New Taxes On Your Internet Usage?

quote:

---

U.S. lawmakers are at it again - debating issues that will affect you as an Internet user. Even if you don't live in the United States, these laws might apply to you if you send email to or receive it from the U.S. or do business over the 'Net with U.S. companies. It's a good idea for all Internet users to try to keep up with the laws being passed by various governments, especially the U.S. and E.U., that can impact us all.

In late October, the U.S. Senate unanimously passed the "Can Spam Act," which imposes a number of new federal regulations on commercial e-mail, with penalties up to $1 million and up to five years in prison. It hasn't passed the House yet, but political observers expect some sort of anti-spam bill to be sent to the president before the end of the year. The Senate bill has both good and bad aspects. It makes it illegal to use misleading subject lines or fraudulent return email addresses in commercial email, which we think is a good policy (although it will be difficult to enforce against spam that originates outside the country). Of more concern, this bill is reported to assess penalties against email service providers whose customers send spam; we're not so sure this is a good idea. It's like holding the phone company responsible if someone uses their service to make harassing telephone calls.

Another controversial provision is the establishment of a "Do Not E-mail" registry patterned after the national "Do Not Call" list. We have reservations about this one; do we really want to provide spammers with a huge list of valid email addresses? We're not sure that what works for telemarketers will work equally as well in the online world, if only because very few telephone solicitors call from other countries.

Another thing about the bill that has some up in arms is the fact that it supersedes state laws. Thus, states that have passed more restrictive spam laws (such as the California legislation we discussed here a few weeks ago) won't be able to impose their own laws. While this provides standardization and solves some of the complex jurisdictional issues involved in regulating spam, it's also a Constitutional (states rights) issue that's likely to be challenged.

Another important legal event occurred with little fanfare on November 1st, when the federal moratorium on state taxes for Internet access expired. This opens up the possibility for states, and maybe even local governments, to rush to slap new taxes on your ISP service (including cable, satellite and DSL service), resulting in higher costs to end users. With nothing preventing it, these taxes could be assessed in whatever way the government wanted. Thus it's conceivable that the "x cents per email" tax that's long been feared by 'Net users could become a reality. asd

---

Report this post to a moderator | IP: Logged

wrong forum
jhahahaha

move to TFL pls

Report this post to a moderator | IP: Logged

WinXPnews™ E-Zine
Tue, Nov 4, 2003 (Vol. 3, 44 - Issue 100)

Report this post to a moderator | IP: Logged

quote:

---

Originally posted by RiZZ
Another important legal event occurred with little fanfare on November 1st, when the federal moratorium on state taxes for Internet access expired. This opens up the possibility for states, and maybe even local governments, to rush to slap new taxes on your ISP service (including cable, satellite and DSL service), resulting in higher costs to end users. With nothing preventing it, these taxes could be assessed in whatever way the government wanted. Thus it's conceivable that the "x cents per email" tax that's long been feared by 'Net users could become a reality.

---

Report this post to a moderator | IP: Logged

Gore will save us. Trust in Gore.

Report this post to a moderator | IP: Logged