California proposes tax on texting and wants to make it retroactive

[dm1333]

The California Public Utilities Commission is proposing this.

https://www.usatoday.com/story/tech/2018/12/12/california-text-tax-what-we-know-so-far/2293656002/

My favorite part!

According to the filing, the CPUC is proposing to tax traditional text messages known as SMS or MMS. Unlike iMessages on iPhones or using the text feature in WhatsApp, the texts the CPUC would tax are ones sent over a mobile phone's built-in messaging app, (iPhone users will know these as "green bubbles" in the Messages app). The CPUC is also seeking to retroactively tax users for the last five years.

[RoadKingLarry]

Crap like that is why such noble purveyors of satire such as The Onion and The Babylon Bee have no real future.
When real life becomes it's own parody of sanity what's left?
 

[brimic]

How is that even legal?

[Ben]

How is that even legal?

That's my thought as well.

Interesting on how they rag on the ISPs regarding "net neutrality", but are happy to use them to collect their taxes.

[RoadKingLarry]

So, all the messenger apps are exempt. Why would anyone use SMS if a nontaxed alternative is available?
I eagerly await the shock and outrage about people using evil loopholes when their tax doesn't work.

[makattak]

“Government’s view of the economy could be summed up in a few short phrases: If it moves, tax it. If it keeps moving, regulate it. And if it stops moving, subsidize it.”

[K Frame]

Retroactive for just 5 years? I'm surprised that they don't make it retroactive for the past 25 years.

Yeah, I know texting has really only been a thing for 10 years, at most, and smart phones with text have really only been ubiquitous for about 15 years, but why let facts and reality stand in the way of PROFIT!

[K Frame]

“Government’s view of the economy could be summed up in a few short phrases: If it moves, tax it. If it keeps moving, regulate it. And if it stops moving, subsidize it.”

Uhm... that's standard government...

California's government?

If it moves, tax it.

It if keeps moving, tax it more.

If it stops moving, institute crushing death taxes on the British pattern.

[Pb]

They should definitely do this!  CA deserves it... 

[brimic]

They should definitely do this!  CA deserves it... 

Just an odd thought, but maybe it could apply to everyone everywhere...
If the government has the technology or the ability to coerce businesses to attribute every text to every person, maybe that ability could be used to track every vote from every citizen.
If we are going to have dystopia, I'm much in favor of the individual voter being sent the bill (whether monetary, or paying with a loss of their own rights) for the actions of the person they voted for, rather than democratizing the misery.

[Firethorn]

How is that even legal?

It generally isn't?

The only way it would be work is if it was somehow a tax that had been "missed", IE some statutory obligation for the texting plans to be taxed in a certain way, and nobody read/enforced the law until recently and they're looking to fulfill their obligation as far into the past as practical.

Like, say, there's some obligation to tax data transmissions at some rate that was passed in the '60s and ignored when data transmissions actually became a thing.

That said, it'd still generate lawsuits.

[230RN]

Remember the standard joke every time a tax increase was passed?

"If they could tax air, they would."

I guess they're getting close.

Terry

[MechAg94]

It generally isn't?

The only way it would be work is if it was somehow a tax that had been "missed", IE some statutory obligation for the texting plans to be taxed in a certain way, and nobody read/enforced the law until recently and they're looking to fulfill their obligation as far into the past as practical.

Like, say, there's some obligation to tax data transmissions at some rate that was passed in the '60s and ignored when data transmissions actually became a thing.

That said, it'd still generate lawsuits.

No need for actual valid legal arguments.  They will find a friendly liberal judge who will invent some twisted reasoning and declare it legal.  IMO, that is the big difference these days is we have a whole lot more political judges who seem to have no fear of making law.

[brimic]

Remember the standard joke every time a tax increase was passed?

"If they could tax air, they would."

I guess they're getting close.

Terry

Air is at least a tangible substance. When you break it down, they are actually taxing electrons and electromagnetic waves.

[K Frame]

California's already taxing rain...

https://www.dailynews.com/2017/08/18/rain-tax-is-back-and-la-county-residents-could-get-soaked-guest-commentary/


Or at least they're trying to.

Maryland did that a couple of years ago, too.

https://www.forbes.com/sites/travisbrown/2014/01/03/when-it-rains-it-pours-tax-dollars-in-maryland/#5f0e66807c69

Although I think that was overturned by the Hogan administration.

[Ben]

California's already taxing rain...

https://www.dailynews.com/2017/08/18/rain-tax-is-back-and-la-county-residents-could-get-soaked-guest-commentary/


Or at least they're trying to.

Maryland did that a couple of years ago, too.

https://www.forbes.com/sites/travisbrown/2014/01/03/when-it-rains-it-pours-tax-dollars-in-maryland/#5f0e66807c69

Although I think that was overturned by the Hogan administration.

I think Oregon did something similar as well. It may not have been a tax, but maybe a fine or something for collecting rainwater , which they say doesn't belong to you, even falling directly on your own property.

[K Frame]

Oh, lots of states already do that.

You're not allowed to collect or otherwise impede rain's journey from the sky to the ground.

[Strings]

They will find a friendly liberal judge who will invent some twisted reasoning and declare it legal.  IMO, that is the big difference these days is we have a whole lot more political judges who seem to have no fear of making law.

Assuming they tax receiving texts (the article said that part was unclear: betting they would try to tax both ends), all we need do is find out the number of any such judge, and start texting

[Scout26]

How is that even legal?

If they say it is.

[Fly320s]

I think Oregon did something similar as well. It may not have been a tax, but maybe a fine or something for collecting rainwater , which they say doesn't belong to you, even falling directly on your own property.

Well, the next logical thing to tax is sunshine.  Same reasoning.  No one should benefit from the sunshine for free. 

[Ben]

Well, the next logical thing to tax is sunshine.  Same reasoning.  No one should benefit from the sunshine for free. 

You may be joking, but as fast as CA is going solar, at some point they'll start taxing solar power in one way or another to make up for the drop in taxes from regular utilities. Square footage of solar panels on the roof - mark my word. And/or big disposal taxes for all the batteries.

[Fly320s]

You may be joking, but as fast as CA is going solar, at some point they'll start taxing solar power in one way or another to make up for the drop in taxes from regular utilities. Square footage of solar panels on the roof - mark my word. And/or big disposal taxes for all the batteries.

Oh, I believe you, though the tax won't be based solely on the sqaure footage of the panels.  California will also tax the electricity used, as they do now, but requiring power meters installed at all homes to monitor the power useage.

[RoadKingLarry]

Oh, I believe you, though the tax won't be based solely on the sqaure footage of the panels.  California will also tax the electricity used, as they do now, but requiring power meters installed at all homes to monitor the power useage.

Somebody needs to make that a letter writing campaign to California legislators, and any other libtard controlled state, Colorado comes to mind.

[230RN]

Retroactive for just 5 years? I'm surprised that they don't make it retroactive for the past 25 years.

Yeah, I know texting has really only been a thing for 10 years, at most, and smart phones with text have really only been ubiquitous for about 15 years, but why let facts and reality stand in the way of PROFIT!

Just part of their oft-used technique of manipulating compromise.

The 5-year backtracking for taxes is a giveaway.

"We" still haven't got wise to that strategy.

Terry, 230RN

[Hawkmoon]

How are they going to monitor it? What if someone in California sends a text to or receives a text from someone in Nevada, or Arizona -- or Massachusetts? I don't think California can legally tax messages that travel interstate.