California Takes A Last Swing At VoIP

JamesB writes "News.com's Ben Charny reports that two California cities want to tax Internet telephony. This news comes on the eve of the FCC ruling on whether federal regulations will preempt local ones."

Re:Good luck, Arnold!

[Anonymous Cowdog]

Oops, and -now- I notice it's not Arnold doing it, but city governments. Well just because you're paranoid, doesn't mean they're not after you!

a little strange

[dns_server]

Ihis is one thing i find strange about america (i'm an aussie) is the seperation of powers between the national government and the state government. In australia the government collects the taxes, which is distributed through to the states. The states are responsible for the running of the state, and can collect taxes on state based services (such as plane tickets), the local council can collect money in it's own area (parking etc). There is a clear hirarcy of power, the national government sets all national laws, the state sets it's state based laws, the councils set thair own laws.

Re:a little strange

[Elizabeth007]

Ah, yes, but you also forgot to mention the following:

Article 1, Section 8.3:
To regulate commerce with foreign nations, and among the several States, and with the Indian tribes;

This tiny little section was used (and still is used) by the federal grovernment to get their grubby little paws into just above everything.

Information Superhighway Robbery

[RealProgrammer]

Derek Hanway, Burbank financial services director, said the city was motivated to act for fear of funding for things like police services drying up. Last year, Burbank collected $3.7 million in utilities taxes on phone calls, half of which went to pay for emergency services.

Funny how they always mention funding for police services, or the fire department, and never their own salary or the rest of the other unpopular half. For instance, the Burbank budget (pdf) [burbank.ca.us] for the next year forecasts

• $32,606,324 Police
• $24,418,541 Fire
• $14,230,311 Park, Rec & Comm Svcs,
• $5,969,207 Community Development
• $5,675,216 General Administration
• $5,043,634 Library
• $4,175,351 Management Services
• $3,645,424 Information Technology
• $2,956,435 Financial Services
• $2,405,510 Non-Departmental

But they need a VoIP tax to pay for their police services. Right.

Oh, by the way, they're hiring [burbank.ca.us].

Re:What's in it for me?

[dynamic_cast]

It's not what is in it for you, but what is in it for dependants of the state.

Re:a little strange

[yuriismaster]

It's called "Marble Cake Federalism" Basically, the federal government handles federal stuff like international affairs and stuff that states really have no handle over. The states handle the really local stuff, like municipal policing, etc. Anything inbetween the two is essentially state-run, with some federal supervision or perhaps some slight involvement. Of course, the easiest way for the federal government to influence states is with a big chunk of money tied to a policy. Basically, they say "OK, any state that DOESN'T have a legal drinking age of 21 or over gets 5% of highway funding cut". Now if I was a state, I would certainly bump up my drinking age to meet those standards, even though the federal govt really has no buisness in drinking age. That's called fiscal federalism (its what makes the world go 'round)

Re:Information Superhighway Robbery

[RealProgrammer]

Yes, police have to be paid for. That doesn't mean that if they don't get a VoIP tax their police funds will just dry up.

My main point is the disenginuity of saying it's all for the police. It's just like when people say, "Do it for the children!"

Re:Get a clue

[anethema]

The most popular voip seems to be skype..which is encrypted with aes-256..good luck wiretapping that.