John Galt
Forward, March
Premium
join:2004-09-30
Happy Camp
 ·CenturyLink
| reply to en102
Re: If you can't drop your own rates....
said by en102  :There's 2 certainties in life: Death and Taxes And I am not so sure about Death...!
--
A is A |
|
en102
Canadian, eh?
join:2001-01-26
Valencia, CA | reply to NOCMan
There's 2 certainties in life:
Death and Taxes |
|
NOCMan
Verizon Fios User
Premium
join:2004-09-30
Flower Mound, TX | reply to DrTCP
Cell phone companies are forced to pay these taxes while we also find the same taxes passed onto us by the backhaul providers.
The residents want more towers, the councils moan, but then agree to it but then stab us in the back with taxes. |
|
en102
Canadian, eh?
join:2001-01-26
Valencia, CA
 ·RoadRunner Cable
·DSL EXTREME
| reply to DrTCP
Agreed -
Dish and DirecTv pay $$$ to have their satellites, and I imagine that they also pay $$$ to use a certain amount of spectrum. Other than that, there are NO local resources used that could be taxed. Cable, power lines, gas lines, phone lines, water lines, and cell phones require land within a city, and are typically on public land (or under the streets). None of this is required for satellite. |
|
DrTCP
Yours truly
Premium,ExMod 1999-04
join:1999-11-09
Round Rock, TX
| reply to gpancner
said by gpancner :Municipalities provide services that many satellite subscribers want but are unable and/or unwilling to pay for. There is a reason for the tax levied on the cable since it uses infrastructure burried and maintainance of the roads etc where infrastructure passes costs to the city. With the Satellite the City does not incur any such charges and there is no reason to tax it. It would be taxation without representation.
However same money grab mentality that wants to tax VoIP is trying to tax the Satellite services.
Cell phone companies collect the same taxes as hard wire phone, so should satellite companies.
Cell phones needs to have towers in the neighborhood. You can make a case for that. |
|
