Porn Tax
Just got off the phone with CNN and they plan to run this story later on Headline News. They did not want a pastor on the show but wanted our buddy JimmyD to talk about this. Here is the proposed tax:
SACRAMENTO, California (Reuters) - A California bill proposing a 25 percent tax on revenues from adult entertainment would do little to ease the state's budget shortfall and would cost the state money by encouraging its pornography industry to move, opponents said on Monday as lawmakers reviewed the bill.
The legislation would especially hurt the economy of the San Fernando Valley, the Hollywood of pornographic filmmaking, said opponents, who included several dancers and other adult entertainment performers and employees at a hearing on the bill in the state capital, Sacramento.
"This will decimate the San Fernando Valley," Larry Kaplan, executive director of the California branch of the Association of Club Executives, a group representing adult entertainment clubs, told Reuters.
"We estimate it would take $3.5 billion out of California," Kaplan added, referring to the economic activity the state could lose if it were to tax strip-club performances, porn-shop sales and adult Web site revenues at a 25 percent rate.
Matt Gray, a lobbyist for the state's adult entertainment industry, echoed the familiar refrain of mainstream small and big businesses directed at lawmakers who propose raising business taxes: "It's an unfriendly business climate here."
If porn-film production costs are pushed up, California's adult movie-makers will have even more reason to shoot movies elsewhere, Gray said, adding that Budapest is giving the San Fernando Valley, north of Los Angeles, a run for porn-film production money.
"It's actually cheaper to fly everyone to Budapest to do their shoots there and to fly them back," Gray said.
FINANCIAL, SOCIAL FIX
Assemblyman Charles Calderon had proposed his bill to help raise revenues for the cash-strapped state. Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger has forecast a $20 billion budget shortfall.
But additional tax revenues from the adult entertainment activity would also help defray social costs associated with it, including crime, drug abuse and sexually transmitted diseases, according to Calderon, the Democratic chairman of the chamber's committee on revenues and taxation.
"This tax would cover the gamut of adult entertainment," he told fellow lawmakers. His bill would tax production, distribution, retail sales, Internet downloads and performances of adult entertainment.
"Every second, $3,000 is being spent on adult entertainment," Calderon said. "Every 39 minutes, a new adult video is being made in the United States."
It could go either way.
I'd also be inclined to think that California would be better off without that and just tighten their belts.
Ah, fake-statistics plucked from thin air. If repeated often enough, people even believe it. Does he have a shread of evidence that their is a causal link from pornography to these social costs? I think not. I think he is just eager to demonise pornography.
It is also legally very untidy. Supreme court rulings do allow for the distribution of what is legally obscene to be regulated or prohibited, but there are various safeguards involved - not least the Miller test, which dispite being hopelessly vague and subjective is the only thing preventing some lawmaker from declaring that all discussion of condoms is illegal (This is not hypothetical: It was once the case). If the supreme court says something is protected under the constitution, then it sets a worrying precident to wriggle around their ruling by replacing the idea of a de jour prohibition with a de facto prohibition - it underminds the authority of the first ammendment itsself to circumvent it with legal tricks and games like that.
I have friends who own tobacco stores, they're taxed, is it fair? What about gas tax? Land Tax?
It's just government. You guys (x3) Sound pretty democratic.
i am completely against pornography. however, i don't think there should be a percent that is taken away from their industry. all you're doing is supporting the government financially off of immorality and someone else's addiction
if pornography is like prostitution (and it is), then that basically makes the government a pimp because they are reaping some of the benefits.
if you want to compare porn to drugs, then that makes the government a drug cartel if they tax the industry. but like i said, i am completely against porn. its not "freedom of speech", its perversion. and just needs to go away.
I thus propose the banning of all forms of entertainment. In addition the use of bright colors in decorating is now restricted to the use of safety signs, and all food shall be prepared from the lowest-grade food prepared by cooks with no more than one year of experience. After all, anything you pay for and recieve pleasure from should be banned, correct?
"Its sick that people buy that crap."
Crap it may be, but it is no concern of yours.
"i don't think porn should even be legal, it's really no different than prostitution. you're still paying someone for sexual gratification and pleasure."
1. And why is this a bad thing?
2. What about free porn? There is plenty of that around - my own collection is around 70,000 images, for which I didn't pay a penny*. In addition I can be sure that not one woman was sexually exploited in their production, as it consists entirely of non-photographic artwork.
3. From two, I note that if you wish to ban free porn as well, then by your own logic you are now required to ban *all* sex - paid or otherwise. Though I can see a loophold if you prevent it supplying gratification, perhaps through a local anasthetic.
* I'm british.
