Comments: Taxing Issuers

Taxing my usage of a device I purchased will never work since how do you know I have more than one? So if I have more than one device ala a network then how do you know I have networked them? If I have deducted the cost to repair the networked devices I have all but told you I have them so I am offering information about how you may elect to tax me.

My device is a tractor that just happens to have an LCD screen and keyboard, in fact I have two. So two tractors that communicate using what might be understood to be a computer is a viable taxable event, or maybe if my cars talk to each other in the same way.

What sounds more likely to occur is the threshold for determining if a device is taxable or a network of devices is taxable will need to be refined and built out. By the time they have figured that one out the hardware will change.

Posted by God's Gift to whomever at June 27, 2004 07:21 AM

Yes, the logic looks faulty to me. The article said they would collect the info from tax forms that claim deductions. Seems like there will then be a simple calculation as to whether the deduction is worth the added hassle.

What do your two tractors do when they are talking to each other?

Posted by Iang at June 27, 2004 07:50 AM

Tractors randomly exchange data in the hopes of finding the solution to the maximized yield for soybeans and the grade of soil compaction. In doing this activity they are required to exchange IM protocol elements and allow for other devices to act along in this process if they wish.

So a P2P Tractor network ermerges allowing outsiders to participate. Maybe other information other than the designed intention gets passed around as well, maybe even in another protocol that allows the participants to talk without the added cost of a long distance bill. Maybe suburban folks use their lawn tractors and urban people use their roof top garden irrigation system. The point is computing in strict terms has already broken the boundaries that can confine it to legal terms. The only thing that can be taxed is that which can be made clear and obvious or what already is in that state.

The governance of the unseen will never work. In fact the more complex the tax code is (meaning the more it trys to reveal and clarify) the more unclear it becomes. Simple structures that are easily understood for tax purposes are best when a simple person understands the system and how they pay for it, they tend to respect it as their own not of some outside entity.

Organic in nature and simple in design. As well, taxes should be collected in real time; the deadline and calendar event are foolish notions and cost more in the end. Real Time Taxes make for less errors and mistakes in commerce. Taxes can be a beneficial means of introducing good governance in commercial transactions. If the a real time method of doing transactions and collecting the taxes were part of the culture the complexities of the Federal Reserve's Economist would be considered foolish since what is would be known.

Taxes at subaccount and participant level in a transaction model. That might be the killer application, handling taxes as they occur rather than reliance on accrual accountants and their bullshit netting. The ultimate customer is the government that needs information in a real time manner since properly informed they can over spend anyway.

Posted by God's Gift to whomever at June 27, 2004 09:34 AM
MT::App::Comments=HASH(0x55819fbcec50) Subroutine MT::Blog::SUPER::site_url redefined at /home/iang/www/fc/cgi-bin/mt/lib/MT/ line 125.