Porn likely safe in California for the time being
Online porn has been spared an XXXL tax, proposed last spring by Assemblyman Charles Calderon (D.-some town where no one buys porn). When even state Republicans wouldn’t back the 25 percent tax on adult entertainment, including streaming and downloaded Internet content, Calderon’s argument that those who produce and consume porn need to pay for its “harms” on the community started to fell apart. This week, the bill got tied up in the Appropriations Committee, from whence it’s believed to be unlikely to emerge before the close of the legislative session on November 30. The term is “held under submission,” and it has nothing to do with anything going on inside Kink.com’s headquarters in the Mission District.
I didn’t really believe this would pass. There is no way the industry would stand for a 25% hit. I don’t know where they’d move to but it’d likely be quick.
I’d really like to have Calderon run through the list of harms pornography supposedly causes and the quantitative analysis to back it up. Likely he’s done the former but not the latter.
Related posts:
- California proposal to lay a 25% tax on porn appears unlikely to pass
- Sixth Circuit court strikes down porn records statute
- DOJ wants list of every porn star in America
- Reason.tv’s Drew Carey Project Episode 26: Hasta La Vista, Arnold! – What California’s Budget Mess Means for America
- Mary Ruwart attacked for comments on child porn
August 13th, 2008 at 9:09 am
I just don’t get how these guys think sometimes. The people usually targeted by these pricks eventually resort to moving out of the tax man’s reach. Now they’re left with even less money, simply because they go straight for the jugular instead of learning the art of slowly bleeding them. Only people left around would be the ones on the receiving end of the wealth redistribution and you can only bleed them so much through inflation.
August 13th, 2008 at 10:07 am
Why not a violent films tax?