Porn likely safe in California for the time being

Posted on August 13th, 2008 by bile Tags: , , , , 2 Comments »

http://valleywag.com/…

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.

California proposal to lay a 25% tax on porn appears unlikely to pass

Posted on May 20th, 2008 by bile Categories and Tags: Uncategorized, , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , ,

http://www.calcatholic.com/…

Even in the face of an estimated $20 billion budget deficit, a bill that would raise revenues by imposing a 25% tax on earnings of the pornography industry is meeting with stiff resistance in the California legislature, with opponents claiming it would drive a multi-billion-dollar industry out of the state.

The bill, AB 2914, authored by Assemblyman Charles Calderon, D-Whittier, would levy a 25% tax on gross revenues from the sale of pornographic magazines, photos, books, films and videotapes, and on the gross earnings of live sexually explicit entertainment and pay-per-view pornography provided to hotel guests.

According to a legislative analysis of the bill, it could raise up to $665 million a year in new revenues for the financially strapped state.

“AB 2914 would tax adult entertainment and adult entertainment venues in a manner similar to the way in which cigarettes and alcohol are already taxed in this state,” said Calderon in the legislative analysis. “Currently, these two products are taxed at higher rates, and the additional revenues are used to address the negative effects of their use. This measure would tax adult entertainment in a comparable manner, with the intent to use the funds to address the various secondary effects associated with the production and consumption of adult entertainment. The secondary effects of production are especially noteworthy as California is the capital of the adult entertainment industry in the United States.”

Money raised by the new tax would be used for “law enforcement, testing and treatment of sexually transmitted diseases, treatment for drug and alcohol abuse, health care and mental health treatment,” said Calderon. “AB 2914 does not make a judgment on the adult entertainment industry. It merely asks the industry to help mitigate some of its ancillary effects in the state that is its production capital, not unlike the state already does with alcohol and cigarettes.”

At a May 12 hearing, opponents testified that imposing a 25% tax on porn industry profits could drive the business out of California, at a cost in jobs and other revenues of as much as $3.5 billion. It would have an especially hard impact, witnesses testified, on the San Fernando Valley, said to be the “porn capital of the world.”

Republicans in the legislature have indicated they would vote against the bill because it is a tax increase and they oppose any tax increase of any stripe. Under state law, tax increases require a 2/3 majority of both houses of the legislature.

Following the May 12 hearing, Calderon’s bill was referred to the “suspense file” of the Assembly Committee on Revenue and Taxation. Although theoretically the bill could be taken out of the suspense file and considered again, the move most likely means the measure is dead for this session of the legislature.

I like that super majority law. Though it’s likely a super majority of a quorum which is less than half of the membership.

Perhaps instead of raising taxes, borrowing or raiding some other funds… I have a suggestion for the California state government. Cut spending. It’s amazing how quickly your bills drop when you just stop taking on debt you don’t need.

As for the proposed tax. As with just about every tax it will harm the industry and likely push it out of state. It just wouldn’t make sense to stay. By some accounts a single DVD could be taxed upwards of 5 times in its creation. No one would stand for that. Then you revenue stream dries up and you’re strapped for cash again sometime down the road. These people have less economic sense then a cup of coffee.



Read the Bills Act

© 2008 blog of bile is powered by Wordpress