EL_TB
join:2003-05-03
Fairfax, VA | Hm..
So if its all paid for. Does this mean the companies cant say they are hiking up prices because they need to pay for improvements? Then they can tell us the truth and that they hike prices because they are greedy? |
|
niplet
join:2003-10-04
Antioch, TN | well....
good point. maybe we will actually be able to see prices drop soon as the cost for the upgrade will not be passed on to us, but i do not see that being the case. |
|
Freezone
join:2000-09-29
Southfield, MI | reply to EL_TB
Re: Hm..
Write off just means that they will not have to pay taxes on money made = to the amount they spend on improvments. |
|
oroper
Patriots Rule
join:2004-06-01
Beverly, MA
| I wonder
1: Will this be considered Gov't subsidy?
2: If subsidised, can share rules be applied (even though not sharing is upheld by FCC)
3: Will my BB rate be cheaper?
AND
4: It smells of Bells 
--
I'm a Chapelle Fan-I'm Rich Beehatch!! |
|
woody7
Premium
join:2000-10-13
Torrance, CA | hmmmmmm...........
Thats what very talented, creative accountants get paid for for.....:):):)
--
BlooMe |
|
swsamurai
Premium
join:2002-04-17
Bakersfield, CA
clubs: | reply to niplet
Re: well....
Yeah... I agree. I would not be surprised if they found a way to make some excuse to RAISE rates because of this. |
|
bit_junkie
join:2004-05-04
Maricopa, AZ
| duh?
"A recent PEW Internet & American Life Project study indicates that rural Americans have far less high-speed availability to their homes than urban and suburban residents do."
Who did they get to do the study?, Obvious Man?
and this whole "digital divide" crap really has to stop, i know people who are "poor" that have the same kind of HSI access i do, and the ones i know who dont, do not want anything to do with computers whatsoever. sorry i'll stop ranting now:D |
|
oliphant
I Have 8 Boobies
Premium
join:2004-11-26
Corona, CA
1 edit | This is the friggin way it should be...
Greedy gov't never fails to amaze...not only do they expect a healthy chunk on the money generated from the improvements, but they want to tax the money used to pay for the tax generating deployment in the first place.
And people wonder why business is fleeing...it's not always about cheap labor, but stupid ass tax policies like this. If business was able to return to a 'tax profit' model you would have so much reinvestment that the gov't would see 10X the return from the higher revenues from freshly expanding business and unemployment would be non-existant.
But alas no...greedy gov't wants every penny they can squeeze from us and tomorrow be damned, they want it all yesterday.
--
Life is good without the headache of Comcrap HSI |
|
oliphant
I Have 8 Boobies
Premium
join:2004-11-26
Corona, CA
1 edit | reply to oroper
Re: I wonder
Subsidy? I'm sure the leftists will see it that way, but not permitting this goes beyond taxing profit to taxing reinvestment. What's next, business can't write off wages? If gov't wants growth they should not be punishing investment.
--
Life is good without the headache of Comcrap HSI |
|
oliphant
I Have 8 Boobies
Premium
join:2004-11-26
Corona, CA
| reply to swsamurai
Re: well....
Because of what...the money used for the reinvestment isn't profit. That money is spend on expansion and is no longer disposable just like the money used to pay for the building leases, wages, and other overhead. It's not stuffed in a mattress.
If they were taxed on the money used for expansion not only would they have spent the money for the expansion but then have to spend even more to cover the taxes on the money used for the expansion.
What some in gov't can't understand is they would see FAR more revenue by making it EASIER not HARDER to expand business.
--
Life is good without the headache of Comcrap HSI |
|
oliphant
I Have 8 Boobies
Premium
join:2004-11-26
Corona, CA | reply to EL_TB
Re: Hm..
Exactly...you may write off your mortgage interest, doesn't mean your interest is paid for you...you just aren't taxed on the money you're spending on it.
--
Life is good without the headache of Comcrap HSI |
|
JTRockville
Data Ho
Premium,MVM
join:2002-01-28
Rockville, MD
clubs: | Will Municipal Providers Get the Same Relief?
If municipal providers get the same relief, we might see more deployment. |
|
sitetest
join:2005-05-25
Davidsonville, MD
| reply to oliphant
Re: I wonder
Actually, reinvestment isn't taxed, ultimately. For capital investments and improvements made that can't be immediately written off, they may be depreciated. The advantage of the immediate write-offs is that the tax savings all come up front, rather than over the life of the depreciation schedule.
And time is money. |
|
fkittred
join:2002-01-24
Biddeford, ME
| *Expense* not write off
I think you all are missing the point. From the story it
appears that what the bill would allow is for the companies
to Expense the equipment. This means they can subtract all the cost of the equipment from profits the first year, rather than over three years. After three years, you end up paying the same amount of taxes...
So the cost of the equipment would be treated as an operating expense, not a capital expense. In the case of current generation equipment, that is probably 50% write off vs 33% write off. Not that big a deal.
regards,
fletcher |
|
cptmiles
Premium
join:2004-04-22
Swayzee, IN | reply to JTRockville
Re: Will Municipal Providers Get the Same Relief?
Do municipalities get taxed in the first place? They are using tax dollars to build these systems. It would be redundant to charge additional taxes to something being paid for by taxes wouldn't it? |
|
bluecynicalm
join:2000-08-11
San Francisco, CA
 ·Verizon Online DSL
| Interesting...
Atleast, it was a bipartisan idea, something lacking under the current political environment. Although it does provide for growth, I never will be enforced. If legislation, tax incentives, and favorable deregulation has not worked in the past and has not been enforced, how does this bill change such enforcement?
»thomas.loc.gov/cgi-bin/query/z?c109:S.+1147:
At the very least, I found the definition of Rural to be interesting.
RURAL AREA- The term `rural area' means any census tract which--
(A) is not within 10 miles of any incorporated or census designated place containing more than 25,000 people, and
(B) is not within a county or county equivalent which has an overall population density of more than 500 people per square mile of land.
In regards to the digital divide and lack of interest on the part of American public to subscribe to broadband services (25% of the 80% who have broadband available), isn't that typical of any new and growing technology in the US?
What would of happened if Western Union originally bought the patent from Alexander Graham Bell instead of Western Union not seeing the value of it and the mass adoption of it by the general public?
It is definitely a step in the right direction. Hopefully, over time, it will pan out and work. |
|
PDXPLT
join:2003-12-04
Banks, OR
| reply to bit_junkie
Re: duh?
Well, I know lots of people who don't have access to HSI, who very much care about computers.
It's interesting, and sad, that rural people seem to be the only group that it's still socially acceptable to make stereotypical, bigoted statements about (i.e., the "Farmer Brown"-type slurs you hear so much of on this website). |
|
JTRockville
Data Ho
Premium,MVM
join:2002-01-28
Rockville, MD
clubs:
 ·LINGO
 ·Sprint Mobile Broa..
 ·surpasshosting
 ·Verizon FIOS
| reply to cptmiles
Re: Will Municipal Providers Get the Same Relief?
Hmmm...
"Municipalities don't have to pay taxes" is Myth #4 in the Top Ten Myths and Realities About Municipal Broadband Projects:
»www.baller.com/pdfs/texas_industry_resp.pdf
quote:
Municipalities make higher "payments in lieu of taxes" and don't get taxbreaks. Some opponents of municipal broadband have argued that municipal utilities have an advantage over private sector providers when offering broadband because municipalities don't have to pay taxes. The truth is, municipal utilities make "payments in lieu of taxes" to local governments that are usually much higher than the local taxes that private entities pay. Municipal entities do not pay income taxes, but that is because they are non-profit organizations that do not make profits. At the same time, municipalities are not eligible for the billions of dollars of investment tax credits, accelerated depreciation, and other tax write-offs that often bring the effective income tax rates of private entities down to zero or less.
So I guess I should have asked: Will municipalities be excused from "payments in lieu of taxes" when deploying next-gen?
btw, do you know of any municipal broadband deployments that were built with taxpayer dollars? |
|
bit_junkie
join:2004-05-04
Maricopa, AZ
| reply to PDXPLT
Re: duh?
well i grew up on a farm in South Dakota before moving to Arizona, so if i make any remarks its from experience:D
not that i have made any as so far that i am aware of anyways:)
but yes the rual market is where the true "digital divide" comes into play, its really not so much attributed to income as it is to distance and companies willing to deploy services in rual areas. |
|
EnzonE
join:2000-03-23
Indiana, PA
| reply to bluecynicalm
Re: Interesting...
Yes I've been very skeptical about this every since Verizon ripped Pennsylvania off in billions of tax dollars. About half of the state should of been FIOS wired by now; meeting deployment targets my @$$! 
--
Verizon 1.5M/384k @ 17,047 feet from CO.Activated June 13 2001.Upgraded March 30 2005. |
|
