California considers text messaging tax to fund cell service for low-income residents

[brooklynite]

Source: The Hill

California may soon charge its residents a fee for text messaging, according to a report released by state regulators Tuesday.

The report from the California Public Utilities Commission (CPUC) says the tax on text messaging would likely be a flat fee added to a monthly bill instead of a per text tax and the money would be used to fund programs that make phone service available for low-income residents.

Business groups in the state and wireless carriers are against the proposal.

“It’s a dumb idea,” Jim Wunderman, president of business advocacy group the Bay Area Council, told the San Jose Mercury News. “This is how conversations take place in this day and age, and it’s almost like saying there should be a tax on the conversations we have.”

Read more: https://thehill.com/policy/technology/420982-california-considers-tax-on-text-messages-to-fund-cell-service-for-low

[TreasonousBastard]

1. Tax Twitter first.

[OnlinePoker]

2. What if you don't text but your phone has that capability?

Will they just assume you do and charge you a tax?

[a kennedy]

3. This is just ridiculous......

[AndJusticeForSome]

4. Another regressive tax?

Per text tax would be disasterous. No. Find ways to tax the wealthy more!

[The Liberal Lion]

6. I thought the same thing on first glance

A regressive tax.

[The Liberal Lion]

5. Nah, this isn't a good idea

[exboyfil]

7. How much do they plan to spend on cell service

My Tracfone plan is $6.68/mo. and $0.68 of that are already taxes and fees.

How is it different than the federal program already in place?

[BadGimp]

8. I'm pretty Liberal but this is a horrible f*#king idea

They should focus on understanding why "low-income residents" don't have cell service. They will end up at the doorstep of the new Telcos.

[ProfessorGAC]

37. Being Liberal Is Exactly The Reason You Should Think That Way

This tax is incredibly regressive. It will impact the people most who have the least to be taxed.

Even if there were some sort of deduction for people under a certain income on the state tax, they are still paying out of pocket for the whole year until that refund comes back, once a year.

You're idea of going after the telcos who aren't providing adequate service is likely the best plan.

[Codeine]

9. Or tax the wealthy a tiny bit more

as is done in every other part of the civilized world.

[JustABozoOnThisBus]

10. To fund phones, charge for phone calls

I wouldn't mind paying two cents per phone call. The telemarketers/scamsters, however ...

[Angleae]

20. Such a tax would only apply to thise having accounts in California

Those outside the state would be unaffected

[guyfromla]

11. Someone is trolling us as this is a bad idea

WTF?? Are they trying to get the youth vote away fro dems?? Which fucker comes up with these ideas??? BTW, Californians like me are tired of being taxed - PERIOD!! I want to do good, but there is a limit...

[aggiesal]

14. California legislature is ...

completely Democratic.
The House, The Senate, All state positions, including our DC Senators.

If they're trying to give up the youth vote, they're shooting themselves in the foot.

I don't mind a small tax.
The problem is, that tax will grow over time.
It will never remain at the rate it started.

Maybe it should be implemented only on new accounts, and allow current accounts to be grandfathered.

[Hassin Bin Sober]

29. Like Chicago's zoned parking permits.

Initially the zone add on for zoned parking was a couple bucks just for “administration purposes” and so residents wouldn’t have to fight with bars and restaurant customers for parking. Then the city needed revenue and tuned the program in to a revenue source raising the fee to $25 (on top of their already high city vehicle sticker fee). The guest passes went from a nickel a piece to $.53 cents a piece.

I don’t know why that one irks me so much but it does. Probably because it started so innocently and turned in to having to pay to park in front of your own house.

[aggiesal]

36. I agree, it happens with everything. ...

I don't know all the details about the Chicago city parking situation.
I grew up in NW Indiana, but I haven't lived there since 1980.
I tell people I grew up in Chicago, because if I say Hammond, they'll say,
"Where's that?"

What I heard is that the Parking Meters were turned over to a private company.
The city agreed to pay the private company the equivalent of all parking spaces
occupied 24/7, which we all know never happens. But, the private company
made out like bandits.

The fees you highlighted, $2 to $25 and 5¢ to 53¢ are two examples where
fees only go up, and never return to their original fee.

Every company/agency/bank/entity all have the same thought "It's only 10¢
it won't hurt anyone.

But if everyone does it, the fees really start to add up.

Then they'll change the rules on you, send you a letter telling you the fee structure
has changed, and you automatically agree to the new fee structure.

[forgotmylogin]

12. Aren't there usually state taxes on most cell phone bills?

I play a flat rate, but I assume all fees are rolled into that. Just add a slight "community cell service" tax in with all the rest. They should not charge per-text...that was the worst idea cellular companies had at the beginning of phone plans.

[Auggie]

13. Screw that. If phone service is so essential it should be non-profit and run by the state.

[progree]

15. A flat fee on the bill -- is the most regressive tax there is, essentially a head tax

Last edited Wed Dec 12, 2018, 08:03 PM - Edit history (1)

Even a regular sales tax -- a percentage of what one buys -- is way less regressive than a head tax -- an amount per person or household no matter how little or much you purchase.

With a head tax, the poorest of the poor pays the same dollar amount as Jeff Bezos.

And the problem is getting worse -- my city council has larded on a $6.00/month fee on each utility bill -- gas and electric. For a total of $12/month per household.

And they keep increasing it (they started out at $2) because, well, frankly far too few progressives understand taxes. So they just lap this shit up if it is ostensibly for a good purpose, without thinking much about the poor people and households paying ever more inflated bills for basic services, and how we can do this with a much more progressive tax -- even a flat percentage rate income tax is more progressive than a sales tax, which in turn is much less regressive than a head tax.

The report from the California Public Utilities Commission (CPUC) says the tax on text messaging would likely be a flat fee added to a monthly bill instead of a per text tax

Edited to add the excerpt from the OP that it's likely to be a flat fee and not a per text tax.

[Azathoth]

16. Shit like this is the reason Republicans still get elected in blue areas nt

[sakabatou]

17. This is really stupid

I mainly use my phone to text, so this would hit me and my family HARD.

[christx30]

21. If they passed the tax,

people would just start sending emails from their phones instead. People are going to avoid any tax they can. There wouldn't be much of a period of adjustment. It'd just be the new thing to do.
Until the next election time.

[ansible]

32. Nah we can just use mobile apps that use the phone's internet access

I already use TextNow that gives me another alternate number for privacy

[christx30]

33. True. But that goes along with my point

is that people are going to find ways of avoiding any added expenses, so they won’t get as much money as they were expecting.
But the tax wouldn’t be a per-text thing. It’s be an added expense on any cell plan that charges separately for texting. But, still, people living paycheck to paycheck don’t need any more expenses.

[EllieBC]

18. Regressive taxes are what we need more of!

Signed,

No One With A Brain

[dalton99a]

19. It is a dumb idea.

[LisaM]

22. User taxes are always regressive.

This is a dumb idea.

[still_one]

23. This is the California Public Utilities Commision, whose current Commisioners were appointed by

Jerry Brown.

This is a very bad idea, and if this is passed I believe there will be a backlash, of course it depends just how much this "flat fee" will be. We already pay taxes and fees on our cell phone bills, so I guess it depends how much more this would add to the bill, but on first take this doesn't sound good

There should be hearings on this where the public gets to weigh in

[Raine]

24. We're taxed to death here

in California, it's no wonder that only two classes exist here anymore ... the very wealthy and the getting poorer by the minute everyone else!

[ansible]

25. But, but DU says California is literally a utopian paradise!

How DARE you speak ill of California!

[wasupaloopa]

27. That's a little over dramatic. I'm not poor and certainly am not rich as are the

majority of Californians. We are mostly one paycheck away from financial trouble but most people have jobs.

[ansible]

31. Sure feels like things aren't getting any better

Why the hell do I still have to pay over $3 a gallon for gasoline?

[Raine]

41. and now it's closer to $4 then $3 nt

[wasupaloopa]

26. I don't know why they call it a text tax. Since they add it onto your

phone bill it is really a tax on phone usage in general.

[BeyondGeography]

28. Call it the California Republican Party Rescue Act

Stick with it boys and girls.

[ripcord]

30. Get used to this sort of thing

California charges a little over 13% tax on cell phone calls, on top of the federal tax, but now that people are calling less and texting more the state is losing revenue. It is the same as the state losing money tax because vehicles arr more fuel efficient so they raised the gas tax.

[raptor_rider]

34. Just... Wow...

Gotta love California... NOT! Glad I’m not in that disgusting dump of a state... They’re taxing the hell out of its legal citizens, while the illegals reap in the lush rewards...

[oneshooter]

35. It could be worse.

They could decide to tax you per text, or per word, or per letter in the text.

[xor]

40. How about a tax on every mispelled word?

*see what I did there?

[Jamaal510]

38. As a heavy texter,

I hope there will be serious pushback against this. What gave them the idea that this would be a smart move? It's already expensive enough here between the sky-high rent, the gas taxes, the rising tolls to cross bridges, sin taxes for certain consumables, etc. The politicians who support this had better watch themselves or they might lose their jobs.

[xor]

39. Flat tax, aye? Since nearly all plans have unlimited texts

Does that mean the tax is unlimited? I don't really understand why this is needed. Aren't there already federal and state taxes for the Universal Service Funds that covers this? If there is an actual justifiable need to increase funding for the purposes stated, then why not just fiddle with that instead?

Maybe I am wrong about how USF works and what it is, but that my understanding of it when I looked it up before.

[Devil Child]

42. How about a breath and fart tax while we are at it?

Some real genius thinkers at California Public Utilities Commission.