RSS
Twitter
Feds Look At Taxing WiFi?
from the yeah,-that'll-win-lots-of-fans dept
The details on this aren't all that clear, but RCR Wireless News has gone through President Bush's latest budget plan, and note that he would allow taxing un-auctioned radio spectrum, such as those used for WiFi and cordless phones. Apparently, the budget plan notes that this could raise quite a bit of cash -- though skips over how it might also slow down usage of such spectrum dramatically. It's also not at all clear how this would be done. Since most people don't ever pay to use unlicensed spectrum, it's difficult to see how they start charging a fee on it, unless they add for equipment providers to tack on. If anyone has more details, please post them here because, at first glance, this sounds more like a "well, what haven't we taxed yet?" type of plan, rather than anything that has been seriously thought through. Update: As we suspected, there's much less to this than it says. Harold Feld is running around clearing up the confusion and pointing out how one reporter's misinterpretation is spreading. Basically, this has little to nothing to do with WiFi.
Reader Comments (rss)
(Flattened / Threaded)
No Subject Given
are you kidding me? this is the most bull shit ive ever heard in my life. if this ever happened i would seriously throw a brick through the whitehouse window. i dont know how, but i would. take my word...
(reply to this comment) (link to this comment)
Re: No Subject Given
agreed. I would do the same.
(reply to this comment) (link to this comment)
not to sound like an idiot but...
How would they go about taxing wifi? any ideas?
(reply to this comment) (link to this comment)
Re: not to sound like an idiot but...
Nannyware required by statute would be the only way to do it. And of course, open source would be a bit of a problem, so that would have to be taken care of.
(reply to this comment) (link to this comment)
overTaxing the People
They could tack on a tax at equipment purchase.
(reply to this comment) (link to this comment)
No Subject Given
so in other words it would be impossible
(reply to this comment) (link to this comment)
farmers
we should fire all the politicians and replace them with farmers who beleive in a hard days work and honest wages. quit taxing everything god dammnit
(reply to this comment) (link to this comment)
No Subject Given
seriously, is Bush trying to find more funds for his 'war on terror'? what an idiot. as if the defense department isn't already getting enough of our tax monies, he has to go and raise more taxes? first he tries to take away our privacy rights. next he's going to tax personal wifi networks. after that, the world? ha.
(reply to this comment) (link to this comment)
Re: More taxes
I think he must be running out of excuses regarding gas prices. He must feel like we are about to take $ out of his pocket bitching about gas so he has to get $ elsewhere. I WONDER if our so called leader has stock in any wireless manufacturing companies. Hell he probally doesn't know what wireless is.
(reply to this comment) (link to this comment)
Re: farmers
Evidently, you've lived on a farm--at least, not in the past 10-20 years. Government subsidies, and extremely high efficiency levels in order to create the volume required for profitability in a very tight margin industry. That's the name of the game now. Heck, farmers don't even have to drive tractors now if they don't want to. But I'm just a farm boy; I don't know much about politics or money...
(reply to this comment) (link to this comment)
Re: No Subject Given
sure i hate the idea too however i seriously doubt it has anything to do with the war on terror
if you must pin it on something perhaps u should give hurricane katrina some thought
in addition.. normally it isnt the president that comes up with ideas. its the advisors =)
bush is just a front so the people have something to look at
(reply to this comment) (link to this comment)
No Subject Given
Yeah, i agree on that. I cant really think of any reason they would need to tax invisible waves. Part of me actually hopes they do this, so us geeks have a good reason to riot and smash things.
(reply to this comment) (link to this comment)
Please tell me...
...that some of you read more than just the article. For instance, do you know what range of the "un-auctioned" radio spectrum the proposal is sighting? Could it be the lower 700 MHz? Hrmm.
More to the point, this article [Wikipedia.org] points out that the use of certain frequencies for wireless access are already permitted/sanctioned by the FCC.
Now, this is not to say that enterprising politicians (not limited to just the POTUS) wouldn't wish to change the rules. However, just because the term "un-auctioned" radio spectrum is bantered about does not mean that you are going to have to pay an additional $0.50 per wireless router you purchase.
(reply to this comment) (link to this comment)
yeah... but
He is in essence just a front to his advisors and stuff. He just happens to be an idiot.
(reply to this comment) (link to this comment)
Re: No Subject Given
We don't have a reason to smash things? You've never had an office riot to smash old equipment? Your missing out!
(reply to this comment) (link to this comment)
republican???????
I thought us Dems were supposed to be the ones who
want to tax everything and spend it on our military...
are we sure Jr.'s really a tax slashing, military cutting republican?
oh wait.....
is that how we're $8 Trillion in debt!
~~~I'm so confused~~~
(reply to this comment) (link to this comment)
No Subject Given
fuck this, im goin to canada.
(reply to this comment) (link to this comment)
Re: farmers
Man, I had no idea farmers were serious about their wireless! :)
(reply to this comment) (link to this comment)
No Subject Given
If you want to tax smoking, you don't tax it per puff of smoke. You tax it when the cigarettes are purchased. Maybe they will try to tax the wifi hardware when it is purchased? Whatever happens, please just post a list of the politicians that support this idea so we know who not to vote for.
(reply to this comment) (link to this comment)
Unlicensed vs. taxed
Doesn't this effectually mean the spectrum is no longer unlicensed? The manufacturer would be paying the government for permission to use spectrum, which sounds a lot like forcing them to buy a license.
Anyway, I can't see it happening. Too many folks have built their businesses around providing equipment and services thanks to this public resource.
(reply to this comment) (link to this comment)
Unlicensed spectrum fee is a shockingly bad idea
How to collect user fees is not a problem - it could be made a condition of type acceptance for license exempt radio equipment, with the fee based on product sales.
But it is so fundamentally wrongheaded in principle that the mind boggles. Bush&Co. must have flunked Econ 101: "different spectrum license acquisition costs" are a normal feature of markets, where suppliers are free to charge what they think the market will bear. Would the Govt close the budget gap by adding "user fees" to EVERY product to eliminate ALL price differences?
This proposal completely ignores the fact that licensed spectrum users have different rights than unlicensed users - they are paying more for the EXCLUSIVITY of frequency use and for govt enforcement of their right of non-interference. If the Govt wants to charge unlicensed users, what benefits will be given to them in return?
Since we work to promote more unlicensed spectrum in developing countries, we see the risk of even proposing this idea. Now (almost) legitimized by a country like the US, ostensibly committed to free market principles, it may be implemented by other countries. India, for example, just decided not to allow their telecom regulator to reduce spectrum fees because the central govt needs income to reduce already sky-high taxes on other things. I would expect them to start internal discussions about WiFi user fees before the end of the week.
This idea must be fought and killed before it infects other "public goods" elsewhere.
(reply to this comment) (link to this comment)
Re: Unlicensed spectrum fee is a shockingly bad id
Don't overthink this. They're taxing everything they can even imagine getting away with EXCEPT the huge piles of money people like Warren Buffet, Bill Gates, Mark Cuban etc. - you get the idea - have, who could never spend a fraction thereof, who are alleged to fuel the economy (we know small business fuels the bulk of the economy) and who claim the opposition party are the taxers.
Wake up and vote against these folks and start paying attention to your own self interest.
(reply to this comment) (link to this comment)
Add Your Comment