Two States, Two Very Different Approaches To VoIP Regulation
from the quacks-like-a-duck dept
For many years, states have been trying to tax VoIP providers as if they were telcos. From the states' perspective, they were using a "quacks like a duck" test, whereby any phone service that acted like a traditional phone service should get taxed like a traditional phone service. Since states rely on tax dollars so much, this feeling was reinforced as people started ditching landline phone service for VoIP providers. However, there are a few problems with this. The reason that telcos are taxed is because of the structure of the telephone system, and the fact that the government more or less handed over rights of way and control of the system to private companies. VoIP providers, however, have the calls travel over the internet, changing the nature of the equation, and meaning that most of the reasons for taxing telcos shouldn't apply. Shouldn't, except for politicians who can't see beyond the money. Yet, taxing VoIP is a doubly bad idea, because VoIP is still an emerging service that is rapidly changing -- offering new services and opportunities that weren't possible on landline offerings. Putting a tax on it could kill a lot of that innovation. Too many states don't see that.Jeff Pulver is showing the contrast between two states in dealing with VoIP regulatory issues. New Jersey has passed a law saying that it will not regulate VoIP, noting "The proliferation of new technologies and applications and the growth in the number of providers developing and offering innovative services using Internet Protocol is due in large part to a light regulatory touch, including freedom from traditional telephone regulation that these new technologies and services and the companies that offer them have enjoyed in New Jersey.... These economic benefits, including consumer choice, new jobs, and significant capital investment, will be jeopardized and competition minimized by the imposition of traditional State entry and rate regulation on Voice over Internet Protocol service and Internet protocol-enabled service."
Unfortunately, Missouri isn't quite so enlightened. Despite various rulings saying that VoIP should not be taxed, Missouri is trying to bend the rules to make at least some VoIP offerings (mainly those provided by cable companies) classified as telco services that need to be taxed. As Jeff notes, if this works, then expect other states to follow suit and create loopholes for taxing VoIP providers... and then watch as all VoIP related innovation happens elsewhere.
Thank you for reading this Techdirt post. With so many things competing for everyone’s attention these days, we really appreciate you giving us your time. We work hard every day to put quality content out there for our community.
Techdirt is one of the few remaining truly independent media outlets. We do not have a giant corporation behind us, and we rely heavily on our community to support us, in an age when advertisers are increasingly uninterested in sponsoring small, independent sites — especially a site like ours that is unwilling to pull punches in its reporting and analysis.
While other websites have resorted to paywalls, registration requirements, and increasingly annoying/intrusive advertising, we have always kept Techdirt open and available to anyone. But in order to continue doing so, we need your support. We offer a variety of ways for our readers to support us, from direct donations to special subscriptions and cool merchandise — and every little bit helps. Thank you.
–The Techdirt Team
Filed Under: missouri, new jersey, regulation, voip
Reader Comments
Subscribe: RSS
View by: Time | Thread
Taxing VoIP
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Oh BTW
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Oh BTW
You moron, do you really want more taxes ?
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Oh BTW
I find it funny that in America, which has one of the lowest tax rates in the western world, people constantly cry about taxes liked they're being taxed into the poorhouse. Quick deprogramming session for you: Not all taxes are bad. Some taxes make sense. Without taxes we wouldn't have a freeway system. Without taxes we wouldn't have police and fire service. Without taxes we wouldn't have a standing army capable of invading countries at random and toppling their governments.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: Oh BTW
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Oh BTW by Kevin
Kevin you sound like someone just taking a civics class and not really in tune with how tax money is spent.
Having seen the behind the scenes of county and state level financial operations, I can tell you that capital investment and service support spending is probably the LEAST prioritied in the allocation of dollars gathered. Even worse at the state level when spend can be pulled by various electorate districts and not really benefit the state as a whole.
I don't mind taxes when they're appropriately administered but I have very little confidence in the majority of civic governments ability to execute that objective.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Skype
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
lowest tax rates
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: lowest tax rates
The phony tax issue in poltics is possible because we Americans know/care so little about the rest of the world. Combine that with politicians who play on our desire to keep our money, and you get get demagoguery.
I need to keep as much of my money as I can also; but I want gov't services.
Government is not the problem. Ignorance and crooks are. Now if we can just get rid of the crooked politicians . . . .
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Taxes are the reason I left Vonage...
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Taxes are the reason I left Vonage...
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
VoIP
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Double taxation...
--
The 2nd Amendment isn't about Duck Hunting
[ link to this | view in chronology ]