Along with a host of Democrat co-sponsors, U.S. Senator Blanche Lincoln (D-AR) introduced a new piece of legislation: The Internet Safety and Child Protection Act of 2005.

Among other things, the bill seeks to (1) Require Age Verification from all adult, for-profit websites, (2) Establish an Internet Safety and Child Protection Trust Fund (ISCP Trust Fund), and (3) Force Pornographers to Pay the Costs of Child Protection by enacting a 25% excise tax on Internet pornography transactions.

Some relevant facts to help you piece your response together:

The online pornography industry generates $12 billion dollars in annual revenue -roughly equal to the annual revenues of ABC, NBC, and CBS combined.

Only 3 % of pornographic websites require age verification that goes beyond the honor system. Two third of sites do not even include an adult content warning. 74% of websites display free "teasers" of pornographic images on their homepages and within require no payment, credit cards, or adequate age verification.

The following federal programs already address the issue of the exploitation of children online: CyberTip Line, NetSmartz, I -Safe America, Internet Crimes Against Children Task Forces, SEARCH, The National Consortium for Justice Information and Statistics, CyberEthics for Kids/Teachers, Innocent Images, National Sex Offender Registry, Victims of Trafficking, Navy Criminal Investigative Service - Safe Kids, National Telecommunications and Information Administration - Kids.us, Office of Education Research and Improvement (OERI), Parents Guide to the Internet, Technology 4-H Program, Office of Women's Health - 4 Girls Health, Family and Youth Services Bureau - grants to reduce sexual assault of runaways, NASA Explores CyberSafety, and Kidz Privacy.

Do you support or oppose an Internet tax, or more specifically, an Internet Pornography tax?

In terms of general principle, do you support the idea of this piece of legislation?

I completely support such a tax. Frankly, I am surprised it hasn't been passed already. We have taxes on alcohol, cigarettes-- why not have a tax on pornography-- and a hefty one at that.

Taxes are very often used for reasons of social policy and I see no difference between something like this and any of the other "sin" taxes.

The fact that the tax is regressive is nothing new either, as all these other types of taxes are also regressive. I hope it passes.

Edited to add-- just because a company moves its site out of the U.S.-- does not mean it can escape U.S. tax. The I.R.S. is pretty darn good at recasting "sham" type transactions like this.

1.) While I am generally in favor of free enterprise, in the strictest sense of the word free, I have to say that I am wholly in favor of a tax on pornography on the internet. It is a multi-billion dollar industry and provides thousands of up-and-coming sadists with the outlet to support their fantasies. In that, the money could best be directed to line the pockets of people other than the porn executives... like the politicians.

2.) With all my heart.

Do you support or oppose an Internet tax, or more specifically, an Internet Pornography tax?

I don't support an Internet tax at all whether it be on goods or porn. The original intent of the internet was for information sharing, not profit. Yes companies and even more so porn companies helped the internet grow but I feel the internet should be a borderless, unrestricted entity in which no one should have overall authority (obviously you need an oversite body for protocols, URL registration and whatnot but that just keeps it running smoothly, it doesn't benefit one country or company).

In terms of general principle, do you support the idea of this piece of legislation?
I like (1) Require Age Verification from all adult, for-profit websites and (2) Establish an Internet Safety and Child Protection Trust Fund (ISCP Trust Fund) it's #3 that I don't support.

So taxing an industry based on the internet is wrong; but taxing an industry based out of an office building is right? You are correct, the purpose of the internet is to share information for practical application- not to deface the morals of people who are endlessly hounded with pop-up adds that read "The Youngest *word not in compliance of the Rules* on the Net! Sign up today!" It is sickening.

Also, the information superhighway, i.e, the internet is meant to share information and not profit? Then how is it pornography makes a hefty chunk of change from internet sales/promotions?




Living in this day and age you and I both know that this is avoidable and capable of being rounded about. It is highly more likely for a thirteen year old to gain access to a porn site now that it is ever before because it is made easy. Also, if things changed, what are your grounds to assume firewalls and URL registration will prevent a determined child from entering the underworld of porn?




So instead of taxing the industry, allow Big Brother to watch me?

I don't particularly support a tax on internet business at all. What is the purpose behind taxing any business that is on the net? Just another way to collect money? Or in the case of pornography, a way to punish what some see as a sin? I might be persuaded to look into a tax that was commensurate with a tax on other internet business, but 25%? I had thought the days of the state stealing outright had gone away with feudal lords.
I agree that there is a lot of porn on the internet that I find distasteful or that is already illegal in most states/countries.
But why are we arguing for a tax on porn akin to taxes on cigarettes? This will again go back to the argument of what constitutes porn and what doesn't. And how do you either stop or tax domains from outside the US?
There is enough free porn to be found on the internet to realistically render a tax as nothing more than obnoxious moralizing by nattering nabobs of virtue. So how do the crusaders of morality deal with newsgroups, free webcams and the like, if the impetus behind the tax is either to reap money from porn businesses or to 'protect the children'?

The answer concerning child safety lies in parenting and responsibility, not fiscal punishment.

I would be fully willing to support such a tax, with a few provisos. First, there would be a mandatory tax on all newspapers, which would be used to fund literacy campaigns. Television broadcasts would of course be taxed to support research into macular degeneration. Public speaking? Well, there would be a tax for that too of course. The money could be funnelled into a program supplying hearing aides. Hey, while we're at it, lets have a blog tax. We can tax blogs based on the amount of data transferred; with the proceeds going into some other elsewhile noble cause.

Sorry, this is all bunk. If such a fund is needed to protect children, then find a way to pay for it that doesn't punish CONSUMERS of a product. You know, such a tax would have no effect on me whatsoever, but I'm still opposed to it, not because of some undying allegiance to smut, but because it represents hypocrisy of the highest calibre. Just about every single piece of media on the planet qualifies as entertainment nowadays, even the most austere; and you could make the argument that each media enterprise comes with a societal cost. But only pornography is going to be taxed? I don't think so.

Yes, I don't think electronic commerce should be taxed at all. I don't think I'm the only one, check out DTOM's post or check out the Internet Tax Freedom Act
As for the pop up adds, I'm not sure where you're going with this. Porn pop up adds make someone immoral? Regardless, a tax on porn sites is not going to get rid of porn pop up adds nor will it get rid of porn sites.


I said the intent. The original intent of the internet was for sharing information, e-commerce and porn just helped the internet become the popular tool it is today. I have no problem with companies making money off the internet but I don't like the idea of a tax on the internet because I don't think their should be a tax on getting information. If you tax porn sites, then what's next? Tax downloads? e-mails? searches?...Let's just not tax anything.


Maybe you don't understand what I'm saying. I don't think their should be a entity such as the IRS or a "global IRS" to collect internet taxes. I don't think the UN or the US should have control over the internet. I don't think Microsoft should have control over the internet. I do, however, realize their needs to be someone like ICANN and W3C to keep all the developers and web designers on the same page so to speak. ICANN is responsible for things like saying: .com is for companies only and .gov is for webpages dealing with the US government. W3C are for publishing protocols such as HTML, XML, HTTP etc. They aren't out to make a buck.


No, big brother isn't watching you. That's just it, their isn't a big brother on the internet (well, the NSA is trying...) This legislation would make it harder for those under age to get onto porn sites and set up a fund to protect children (I'm not sure for what but "we have to save the children!" ) I don't see how you equate this with Big Brother watching you.


For those of you in favor of this tax, can you provide evidence that a tax on porn would be an effective deterrent to those who want to make or watch porn? We have a high tax on alcohol and I still drink, we have a high tax on cigarettes and people still smoke, the price on gas keeps going up and people still drive. Heck we outlawed alcohol at one time and people still drank, so what makes you think raising the price on porn will stop anyone?

I would be curious to know how such a tax would be collected from all the off-shore internet porn sites, which make up the bulk of internet porn available?

And, how do we continue to fund such programs and fund "for the children", when the internet pornography businesses based the the US move off-shore to avoid this massive 25% tax because they cannot increase the price of their goods to pay the tax as they are competing with so many non-American based businesses that would not have to pay this tax?

This sounds nice in theory to some folks I guess, but on a more practical look it is simply not workable.

Want to help fun keeping kids away from internet porn? why not consider a tax deduction for parents who purchase blocking software and the annual subscriptions? At least that would be realistically workable. What about a tax break for search engine companies who provide "family-Friendly" search options?


Edited to add:



It's not a "Sham" if the company actually moves off-shore. How would the IRS collect these taxes for pornography producing websites that are already based in foreign companies and whole owned by non-American citizens?

A massive increase in operating costs like a 25% tax, that can not be passed onto the consumer because the company is competing against a horde of off-shore companies that are not subject to this tax would be a MAJOR motivator to move an operation (who's product is mostly internet / data based anyway), overseas.

We tried to address internet Gambling once. There are more internet Gambling sites then ever. However, virtually all of them are run on servers based mainly in the Caribbean, in countries such as Curacao, the Dominican Republic, St. Kitts, etc. And, most are owned and operated by non-American companies. Why would the measure suggested in this topic somehow fair better?

I do agree that there should be an internet pornography tax. Not only would it help our country with the large amount of debt that we are in. It would also help with keeping child pornography down because it would be under more close scrutiny by the press and by more american's that feel this is a problem with the internet and pornography.

Do you support or oppose an Internet tax, or more specifically, an Internet Pornography tax?

I am kind of surprised there are Democrat sponsors of this bill. I believe the major Pornography companies contributed solely to Democrats in the last election (I could be mistaken). I guess they didn't contribute enough in that case.

First taxing anything on the internet is complicated. I would need more information to see if it is even possible. That being said I am all for taxing pornography all across the board. Pornographic magazines, videos, pay-per-view, and the internet should all be taxed on some level. I’m not sure about the 25% tax, but I am sure level could be determined.

In terms of general principle, do you support the idea of this piece of legislation?

I am totally against taxing the internet, but many times, there are already sales taxes on internet purchases depending on where you live (Illinois and Florida off the top of my head). It seems to me the first logical step in legislation like this is to tax pornography outside the internet.

For those that object to the internet tax idea, would you object to taxing porn outside the internet? We already tax alcohol and cigarettes I do not see why taxing porn would be any different.

Forgive my bluntness, but Pornography is an expression, not a medium. A more suitable comparison would be pornography to malt liquor; not alcohol at large. A tax based on morality seems like a pretty bad idea to me; especially when free-speech (you know, that concept that embodies pretty much all speech) issues are involved.

Do you support or oppose an Internet tax, or more specifically, an Internet Pornography tax?
I do not support taxation of internet goods and services in any way, shape, or form. Additionally, enforcement of said tax would prove near impossible. As an example, just ask the state of North Carolina how much tax revenue they've collected over people voluntarily declaring the value of goods they've purchased over the internet so that the internet sales tax can be applied.

In terms of general principle, do you support the idea of this piece of legislation?
No, for the reasons that UltimateJoe already cited and those cited above. Naturally, I support efforts to protect children from unscrupulous pornogrophers and child molestors, but this is not the way to go about it (I'm referring to the tax provisions only). The age verification provisions I would have no issue with. The other two should be rejected outright.

Doc

I work for a membership organization that is online. A major portion of our products is online. Right now Florida and Illinois are collecting sales tax for products we sale online and host online. Any type of reputable company has to report these sales. That cat is already out of the bag. Maybe this will become a state issue and not a federal issue.

I do not often quote posts in their entirety merely to agree with them. But this post deserves to be reiterated. It deserves to be printed, framed, and distributed to every legislator in the country. Needless to say, I absolutely, whole-heartedly agree 100%. This is a rare moment, DTOM. Cherish it.

Do you support or oppose an Internet tax, or more specifically, an Internet Pornography tax?

Vehemently oppose - especially at a punitive level of 25%. As others have pointed out, collecting such taxes would be nigh on impossible. If such a tax were effected, all it would do is drive the online sex industry out of the US, thereby depleting what income is generated by American service providers and further damaging our economy (while enriching overseas competitors).

This is nothing more than an attempt by the Democrats to cash in on the perceived morality market in terms of voters. What they fail to realise is that the fundamentalist minority that gives a damn about this sort of thing in the first place is not going to be convinced by a single, spurious bit of legislature. Further, that minority will eventually have to realize that even the politicians they've been supporting have been doing little more than pander to their concerns with hollow words and no real action. If the Democrats manage to push this through, I hope it backfires and loses them hundreds of thousands of votes - as it well should.

In terms of general principle, do you support the idea of this piece of legislation?

Not in the least. Okay, the first item mentioned makes some sense. Age verification should be in place for adult-oriented sites (whether they're pornographic, violent, or involve things like gambling, escort services, or the sale of cigarettes).

Establishing an Internet Safety and Child Protection Trust Fund is laughable. Protection from what? Mindless parents who can't take responsibility for their own kids? Mandatory birth control for those who can't pass a responsibility test would be more effective - and no less sound than Sen. Lincoln's proposal.

Or are we meant to be protecting children from online predators? If that's the case, then the tax should not be on pornography, but on instant messaging services and chat rooms - that is, after all, how 89% of minors are victimized on the web (according to a "Pew Study reported in JAMA, 2001" quoted by every hysterical "morality" site on the web), not through access to pornography. For that matter, far more children are victimized by priests, rabbis, and ministers than they are by "online pedophiles". Perhaps we should be taxing our churches at 25% until every last one of them is free of child sex abuse. Again, this would be no less sound than the proposed legislation.

Or are we meant to be cracking down on child pornography itself? How? By taxing it?? Child pornography is already illegal throughout the world. Taxing legitmate sex sites on the web is not going to do a damned thing to curb the child sex industry - except drive it further underground. I suppose we should legalize child pornography so that it, too, can be more closely scrutinized as cellfae was suggesting. Once again, such a notion is no less sound than this idiotic piece of legislature.

And why single out the internet? Why not a 25% tax on pornographic magazines and videos? Why not a 25% tax on hotels and motels that feature in-room viewing of porno films? Why not a 25% tax on every outlet that offers Hustler or Penthouse or Playboy? What about Jackie Collins novels? Lewis Carroll was a pedophile - so was Robert Baden-Powell. Should we be taxing Alice in Wonderland and the Boy Scouts by extension? Where, exactly, does the punitive tax lobby draw lines here? Is it just that "internet porn" has become such a sellable buzzword? I can think of no other reason for this legislation. It is the most bare-faced bit of pandering I've seen in ages - and the last five or six years of political life in this country have seen no shortage of pandering.

This proposal is so stupid, so ineffectual, so backward, so counterproductive, and so unenforceable, that it is sure to gain widespread support within the Democratic Party. Republicans, on the other hand, will no doubt accuse them of "coddling pornographers", claiming that a tax would simply give them legitimacy (while doing nothing themselves to ensure more rational solutions like age verification). The whole thing is asinine - and every legislator that supports it should be drummed out of office. Yesterday.

[quote=4gold,Aug 9 2005, 09:59 PM]
Do you support or oppose an Internet tax, or more specifically, an Internet Pornography tax?[/quote]

I oppose all Internet taxes for the simple reason that they are not feasible. You can't impose a tax on web sites outside of the US and the second they pass the tax, most sites will simply go offshore.

In terms of general principle, do you support the idea of this piece of legislation?[/quote]

While I think the idea of protecting kids is generally good, I'm not too thrilled with the idea that the government knows best. More often than not, they haven't got a clue, and because of the huge number of off shore porn sites, any laws they pass aren't going to really control anything.

The net is and always will be uncontrollable unless you want to completely cut off everyone in your country from it. All the laws in the world won't put a dent into what goes on and it's just a waste of time and money to try.

As long as it is a tax on ISP's and so forth, fine by me. But not on users. We already have an inequity in internet access for the poorest people, and this would be just one more barrier I think.

As far as porno, I have long been a proponent of a separate TLD for all adult content. By "adult content," I mean to include porno, violence, and anything else we might not like to have children bombarded with. This way, parents (or their ISP) can select whether they would like to have internet access to such content. This is the fairest way to do it, I believe, since this gives internet users choice (which is what it's all about, isn't it?) and doesn't preclude those who want such access from obtaining it.

In fact, I would argue, this might be just the solution: ISP's could charge a premium for access to the adult domain, and they would pay tax on just the proceeds from these additional revenues. Simple, fair, and I think should keep everyone happy.

As far as age verification, I think the adult domain approach might also help to address this issue as well. Since parents would be in control of what their children see, it might obviate such verification schemes, which must be very difficult to implement or enforce. This keeps the decision-making in the realm of the parents and the family, not the government. (Remember, even though I am a leftie, I still hate federal taxes and government intrustion.)

Oh, I should mention: I am not a sexual prude in any way, it is just that I think parents should be allowed to make decisions for their own children's well-being. I am a very sexual person, but I do not want our children to be bombarded with all this crap at a time in their lives when there are other important things to consider besides getting laid, which is very common and natural with youngsters. OTOH, it really should be a family choice, not the government's choice.

Parents are already allowed to make decisions for their children's well-being. It's called being involved in their lives and being aware of what's going on. Many parents ignore their responsibilities however and decide to let the government and others decide what is best for their child because parenting gets in the way of their lives.