[Chapter-delegates] [Internet Policy] Taxing Internet services

Sat Nov 12 15:59:24 PST 2016

Mike,

is there any reason "the Internet" would need taxes of its own? this must
vary widely by country but at the very least sales taxes apply almost
everywhere.

What is more incongruous, as was discussed in this list a few weeks ago I
think, is to tax "the Internet" (and in particular, access) with taxes
meant for "demerit goods" like alcohol or tobacco, or those meant for
luxury goods, when most countries are still facing a serious digital divide
in one or many layers and have explicit and tacit policy goals to promote
access.

As others have now pointed out, a more-detailed picture is needed for
further response.

Alejandro Pisanty

On Sat, Nov 12, 2016 at 4:14 PM, Michael Gurstein <gurstein at gmail.com>
wrote:

> I am unclear why “the Internet” should be exempt from paying its fair
> share (of taxes).  Surely, the Internet and associated activities benefit
> inordinately from public investment in education/literacy and other areas
> of public expenditure.
>
>
>
> My understanding is that the original exemption from taxation as accorded
> by the Clinton presidency was an artifact of various political finagling
> and considerations of the time which would provide I believe, little or no
> “precedent” for carrying this forward.
>
>
>
> M
>
>
>
> *From:* InternetPolicy [mailto:internetpolicy-bounces at elists.isoc.org] *On
> Behalf Of *Alejandro Pisanty
> *Sent:* November 11, 2016 7:04 PM
> *To:* Mark Buell <buell at isoc.org>
> *Cc:* ISOC Chapter Delegates <chapter-delegates at elists.isoc.org>;
> internetpolicy at elists.isoc.org
> *Subject:* Re: [Internet Policy] Taxing Internet services
>
>
>
> Mark,
>
>
>
> we had a similar case in Mexico in 2009 which I have described in ISOC
> lists (so apologies to those who have read it.) We were able to defeat the
> brunt of the initiative.
>
>
>
> The government proposed a tax on all telecommunications services of 4% on
> the bill. The Executive's argument was "because this is a highly
> concentrated sector so it is simple to collect, and because this sector has
> not been subject to specific taxes for a long time." (They do pay VAT and
> all other taxes plus they did pay the Universal Service Fund contribution
> already described by others on this list.) Industry lobbying was able to
> bring this down to 3% in the lower chamber.
>
>
>
> Members of ISOC Mexico and others in the community decided to oppose this
> new tax and argued that it was incoherent with the governments's announced
> purpose of increasing access to telecommunications and the Internet because
> the tax would translate into higher prices (conveniently a study showed
> that there would be x% less users for every y% of price increase i.e. you
> have to use a figure for the demand elasticity.) We made a campaign
> independent of industry's so we didn't use a "no tax" theme but rather an
> "Internet is necessary" one, i.e. reflecting society's concern.
>
>
>
> This was mostly an online-media (Twitter hashtag #InternetNecesario) that
> was able to unite people from all sectors, ages, political sides, and
> locations. Once it became massive it attracted the media's attention and
> then the Senate's. The Senate held hearings from us and after three weeks
> of intense campaign the goal was partially achieved: Internet access which
> was billed separately would be tax-exempt. The actual text of the laws was
> written more by industry lobbyists than by anyone else but the victory was
> sweet for civil society and the technical community anyway. Plus, we
> established a "don't mess with the Internet" theme that has lasted long and
> served us well.
>
>
>
> There are downsides and more details which I'll spare the list but will be
> happy to share with those interested.
>
>
>
> Yours,
>
>
>
> Alejandro PIsanty
>
>
>
> On Fri, Nov 11, 2016 at 1:53 PM, Mark Buell <buell at isoc.org> wrote:
>
> Dear colleagues,
>
>
>
> As you may know, the Government of Canada is considering implementing a
> tax on Internet service to generate funding for the development of Canadian
> content in light of declining revenues in the traditional media sector. Two
> scenarios are under consideration:
>
> 1         A tax on online content providers, like content streaming sites
> (thus, the tax in Canada has been referred to as the ‘Netflix tax’).
>
> 2         A tax on Internet service, added to a subscriber’s Internet fees.
>
>
>
> Canada isn’t the first country to consider an Internet tax. Hungary,
> France, the United States, and others have proposed – and withdrawn – a tax
> on Internet service. Other countries have implemented a similar tax,
> including Pakistan and Bhutan.
>
>
>
> An ‘Internet tax’ could have implications for the Internet and innovation.
> There are significant policy questions that need to be carefully
> considered. As we frame our thinking ourselves, we would like to hear your
> thoughts in particular on the following questions:
>
> Is a tax on Internet service an appropriate tradeoff for ensuring the
> development local, regional and national content?
>
> Would a tax on Internet services affect the end-user adoption of the
> Internet nationwide? Would it have an impact on investments in Internet
> infrastructure?
>
> How would a tax on Internet service intersect with policies to enhance a
> nation’s competitiveness in the innovation and digital economy?
>
>
>
> Furthermore, if you have had any experience with a similar policy at the
> regional and/or national level, please let us know.
>
>
>
> We look forward to hearing your thoughts on this important issue. The
> discussion will be open until November 18, 2016.
>
>
>
> Thank you,
>
>
>
> Mark Buell
>
> Regional Bureau Director, North America
>
> Internet Society
>
> Skype: mark_at_isoc
>
> Twitter: @mebuell <https://twitter.com/mebuell> and @isoc_na
> <https://twitter.com/ISOC_NA>
>
> www.isoc.org
>
>
>
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> To manage your ISOC subscriptions or unsubscribe,
> please log into the ISOC Member Portal:
> https://portal.isoc.org/
> Then choose Interests & Subscriptions from the My Account menu.
>
>
>
>
>
> --
>
> - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
>      Dr. Alejandro Pisanty
> Facultad de Química UNAM
> Av. Universidad 3000, 04510 Mexico DF Mexico
> +52-1-5541444475 FROM ABROAD
> +525541444475 DESDE MÉXICO SMS +525541444475
> Blog: http://pisanty.blogspot.com
> LinkedIn: http://www.linkedin.com/in/pisanty
> Unete al grupo UNAM en LinkedIn, http://www.linkedin.com/e/gis/
> 22285/4A106C0C8614
> Twitter: http://twitter.com/apisanty
> ---->> Unete a ISOC Mexico, http://www.isoc.org
> .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .
>

-- 
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
     Dr. Alejandro Pisanty
Facultad de Química UNAM
Av. Universidad 3000, 04510 Mexico DF Mexico
+52-1-5541444475 FROM ABROAD
+525541444475 DESDE MÉXICO SMS +525541444475
Blog: http://pisanty.blogspot.com
LinkedIn: http://www.linkedin.com/in/pisanty
Unete al grupo UNAM en LinkedIn,
http://www.linkedin.com/e/gis/22285/4A106C0C8614
Twitter: http://twitter.com/apisanty
---->> Unete a ISOC Mexico, http://www.isoc.org
.  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <https://elists.isoc.org/mailman/private/chapter-delegates/attachments/20161112/82c52f28/attachment.htm>