Florida Ponders Communication Tax on LANs 406
victor_the_cleaner writes "Here in Florida, a little known tax provision may lead to LANs being taxed. According to the article, 'The provision was intended to make sure companies operating their own land line communication systems, which two decades ago was limited to large utilities and railroads, were paying the same taxes paid by those who rely on commercial phone carriers. About 10 companies (in Florida) pay more than $1.2 million annually based on that definition. However, the statute is so broadly worded that it could be interpreted to describe a local area network.'
Internal auditors at the city of Tampa noticed a couple of years ago that the substitute communications service provision was still there and asked state officials why it wasn't being enforced.
And now people like Sharon Fox, the city of Tampa's tax revenue coordinator are pushing for enforcement."
Home enforcement? (Score:5, Insightful)
They don't pay taxes. (Score:3, Insightful)
Re:Home enforcement? (Score:4, Funny)
LAN Inspector: "Hello, mam. I need to search your house for networking cables in order to tax you properly."
How many people are going to open their door to a guy that that? It seems more like a wallet inspector position to me.
Knock, knock, knock... (Score:5, Funny)
Plumber!
I didn't call a plumber. Who is it!?
Flowers!
Flowers for who?
Plumber!
Why you're that crazy Landshark aren't you?
No ma'am, I'm just a dolphin. Will you let me in please?
A dolphin? OK.
Aaaaaaaggggggghhhhhhhh!!!!!! You're not a dolphin. You're a filthy A LAN inspector!!!
Re:Home enforcement? (Score:5, Funny)
"Who is it?"
"Plumber."
"I didn't hire a plumber. Who is it?"
"Candygram."
"You're...that crazy LAN Shark I've been hearing about on Slashdot, aren't you?!"
"No ma'am, I'm...I'm just a dolphin."
Re:Home enforcement? (Score:5, Insightful)
Re:Home enforcement? (Score:2)
Re:Home enforcement? (Score:3, Funny)
Duh. That is already taxed. Whether you have DSL or Cable the government is getting part of what you pay. That is the point of the article. The government already taxes the regular communication networks. They wanted to make sure that company's that run their own lines pay tax, too. Only in Florida it seems they got carried away. And guessing that it is vague enough for those other things is just silliness. The law would basically have to say - tax
Re:Home enforcement? (Score:5, Insightful)
So either it has a specific exclusion for PBXs, or I really doubt that it covers LANs anyway. In any case, just sling a couple of VoIP phones on the LAN and call it a PBX system!
Re:Home enforcement? (Score:5, Interesting)
No kidding. I'll make a disclaimer and mention that I didn't RTFA, but offhand it sounds like they're taxing private networks like they do public networks which were funded with public money.
Ahem... Let me say this again:
They are taxing private networks built by private companies with their own money.
How can you justify that one? Seriously? That's like taxing me for writing a perl script to do nightly backups of some of my files, or taxing a company for developing internal middleware software.
Or taxing open source software a la the April 1st article here on Slashdot.
Are we sure this article isn't a couple weeks late?
Re:Home enforcement? (Score:3, Insightful)
They are taxing private networks built by private companies with their own money.
How is this different than the income tax? I can sit on my arse in a shack year round, using no govt. services and still have to pay the income tax. I make money from the fruit of my labors, "built" with my valuable time, and I still have to give Uncle Sam his cut.
Taxes suck. Full Stop.
Re:Home enforcement? (Score:3, Insightful)
I could go on if
Re:Home enforcement? (Score:4, Insightful)
Re:Home enforcement? (Score:2, Informative)
This [slashdot.org] is from last year when Florida was pushing to pass new legislation to tax LANs.
I think someone (read the revenue service) may have an agenda...
Re:Home enforcement? (Score:5, Insightful)
Re:Home enforcement? (Score:5, Interesting)
I'm pretty sure they know exactly what they
are doing. Identifying any specific device
for taxation (ie. automobiles) makes it much
easier to keep track of.
Re:Home enforcement? (Score:2)
NO, somebody who is in charge of tax enforcement wants to start a new tax that will require more funds going to the tax department? Say it ain't so!
Re:Home enforcement? (Score:3, Insightful)
Re:Posted Before (Score:2)
justification (Score:5, Insightful)
Re:justification (Score:2, Insightful)
Or maybe I could interest you in a $1000 hammer? I've yet to see a good ROI for my tax money. Based on that, I'd say the less taxes/less forced goverment services, the better.
Re:justification (Score:5, Insightful)
I've yet to see a good ROI for my tax money.
Sometimes, it is wrong-headed to judge ROI in purely financial terms. Both the Lincoln and Washington monuments were funded using public money; yet I don't think you will find many arguing that this money was wasted. There are areas where public funding can meet a need, for which there is no private-enterprise motivation to address.
Highway Robbery (Score:4, Insightful)
Misapplication of the law for the purpose of generating revenue is nothing short of extortion. This law was not passed for the purpose they are trying to use it for. It is therefore an abuse of power which it is the duty of every citizen of the state of Florida to resist.
Lee
Re:justification (Score:5, Informative)
The $1000 hammer is a myth. Actually, it's even a badly reported myth--the usual figure cited by the media back in the Eighties was $600, and the real number on the books is $435.
Still, that seems rather shocking...until you dig deeper and realize that the hammer's actual cost was fifteen dollars. Sydney Freedberg described the issue in Government Executive magazine way back in 1998 [govexec.com].
I don't for a minute deny that waste exists in some government programs, but it's time to put this particular tired old tale to rest. Repeating it just damages the credibility of the speaker.Re:justification (Score:2)
I don't see how they could tax it though...
Re:justification (Score:2, Funny)
Yeah...if they came to my house. I've been wanting to get rid of this cat 3 stuff for years.
Re:justification (Score:2)
For instance, does the toll booth in Lake County on 94 right before you hit Wisconsin go into Dailey's pocket? I don't think so.
But you're right about Illinois roads...they suck...it's like you're coming from Wisconsin with nice paved roads and when you cross the state line into Illinois you hit pot-holes and bumpy pavement and WHAM...there's a toll booth staring right in your face...it suck
Won't work... (Score:5, Insightful)
--
Retail Retreat [retailretreat.com]
Re:Won't work... (Score:5, Insightful)
Re:Won't work... (Score:2, Insightful)
You mean like if a big company tried to used copyright laws to extort money from their customers?
You mean like if the government passed a law that makes it possible for them to examine anyone's library records?
You're right. Here in America, we are STRONG. We stand up for our rights. You can't push the average American cizizen around and get away with it.
Oh, wait.
program named 'Why you should leave Florida' (Score:5, Insightful)
Re:program named 'Why you should leave Florida' (Score:2)
Re:program named 'Why you should leave Florida' (Score:5, Funny)
Re:program named 'Why you should leave Florida' (Score:3, Interesting)
Moving to another country for a job is much harder, if not downright impossible because of immigration laws. People coming to this country have had it easy--our immigration laws are quite lax--but for an American trying to move somewhere else,
Jobs will migrate... (Score:5, Insightful)
Clearly, companies that rely on LANs will go to places that don't tax LANs. Like neighboring states, or non-neighboring states, or non-neighboring countries. I'm sure the tax assessor is not thinking of the medium to long-term consequences.
Do they tax LANs in India? Russia? Other countries?
Alan.
Re:Jobs will migrate... (Score:5, Funny)
Of course not. In Russia, the LANs tax you!
Re:Jobs will migrate... (Score:2)
Which article? this article? [bizjournals.com] (note the date).
BREAKING NEW (Score:5, Funny)
Re:BREAKING NEW (Score:4, Funny)
"Why anyone would waste a network cable is beyond us stated........
Well... (Score:3, Funny)
Given the ignorance of the media on technology issues, I'd expect the closing of that breaking news to be "cats 1 through 4 unavailable for comment."
In other news: (Score:2)
I don't want to sound critical of the fine people (Score:2, Insightful)
Any other folks in tech support notice the same thing?
Not quite off topic, it just seems that areas which have a zip code that begin with the digit "3" have, shall we say, limited computer experience.
Re:I don't want to sound critical of the fine peop (Score:2)
maybe trollish but... (Score:5, Insightful)
That a tax of this nature was initiated in Florida is just one more reason why I will never willingly choose to live there.
Re:maybe trollish but... (Score:2)
If you buy a piece of property worth 50,000 and the property taxes are 3%, you pay 1,500/year.
Now, lets say you cut down some of the trees on your property, get them made into lumber, and build yourself a house. Maybe the property is worth 150,000 now, and your taxes went up th 4,500 a year.
Your effort and expenditure raised your taxes. Sometimes you just get screwed.
Re:maybe trollish but... (Score:5, Insightful)
Did I miss anything?
Re:maybe trollish but... (Score:2)
Re:maybe trollish but... (Score:5, Insightful)
but when a company or individual acquires or builds something for themselves, what right does someone else have to came[sic] and lay claim to your efforts?
Happens all the time. Property taxes.
Security (Score:3, Insightful)
In practice, it's a bit different, of course; often property taxes are used to fund schools, which seems it should be based on the number of kids you have rather than the amount of property you own; but I don't complain, since a good education system is required for
Re:Security (Score:3, Insightful)
The way to reduce the number of dumb/desperate kids is to encourage poor/uneducated people NOT TO HAVE MORE FUCKING CHILDREN THAN THEY CAN AFFORD. Quality of education aside, I DO object to paying for some moron's inability to keep it in his pants.
Re:maybe trollish but... (Score:2)
I don't know that I'd ever move a business to Florida, but at least it's not California or New York.
Cheers
Re:maybe trollish but... (Score:3, Flamebait)
Tangible Tax (Score:4, Insightful)
Besides having business income taxes, Florida also has a tangible tax system, which says that all business must pay taxes based on their assets. So if you have 10 computers, a router and a switch, you already have to pay taxes SIMPLY BECAUSE YOU OWN THEM.
Florida is king of the weird taxes.
Lack of personal income tax! (Score:3, Informative)
How long do you think this'll last? (Score:5, Insightful)
Re:How long do you think this'll last? (Score:3, Informative)
You don't live in the UK, do you?
Depends on what exactly is taxed (Score:4, Interesting)
Re:How long do you think this'll last? (Score:4, Funny)
Is it only wired networks? (Score:2)
Would going wireless be a work-around if they kept the laws intact?
Re:Is it only wired networks? (Score:2)
Thousands of Florida residents are preparing their war-walkers even as we speak.
already being taxed for this? (Score:5, Insightful)
On the surface, it seems like it's taxation without representation: the networks are privately built and maintained. And what do those networks run over for companies that have multiple offices? Outside phone lines, which the Gov't helped build. Ok, it can be argued that there is representation here.
But think about it: if those lines are already running to the buildings and being used, then the taxes are already being paid on them, in the form of basic service fees.
It seems like this law was made to make companies that run their own lines to pay taxes on them, which is taxation without representation. Now it's being applied to people who are already paying the service fees and taxes on them, and are now going to be taxed again for using said lines.
This is going to do one of two things:
1) Make a lot of criminals
2) Be challenged and not stand up in court.
Feel free to tell me I'm an idiot and don't know what I'm talking about, just back it up with reasons and facts, please.
Unreal (Score:2)
I guess it's time to ... (Score:2, Funny)
CEO: What Happen? (Score:5, Funny)
Admin: We get signal.
CEO: What!
Admin: Main screen turn on.
CEO: It's You!!
Florida: How are you gentlemen!!
Florida: All your LAN are belong to us.
Florida: You are on the way to taxation.
CEO: What you say!!
In other news... (Score:2)
Very old stuff (Score:2, Informative)
WANs perhaps (Score:2, Insightful)
won't happen (Score:3, Insightful)
The upper legislative chamber is expected to propose a temporary suspension of its enforcement and then look for ways to limit the provision's application without undermining its original intent.
No one knows exactly how much more would be collected by enforcing the broader definition of the tax. The rate varies statewide, ranging from 9.17 percent to 18.07 percent depending on local option assessments.
Stargel predicts it would be hundreds of millions of dollars annually, while some business lobbyists say it would easily exceed $1 billion.
This is an interesting case of reasonable tax laws made dumb and potentially dangerous by advances in technology, but otherwise pretty much a non-issue that will go away quietly within a few weeks.
I don't buy your assessments. (Score:2)
Hmmm... (Score:2, Funny)
Tax a LAN? (Score:3, Interesting)
You know why the quality of government sucks here? (Score:2)
So here's a novel idea. Cut back the government budget, p
Re:You know why the quality of government sucks he (Score:2)
If I had a teacher that said object orientation meant using a GUI I would have to stand up and bitch slap them. I couldn't help myself.
Really, isn't it time to do away with phone taxes? (Score:3, Insightful)
Viva la VOIP!
Longest dupe I can remember (Score:5, Informative)
Re:Longest dupe I can remember (Score:3, Informative)
Your post is the dupe, not the article.
Support the libertarians . (Score:3, Informative)
Flaw in their logic (Score:5, Insightful)
More importantly, most LANs integrate with some form of WAN, of which a relationship must exist with a telecommunications company that pays these state taxes already.
From what I read in the article, the tax was only created to level the taxation benefit that large companies would reap from having a private phone system. Even in 1985, the year this tax was implemented, many companies had some form of internal networking to cover such devices as computers, computerized cash registers, etc. and they were not taxed.
Doesn't make sense.
Re:Flaw in their logic (Score:4, Interesting)
cince then they have done nothing with it.
and yes, we would have pissed off lots of residents.. no I wont tell you what telecommunications company I am with....
Is There No End to Government Greed? (Score:2, Interesting)
If we actually recieved value for the tax dollars we pay, that would be one thing. But the complete ineptness of virtually every
The Offending Statute (Score:5, Informative)
Section 12 [flsenate.gov] says that the tax rate is 6.8% of the sales price, applied yearly.
Re:The Offending Statute (Score:3, Interesting)
If you have the right statute (I can't tell myself, even RTFA'ing didn't help much), then I see two reasons why this wouldn't apply to a LAN, only to a WAN...
First, no "dealer of communications services provides a communication path" between my upstairs and downstrairs computers. So, no
Cisco Tea party... (Score:3, Funny)
obBOFH ref (Score:3, Funny)
"Hi. I'm having trouble accessing my files today."
"Your username?"
"SF3092."
[clickety-click] "Sharon Fox, is it?"
"That's right."
[clickety-click rm -rf, you know the drill] "But you don't have any files!"
"What? OMIGOD, my LAN tax proposal was in there!"
"As if I didn't know."
"Excuse me?"
"I said 'I can't imagine where it could go.' Don't worry, we have it on backup."
"Thank goodness."
"It's engraved on a grain of rice. Bwah hahahaha!"
"AAIIIIIIGGGGHHHHH!"
(with apologies to Simon [ntk.net])
California & Florida (Score:4, Insightful)
Isn't it just like the government.... (Score:2, Interesting)
Nooooooo..... Let's add a few cents here to their coffers NOW and let us LAN people pass it on to the users as a cost of doing business. Meanwhile, the people in control of the government (and the pursestrings) will have have some MORE cash to implement their little pork-barrel projects to keep them happy and e
Reminds me of a song... (Score:5, Funny)
(If you drive a car car) I'll tax the street
(If you try to sit sit) I'll tax your seat
(If you get too cold cold) I'll tax the heat
(If you take a walk walk) I'll tax your feet
(If you push 'trons on the wire) I'll tax your LAN
(If you push them outside)I'll tax the WAN
Seen this before... (Score:3, Interesting)
This article is true, but it's in the process of being changed. The wording is going to be fixed.
Great example of government at work (Score:5, Insightful)
Right now we are looking at Florida doing this. If Florida is stupid enough to pull this, people and businesses in Florida at least have the option to go to a different state. Imagine if it were a Federal tax law.
This is also a great example of why laws should be clearly written. A few years back, there was an initiative in Washington state with some vague provisions. The anti- guys pointed out that with some broad interpretation, the initiative would give some really broad powers to the government; the backers of the initiative said "Don't be silly, no one would ever interpret the law that way." Oh, really?
Vague laws are ticking time bombs.
steveha
They should read the law, as I have (Score:5, Informative)
And
And
IANAL, but the way I read this, computer networks can not be "Substitute communications system" because "communications services" does not include "Information services", "Internet access service", "similar on-line computer services".
This is just another instance of government officials not understanding the technology they are trying to tax, regulate, and legislate.
tax on what? (Score:3, Interesting)
Re:tax on what? (Score:3, Insightful)
Taxes aren't about paying for the things on which they are levied. When I buy something from the store and pay sales tax, that sales tax isn't paying for the item I purchased - it's paying for the existence of the government. When I pay tax on my income, that's not paying for the provision of my services - it's paying for the government again. So, just because I paid a copmpany for some LAN equipment, and the electricity company some money for the electricity t
Re:Dupe? (Score:3, Informative)
link [slashdot.org]
Re:How about I just make it a WAN. (Score:2)
Re:Who's this really going to affect? (Score:2)
Re:Who's this really going to affect? (Score:2)
Re:Who's this really going to affect? (Score:2)
but I'd be more concerned had this bill popped up in, say, California.
FYI, bud.
Re:The Entire Story (Score:2)
</sarcasm>
Re:Not again... (Score:2, Informative)
Nothing like England (Score:3, Informative)