw earlier today.

Amusing request to make to Oracle... (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#27707125)

Amusing request to make to Oracle...

"Plug the damn leaks already"

You mean like Larry being on the board of directors of Apple and leaking information on the "Star Trek" project, causing him to get kicked off the Apple board?

-AC

Sun Directory, Messaging Server, OpenSSO, etc. (1, Interesting)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#27706907)

What about these?

Re:Sun Directory, Messaging Server, OpenSSO, etc. (4, Interesting)

bunratty (545641) | more than 5 years ago | (#27708435)

and Sun Grid Engine, VirtualBox, ...

Sell OpenOffice to IBM (5, Interesting)

markdowling (448297) | more than 5 years ago | (#27706911)

Now that Lotus have integrated OpenOffice into Notes 8 Standard and are also pushing Symphony, they are the ones with the incentive to ensure the OO momentum is maintained (not to mention ODF).

Re:Sell OpenOffice to IBM (1)

DragonWriter (970822) | more than 5 years ago | (#27707479)

Now that Lotus have integrated OpenOffice into Notes 8 Standard and are also pushing Symphony, they are the ones with the incentive to ensure the OO momentum is maintained (not to mention ODF).

That's a good argument why being sold to IBM would be good for OOo as a product line, but not for why selling OOo to IBM would be good for Oracle.

Has Microsoft Office (and Access, in particular) helped Microsoft self SQL Server? Could a succesful office suite help IBM move DB2? If so, does it make any sense for Oracle to give IBM OOo at any price IBM would be willing to pay for it?

Re:Sell OpenOffice to IBM (1)

rackserverdeals (1503561) | more than 5 years ago | (#27708011)

I don't know. I think OpenOffice.org could be important to Oracle.

Many people are surprised to hear that Oracle is the second largest software company. With OpenOffice.org adding 3 million users a week, it's a good place to put Oracle's logo.

Uh Cloud? (5, Insightful)

rackserverdeals (1503561) | more than 5 years ago | (#27706913)

Screven made it pretty clear the Sun vision of cloud computing does not fit with Oracle's; Oracle sees itself as a provider of infrastructure like virtualization to make clouds, not a provider of hosted services.

Uhm... That's one of the things Sun is doing with cloud computing that I don't think others are.

All the cloud stuff is, is virtualization and infrastructure. Jonathan Schwartz himself has said that if you're not comfortable putting your stuff on a public cloud they'll bring the cloud to you.

They've been doing cool stuff with their virtualization and provisioning systems.

Re:Uh Cloud? (4, Insightful)

Twillerror (536681) | more than 5 years ago | (#27707065)

Yes, exactly. I wish more people would speak to this side of "cloud" computing.

What we want is two have redundant "pools" of server and applications. Those pools usually run at 2 or more data centers.

We pull the plug on one data center and clients of those servers and application automatically switch. We have more apps, need more servers for a cluster, or more space we just add on to the thing in a fairly automated fashion.

I'd like this at the intranet level. We have lots of various legacy and web based apps that I want to be able to run in 2 datacenters.

When the system fails our internal network in conjunction with the "cloud" software will switch so one of the clouds takes over the same IPs.

Putting servers in public clouds is for startup web applications, the scientific community, some niche apps(like using Amazon s3 for clusterable storage) and maybe small businesses. No way in heck we are putting our emails and our documents up on someone else servers. Being a public company I don't even think we could with all the SOX crap.

Re:Uh Cloud? (3, Interesting)

rackserverdeals (1503561) | more than 5 years ago | (#27707213)

I think that's the direction sun want's to go with their private cloud stuff. It was called N1 but I'm not sure what's it's called now.

As a large public company, you may not be able to put everything in the cloud like you said, but some stuff you could.

Imagine your public website gets a predictable amount of traffic but every other press release brings a huge spike in traffic, so you have built out your system to handle the peak times so your hardware mostly sits idle.

You could have your own cloud provision spares, but since it's not sensitive data, you can provision computing power from public clouds, like amazon ec2 and just pay for what you need.

OK, maybe not the best scenario but I wanted an excuse to post this link to this Sun HPC software demo [youtube.com] that shows Grid Engine sending jobs to private servers, then going to private spares, then pulling in Amazon EC2 instances to handle the load.

Re:Uh Cloud? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#27708221)

Jonathan Schwartz himself has said

you believe his babbling?

remember, sun != peoplesoft (5, Interesting)

damn_registrars (1103043) | more than 5 years ago | (#27706923)

In the case of Sun, you have a company that makes (some) useful and reliable products. In the case of peoplesoft, you have a company that makes an obscenely bloated, broken, overpriced software package that has caused havoc and pain across the continent. Peoplesoft was the most similar thing to Microsoft available for takeover for less money than the contents of Fort Knox, and Sun did to them what so many of us would love to do to Microsoft.

Re:remember, sun != peoplesoft (3, Funny)

Migala77 (1179151) | more than 5 years ago | (#27706953)

In the case of Oracle, you have a company that makes an obscenely bloated, broken, overpriced software package that has caused havoc and pain across the continent.

Fixed that for ya

Re:remember, sun != peoplesoft (2, Funny)

VGPowerlord (621254) | more than 5 years ago | (#27707761)

In the case of Oracle, you have a company that makes an obscenely bloated, broken, overpriced software package that is causing havoc and pain around the world.

Fixed that for ya

Fixed again!

Re:remember, sun != peoplesoft (3, Interesting)

Red Flayer (890720) | more than 5 years ago | (#27706991)

Peoplesoft was the most similar thing to Microsoft available for takeover for less money than the contents of Fort Knox, and Sun did to them what so many of us would love to do to Microsoft.

Just so you know... Sun did nothing to PS. It was Oracle who bought PS and canned the staff (just as they've done for many acquisitions).

FWIW, it's now several years later, and the "PeopleCode" (seriously, that's what they called it at Peoplesoft) is just as borked as ever... the JDEdwards/PS integration is no closer... I think Oracle's strategy is to move PS clients over to Oracle Apps and drop PS.

Now if only they can unbork Oracle Apps...

Re:remember, sun != peoplesoft (5, Interesting)

MouseR (3264) | more than 5 years ago | (#27708179)

Many PeopleSoft employees moved into our Montreal office.

As someone whose been through an Oracle acquisition, I can say that Oracle actually handles that nicely. It's a bit of a culture clash, coming from a small vertical market company, but they dont savagely trash acquisition content.

They do get rid of non-essential personnel but they give you a chance to move on to current products, and they not only support acquired products for many years, they also keep staff around to make sure these products aren't just backed by paperwork and a web page.

Re:remember, sun != peoplesoft (2, Informative)

twidarkling (1537077) | more than 5 years ago | (#27707031)

an obscenely bloated, broken, overpriced software package that has caused havoc and pain across the continent.

Hey! My company uses Peoplesoft software! I'm... I'm...

Yeah, you're right. God forbid anything goes off the rails here. The only way to fix it is pretend nothing went wrong, and then fake the next thing to compensate.

Re:remember, sun != peoplesoft (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#27707095)

You make it sound like Sun bought Peoplesoft. That was Oracle.

Re:remember, sun != peoplesoft (1)

nurb432 (527695) | more than 5 years ago | (#27707675)

Oracle wasn't peoplesoft either, until they bought them. Their homegrown ERP systems were even *worse*, if you can imagine worse..

But i agree with the premise that what made Sun Microsystems what it was, is gone now.

Long live Sun.

Why Hedge on Open Office? (3, Interesting)

reSonans (732669) | more than 5 years ago | (#27706969)

So, Oracle admits they 'need' MySQL, which may or may not complement their core business, but then ducks a question on the future of OpenOffice, saying they can't comment on any product line. Isn't MySQL a product line, too? Why comment on the future of one and not the other? Sun employees, start twisting in the wind...

Re:Why Hedge on Open Office? (1)

Bill, Shooter of Bul (629286) | more than 5 years ago | (#27707177)

Good question. But, I think it was more important for them to reaffirm Mysql support. With all the rumor an innuendo that's been flying about. Open Office Development is pretty much confined to Sun from what I remember hearing. Its important to us all, but they don't need to say anything now to prevent developer mindshare from gathering behind a non sun branch of open office, but they do for Mysql. Now within mysql I wouldn't be surprised if they axed the falcon engine, now that mySql and inodb are under the same umbrella. Despite what Mysql was saying I can't imagine another reason for developing Falcon, other than an alternative for innodb.

How It Went Down (4, Insightful)

sexconker (1179573) | more than 5 years ago | (#27706993)

"OMG I work in . will I get laid off?"

"No no, no one will be laid off. All of Sun is important to us."

2 months from now when everyone from Sun will be ancient history.

--Wanted to link that pic of the Iraq guy at the press conference, obviously lying, with his hands in a "simmer down" gesture, but I can't find it. Maybe it wasn't Iraq. I dunno. Someone find it.

Re:How It Went Down (3, Funny)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#27707121)

Wanted to link that pic of the Iraq guy at the press conference, obviously lying, with his hands in a "simmer down" gesture, but I can't find it. Maybe it wasn't Iraq. I dunno. Someone find it.

Methinks you are a bit unclear on how this whole Internet thing works.

Re:How It Went Down (1)

JCSoRocks (1142053) | more than 5 years ago | (#27707221)

Wanted to link that pic of the Iraq guy at the press conference, obviously lying, with his hands in a "simmer down" gesture, but I can't find it. Maybe it wasn't Iraq. I dunno. Someone find it.

This is /. Go back to /r/ where you belong.

Re:How It Went Down (1)

Laebshade (643478) | more than 5 years ago | (#27707231)

Re:How It Went Down (1)

sexconker (1179573) | more than 5 years ago | (#27707333)

INFORMATION minister.

I was looking for defense minister, press secretary, press conference, liar, damage control, etc.

Re:How It Went Down (2, Insightful)

fm6 (162816) | more than 5 years ago | (#27707383)

Oh please. Sure they'll lay off a lot of people (I suspect most of sales and marketing is toast) but they're not going to spend $5 billion on a bunch of product lines only to fire all the people who create and maintain them. Some products will probably die, but not most of them.

Re:How It Went Down (3, Insightful)

lgw (121541) | more than 5 years ago | (#27707755)

they're not going to spend $5 billion on a bunch of product lines only to fire all the people who create and maintain them.

They spent $10 billion on a bunch of product lines, only to fire everybody when the bought PeopleSoft. Based on Oracle's history, there's no reason to think they wouldn't fire every single current Sun employee.

Your counter-argument seems to be "but, but, that would be stupid of them!". Well, yeah, this is Oracle we're talking about here. Have you ever tried to install Oracle?

Re:How It Went Down (5, Informative)

Clandestine_Blaze (1019274) | more than 5 years ago | (#27708123)

Disclaimer: Oracle employee

No, they didn't fire everybody. There were layoffs, but there were also many PeopleSoft employees that became Oracle employees. The current client engagement that I am on has two such people.

Maybe you meant "they fired a bunch of people", which is inevitable with any merger or takeover. But they didn't fire EVERYONE.

Re:How It Went Down (2, Interesting)

diegocgteleline.es (653730) | more than 5 years ago | (#27708319)

Peoplesoft was competing with Oracle and oracle killed it to get rid of them, sun in the other hand was not competing with oracle - except for mysql, but why would them waste 7000 millions to get rid of mysql? In fact, sun as a company was dying. So this seems a completely different move. Either they were interested on not letting IBM/HP get bigger, or they are really interested in Sun. I think that both options are possible

Re:How It Went Down (1)

sexconker (1179573) | more than 5 years ago | (#27707923)

Look at Oracle's history in terms of buying companies and keeping on the staff.

Also, they were dumb enough to buy Sun in the first place.

Re:How It Went Down (3, Informative)

fm6 (162816) | more than 5 years ago | (#27708409)

They laid off a lot of people. They never laid off everybody. In fact, they've actually laid off a lot fewer people than you expect. Several times they've acquired companies that were basically competition, and everybody predicted they'd just fold them up, fire everybody, and move all the customer to Oracle products. But they haven't done it. Didn't do it with PeopleSoft. Didn't do it with RDB.

Also, they were dumb enough to buy Sun in the first place.

Right. They're only the second-largest software vendor on the planet. They couldn't possibly walk and chew gum at the same time. I'm sure Larry just told his underlings, "Hey, we have too much cash, and I'm bored. Take $7 billion, buy Sun, then fire everybody."

BTW, have you every managed anything more complicated than a beer run? I suspect not.

Re:How It Went Down (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#27707605)

--Wanted to link that pic of the Iraq guy at the press conference, obviously lying, with his hands in a "simmer down" gesture, but I can't find it. Maybe it wasn't Iraq. I dunno. Someone find it.

Or you could link to anyone in the Bush administration - Bush at the 2003 State of the Union or Colin Powell at the UN would be particularly appropriate.

No talk about Solaris (3, Insightful)

parryFromIndia (687708) | more than 5 years ago | (#27707017)

I find it odd that no one asked any questions about the future of Solaris - although there was a round-about question on x86 which resulted in an somewhat positive answer for SPARC. Oracle seems to be keeping SPARC and thus Solaris alive. (There isn't another OS running SPARC that is in widespread use after all.) This also makes me wonder if Oracle product support for Solaris x86 is going to improve now. This also seems to suggest that Oracle may not be selling Sun's hardware business to HP per the original plan. The idea sounded very interesting - HP would then become the most diversified hardware company selling x86, Itanium and SPARC hardware.

Re:No talk about Solaris (5, Interesting)

rackserverdeals (1503561) | more than 5 years ago | (#27707309)

The day the sale was announced Sun/Oracle had a conference call where Larry Ellison said two of the main reasons they were buying Sun were Solaris and Java. Solaris was the best Unix technology out there he said.

Selling the hardware business to HP was part of a different deal in the bast where Oracle and HP were going to buy different parts of Sun but IBM blocked it according to the article.

Nothing in the recent sale, other than some bloggers speculation, indicates they will be selling off the hardware units.

Re:No talk about Solaris (1, Offtopic)

Digital_Mercenary (136288) | more than 5 years ago | (#27707419)

FREEBSD sparc 64> Runs great on t100 and t200 servers.

Open Source? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#27707033)

I wonder if this Oracle dude has ever heard of open source or gpl. He will have an awful hard time with trying to make java, mysql, open office or sun java application server closed source. If he tries, we'll just say "fork you"!

"...helped develop the Linux kernel..." (3, Informative)

Browzer (17971) | more than 5 years ago | (#27707067)

Sounds like what a typical politician or an administrator would say.

Nonetheless, here are "Oracle's Technical Contributions to Linux" [contributions sounds so much better than develop]

http://www.oracle.com/technologies/linux/linux-tech-leadership-contributions.html [oracle.com]

and a link to Oracle's "Free and Open Source Software" http://oss.oracle.com/ [oracle.com]

looks extensive

OS X too (1)

Ilgaz (86384) | more than 5 years ago | (#27707173)

Remember the horrifying results at threading performance of OS X compared to Linux on same hardware? It was in first G5 ages.

Oracle could be the one helped the issue to get fixed but there is no proof of that, it is just a rumour. Today OS X doesn't have that issue.

The tool everyone used for benchmarking was mysql btw.

Summary (4, Funny)

Locke2005 (849178) | more than 5 years ago | (#27707193)

Sun Employees: What is our status when Oracle takes over?

Oracle President: See Figure 1 [wordpress.com]

Open Source NeWS! (2, Insightful)

argent (18001) | more than 5 years ago | (#27707219)

Best thing Sun ever did, and they killed it rather than letting it grow.

Re:Open Source NeWS! (5, Insightful)

fm6 (162816) | more than 5 years ago | (#27707547)

What were they supposed to do with NeWS, continue developing it while the rest of the Unix community used X11? If they had, Sun's workstation business would have died about a decade earlier than it did.

Switching to Postgres (5, Interesting)

ColeonyxOnline (966334) | more than 5 years ago | (#27707423)

I talked to my manager today, he said we were going to use Postgres instead of MySQL for out next web project.

In his opinion, the latest stable release had poor support for stored procedures and now this acquisition puts further development into question. He wants to move everything out of MySQL at some point.

Since I have never used Postgres before, I couldn't comment on anything, but from my perspective, MySQL had been moving forward with their database. Even if the stored procedures were not on par with the other DB's out there, they would mature in time.

I was ready to speak up, until I thought about MySQL passing hands for the second time, talks about forks, and finally the developers leaving the company. All those things cannot be good short term, and long term will depend a lot on the parent company.

So for the time being, I think my manager is correct and I did not protest his decision.

Re:Switching to Postgres (3, Informative)

crazybit (918023) | more than 5 years ago | (#27707775)

With PostgreSQL you can write stored procedures in different languages, and they will run as fast as if the function was run from a shell script.

http://www.postgresql.org/docs/8.0/interactive/xplang.html -- There's more info

Re:Switching to Postgres (2)

h4rm0ny (722443) | more than 5 years ago | (#27707927)


You'll find a lot of pro-PostgreSQL posts in my history, it's very good and I think if you go into it prepared to learn you'll like it too. But I'm not an idiot and throwing away a lot of in-house expertise on MySQL requires some real justification. MySQL has indeed come on a lot since the old days. Unless you really need the more sophisticated features that MySQL doesn't provide (or provides badly), it's usually a good basis for things. There are long-term risks with MySQL - it is already starting to fork (a little), but again, unless you're quite sophisticated users of it, I doubt this will become an issue for you for a long time yet.

But still, you sound like someone who considers things from all sides, so maybe you'll find you like PostgreSQL anyway.

smart; but oracle will love you (1)

WindBourne (631190) | more than 5 years ago | (#27708149)

Pl/Sql.

Re:Switching to Postgres (1)

Bill, Shooter of Bul (629286) | more than 5 years ago | (#27708153)

I guess if stored procedures are a killer feature for you then mysql probably isn't the right db. I'm not a big fan of stored procedures. I've seen too many abuses of them. It sort of reminds me of the whole SCO fud. My boss at the time refused to let us use Linux on our servers, because we might get sued, or Linux might be killed if Sco won. He just out thought himself without realizing the truth that a popular open source product, does not dissipate overnight. Mysql might develop some alternative distributions, but that doesn't prevent anyone from using it.

Sun and Oracle: End of a beautiful dream (2, Interesting)

Cow_woC (174453) | more than 5 years ago | (#27708017)

http://www.theregister.co.uk/2009/04/21/oracle_sun_open_source/

Read every word of it. It's sad but true. I hope that Google finds a way to buy Java off Oracle.

The destruction of a beautiful company (3, Insightful)

giuffsalvo (1536695) | more than 5 years ago | (#27708431)

I'm literally hating myself, for having refused a job offer by Sun 1 year and half ago, because of personal (but not very serious) reasons...Now I'll never have the opportunity to work in a company so academic and transparent...
Load More Comments
Slashdot Login

Need an Account?

Forgot your password?
or Connect with...

Don't worry, we never post anything without your permission.

Submission Text Formatting Tips

We support a small subset of HTML, namely these tags:

  • b
  • i
  • p
  • br
  • a
  • ol
  • ul
  • li
  • dl
  • dt
  • dd
  • em
  • strong
  • tt
  • blockquote
  • div
  • quote
  • ecode

"ecode" can be used for code snippets, for example:

<ecode>    while(1) { do_something(); } </ecode>