<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?>
<rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:wfw="http://wellformedweb.org/CommentAPI/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
	xmlns:slash="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/slash/"
	>

<channel>
	<title>AllThingsD &#187; iTax Touch</title>
	<atom:link href="http://allthingsd.com/tag/itax-touch/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://allthingsd.com</link>
	<description></description>
	<lastBuildDate>Sun, 12 Feb 2012 02:05:24 +0000</lastBuildDate>
	<language>en</language>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=3.3.1</generator>
<atom:link rel="hub" href="http://pubsubhubbub.appspot.com"/>		<item>
		<title>California Assemblyman Introduces &quot;iTax Much&quot;</title>
		<link>http://allthingsd.com/20080409/itax/</link>
		<comments>http://allthingsd.com/20080409/itax/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Wed, 09 Apr 2008 07:00:46 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>John Paczkowski</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Commerce]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[News]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Assembly Bill 1956]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[California]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[download]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[e-book]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[e-commerce]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[information]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[iTax Touch]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[John Paczkowski]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[pornography]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[property]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[sales]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[tax]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://digitaldaily.allthingsd.com/20080408/itax/</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[As far as solutions for California&#8217;s $14 billion budget deficit go, taxing &#8220;digital property&#8221; is nearly as outlandish as Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger&#8217;s proposed $4.8 billion cut in education spending. Yet it&#8217;s being bandied about by Democratic State Assemblyman Charles Calderon, whose Assembly Bill 1956 would expand the state&#8217;s sales tax to digital goods&#8211;music downloads, e-books, [...]]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>As far as solutions for California&#8217;s $14 billion budget deficit go, taxing &#8220;digital property&#8221; is nearly as outlandish as Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger&#8217;s proposed $4.8 billion cut in education spending.</p>
<p>Yet it&#8217;s being bandied about by Democratic State Assemblyman Charles Calderon, whose Assembly Bill 1956 <a href="http://www.reuters.com/article/musicNews/idUSN1334810620080314">would expand the state&#8217;s sales tax to digital goods</a>&#8211;music downloads, e-books, pornography and what-not. &#8220;The notion of taxing tangible, physical property is really an industrial-era construct when we made widgets and sold widgets,&#8221; Calderon argues. &#8220;Now it&#8217;s not about widgets, it&#8217;s about information, and selling information and moving information.&#8221;</p>
<p>It certainly is, but is it really prudent to slap an iTax of 8.25% to 8.75% on such information? Especially when those who peddle it could pretty easily create a separate entity out-of-state and avoid it altogether? Driving away e-commerce certainly isn&#8217;t going to do California&#8217;s budget any good. &#8220;When you charge these taxes, all these e-commerce [companies] are going to move outside of California,&#8221; <a href="http://www.mercurynews.com/businessheadlines/ci_8837145?nclick_check=1"> said Michelle Steel, a member of the California State Board of Equalization</a>. &#8220;California is the high-tech state; why would you want to kick them out?&#8221;</p>
<p>Good question. Because if you do force them out, who&#8217;s going to provide the state with its <a href="http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?file=/c/a/2006/05/09/MNGSVIO7NG1.DTL">massive</a> tax <a href="http://www.boston.com/business/taxes/articles/2007/01/06/google_stock_boom_boosts_calif_coffers/">windfalls</a>?   From an Associated Press report from January, 2007:</p>
<blockquote><p>
After cashing in more than 9 million shares valued at $3.7 billion last year, 16 Google insiders will owe the Golden State as much as $380 million in taxes&#8211;enough to cover the salaries of more than 3,000 state workers.&#8221;
</p></blockquote>
]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://allthingsd.com/20080409/itax/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>1</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>California Assemblyman Introduces "iTax Much"</title>
		<link>http://allthingsd.com/20080409/itax-2/</link>
		<comments>http://allthingsd.com/20080409/itax-2/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Wed, 09 Apr 2008 07:00:46 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>John Paczkowski</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Commerce]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[News]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Assembly Bill 1956]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[California]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[download]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[e-book]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[e-commerce]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[information]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[iTax Touch]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[John Paczkowski]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[pornography]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[property]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[sales]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[tax]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://digitaldaily.allthingsd.com/20080408/itax/</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[As far as solutions for California&#8217;s $14 billion budget deficit go, taxing &#8220;digital property&#8221; is nearly as outlandish as Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger&#8217;s proposed $4.8 billion cut in education spending. Yet it&#8217;s being bandied about by Democratic State Assemblyman Charles Calderon, whose Assembly Bill 1956 would expand the state&#8217;s sales tax to digital goods&#8211;music downloads, e-books, [...]]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>As far as solutions for California&#8217;s $14 billion budget deficit go, taxing &#8220;digital property&#8221; is nearly as outlandish as Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger&#8217;s proposed $4.8 billion cut in education spending.</p>
<p>Yet it&#8217;s being bandied about by Democratic State Assemblyman Charles Calderon, whose Assembly Bill 1956 <a href="http://www.reuters.com/article/musicNews/idUSN1334810620080314">would expand the state&#8217;s sales tax to digital goods</a>&#8211;music downloads, e-books, pornography and what-not. &#8220;The notion of taxing tangible, physical property is really an industrial-era construct when we made widgets and sold widgets,&#8221; Calderon argues. &#8220;Now it&#8217;s not about widgets, it&#8217;s about information, and selling information and moving information.&#8221;</p>
<p>It certainly is, but is it really prudent to slap an iTax of 8.25% to 8.75% on such information? Especially when those who peddle it could pretty easily create a separate entity out-of-state and avoid it altogether? Driving away e-commerce certainly isn&#8217;t going to do California&#8217;s budget any good. &#8220;When you charge these taxes, all these e-commerce [companies] are going to move outside of California,&#8221; <a href="http://www.mercurynews.com/businessheadlines/ci_8837145?nclick_check=1"> said Michelle Steel, a member of the California State Board of Equalization</a>. &#8220;California is the high-tech state; why would you want to kick them out?&#8221;</p>
<p>Good question. Because if you do force them out, who&#8217;s going to provide the state with its <a href="http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?file=/c/a/2006/05/09/MNGSVIO7NG1.DTL">massive</a> tax <a href="http://www.boston.com/business/taxes/articles/2007/01/06/google_stock_boom_boosts_calif_coffers/">windfalls</a>?   From an Associated Press report from January, 2007:</p>
<blockquote><p>
After cashing in more than 9 million shares valued at $3.7 billion last year, 16 Google insiders will owe the Golden State as much as $380 million in taxes&#8211;enough to cover the salaries of more than 3,000 state workers.&#8221;
</p></blockquote>
]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://allthingsd.com/20080409/itax-2/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
	</channel>
</rss>

