Though it's been proposed and shot down before, a renewed effort to cap federal taxes on wireless service in the US has a fighting chance of making it through Congress this time thanks to bipartisan support and a pretty crappy economy that could use all the breaks it can get right about now. Senators Ron Wyden and Olympia Snowe, representing both sides of the chamber, are trying to push through a five-year ban on tax hikes -- welcome news to pretty much any subscriber who takes even a fleeting look at the buffoonery on page one of their bill. Unsurprisingly, it's also welcome news to carriers who embrace any opportunity to lower their bills without any action on their own part; Verizon for one has come out to say that it "applauds" the legislation. How about a bill to ban
20-cent text messages, hmm, Verizon? Would ya applaud
that? Thought not.
posted Jul 20th 2008 8:23AM
No shit whenever I feel like getting depressed all I have to do is look at my ATT bill under the "Gov't Fees and Taxes" section that adds about 15% to my bill each month.
how about lowering the taxes? but no matter how far they lower the taxes, it won't stop people from calling up and asking the dumbest question in the universe: why is my bill so high? I don't know, you stunad, read it
if you forbid them from raising federal taxes, they'll just raise local taxes or other fees & surcharges. It is pretty crazy when a $65 bill of service results in nearly $20 worth of taxes and fees - that's almost 30% taxes on a service!
That doesn't make any sense. You're saying the telecoms *want* their services taxed? Doesn't seem too likely. And local taxes don't go to the federal government, so that doesn't follow either. (Who is the "they" you speak of?) There's not much the Feds can do about regulating local tax levels. You'll have to take that up with your state representatives.
But telephone taxes are an *easy* tax for any government (city, county, state, federal) to pull taxes. They know everyone uses the phone so everyone has to pay the tax.
@Joseph Singer
You're absolutely correct. But that isn't what Wobbly said.
do they really need to use a sprint bill? engadget is always picking on sprint
1) The bill bans new or discriminatory (ie. on your cell bill but not on your morning coffee) by STATE or LOCAL governments, which is where the far majority of current cell taxes come from. There has not been an increase in federal cell taxes for a while (and it would have to get around the same people who are supporting this) so the main threat to the consumer is in these state and local taxes.
2) Yes, reducing them would be better, but in this environment with state and local govt's pleading poverty, a moratorium is at least a start.
I feel that it is preposterous that states are levy both sales tax and wireless service taxes. I think they ought to have to pick one or the other.
i like the proposition for a ban on 20 cent texts.