Wireless Internet and Greedy Companies

[Steveair]

http://msnbc.msn.com/id/8122363/

United and Verizon will be putting wireless internet on UAL aircraft and most likely charging for it.

Airports provide Wifi with T-Mobile and charge you there too.

Wireless internet is essentially free to operate and costs a little bit to install. I find it pretty proposterous that people charge for it. Grr.

 

[FN FAL]

Nothings free!

Wisconsin to Collect Internet Tax Despite Federal Ban

Written By: Steve Stanek
Published In: Budget & Tax News
Publication Date: April 1, 2005
Publisher: The Heartland Institute

The State of Wisconsin plans to keep collecting its Internet access tax, despite a federal law designed to require the state to drop the tax in 2006.

On January 25 officials with the Wisconsin Department of Revenue announced the state would continue to collect the 5 percent tax, which was implemented in 1991 and brings in about $30 million a year. A provision that apparently requires Wisconsin to drop the tax was included in the Internet Tax Nondiscrimination Act, which President George W. Bush signed in December 2004. Wisconsin Governor James Doyle (D) opposed the act.

"Governor Doyle is looking for a loophole to continue taxing Wisconsinites who log onto the Internet," said Rep. James Sensenbrenner (R-WI), who insisted his home state be forced to drop its Internet tax.

"He claims that this new law does not apply to Wisconsin." Sensenbrenner said. "This is a slap in the face to Congress, as the intent of this law is crystal clear. This also goes to show that Governor Doyle has a hard time keeping his nose out of the tax trough, and his hands out of the wallets of people from Wisconsin."

The Internet Tax Nondiscrimination Act extended by three years a ban on state Internet taxes. It blocks state and local governments from taxing Internet connections, including dial-up and DSL. It also blocks multiple state and local taxes from being levied on online purchases and prohibits the creating of taxes unique to the Internet.

Wisconsin was one of several states that began taxing Internet access before the original Internet tax ban in 1998. The recent extension of the ban was designed to force those states to phase out their taxes.

Does Enacted Mean Implemented?

In a January 25 letter to the Wisconsin Joint Finance Committee, Wisconsin Department of Revenue officials said they believe Wisconsin may continue to impose the sales tax on Internet access services. The letter said the department intends to continue taxing such services.

The provision in question says any state that enacted an Internet access tax on or after October 1, 1991 must end the tax on November 1, 2006.

The state Department of Revenue argues Wisconsin "enacted" the law in August 1991 and that it merely took effect on October 1, 1991. Therefore, the department says, the provision does not apply to Wisconsin.

"We're implementing the law as written in the statute," said Audra Brennan, the Department of Revenue's division administrator for research and policy. "We don't meet the criteria. There's no room for interpretation."

She said Wisconsin expects to collect about $37 million in Internet access taxes during fiscal 2005.

"Revenues are increasing a lot because Internet sales are increasing every year," Brennan said.

Congressman Shocked by Decision

Rep. Mark Green (R-WI), who joined Sensenbrenner in pushing for the phase-out provision in the act, said he was "shocked" to learn of plans by Doyle's administration to continue taxing Internet service charges.

"While Chairman Sensenbrenner and I have been fighting to lower the tax burden on Wisconsinites, Governor Doyle has continued looking for every opportunity to collect more of their hard-earned income," Green said. "The intent of this federal law they plan to ignore couldn't be more apparent: No more taxing Internet access services in Wisconsin."

Sensenbrenner hinted at a lawsuit in a January 28 press statement.

State Government Unworried

"It's possible that Governor Doyle will use more taxpayer dollars to defend his position," Sensenbrenner said. "This would be a poor use of our state's finances, and Governor Doyle's time and efforts would be better spent in more clearly reading the legislation Congress passed in November."

Brennan said the Department of Revenue is not worried about a possible lawsuit if the state continues to collect Internet access taxes.

"The law is clear," Brennan said. "If a taxpayer refused to pay, we would follow our typical audit routes. We're reading the language and following it."

 

[garf12]

What pisses me of the most is when hotels charge for it. Hampton Inn and Marriot courtyard will give it to you free. But I was in vegas at the paris and it was $10.99 a day, and in savannah at the hilton it was $5.99. That makes me so mad!

 

[banned username 2]

What pisses me of the most is when hotels charge for it. Hampton Inn and Marriot courtyard will give it to you free. But I was in vegas at the paris and it was $10.99 a day, and in savannah at the hilton it was $5.99. That makes me so mad!

Try some of the Hotels in London... It is about $29 a day! Most of the rest of Europe is 15 Euros per day which is about $20

 

[scubabri]

I wouldn't go so far as to call them greedy... you think that they should offer it for free? The have a product and have a right to charge whatever they want, and if you can't afford it, to bad, that's the whole idea of captalism.. if you don't like it, boycot the service, or move to china.


sb

 

[Gulfstream 200]

Try some of the Hotels in London... It is about $29 a day! Most of the rest of Europe is 15 Euros per day which is about $20

Last time I was in London it was 20-25lb/day OUCH.

Of course most better hotels charge for it, business travelers just expense it. Its called MAKING MONEY, showing a profit, keeping shareholders happy --- the very basics of survivability that airline people dont understand.

Why should it be free? you want to surf - pay. Nobody owes you $hit and you dont have to get online if you dont want to.

If you cant live with that stay at the lower end hotels where internet tends to be free.

whiny a$$ Generation X - pathetic.

 

[Steveair]

I wouldn't go so far as to call them greedy... you think that they should offer it for free? The have a product and have a right to charge whatever they want, and if you can't afford it, to bad, that's the whole idea of captalism.. if you don't like it, boycot the service, or move to china.


sb

I agree that some fee is justified... but what T-Mobile and other companies are charging is outrageous. Where is the cost involved with this? There's none

At a lot of airports, WIFI has been installed for "Free;" courtesy of our tax dollars. Now, companies are coming in and using the same equipment that has already been paid for and charging people; most likely kicking back some of the funds to the airport.

This just seems like one big scam to me.

 

[scubabri]

I agree that some fee is justified... but what T-Mobile and other companies are charging is outrageous. Where is the cost involved with this? There's none

At a lot of airports, WIFI has been installed for "Free;" courtesy of our tax dollars. Now, companies are coming in and using the same equipment that has already been paid for and charging people; most likely kicking back some of the funds to the airport.

This just seems like one big scam to me.

There is significant cost in running a network access site like at airports or hotels. The T1 or better line, last I checked $800/month or more, the wireless hubs 3-4K and depending on the site, you will need more than one, routers, 3-5K, (not always the cheap stuff you get at compusa), customer service reps wages, system and network administrators, which can be expensive (I used to be one) other overhead such as ip address name space, domain servers, firewall hardware and software.

A basic wireless network setup at an airport or a hotel, I would guess could go for 25-30K, plus the monthly costs depending on the size of the install.

This stuff is very expensive, and the stuff you get for your home system doesn't cut it with the loads that they carry on these sites.

When you add all that in, and then needed to make a profit... I think the costs are justified in most cases.

 

[Immelman]

No it isn't free... bandwidth costs money. A coffee shop might shell out the $$ each month to pay for access to get people to be customers, hang out, and hopefully buy expensive coffee. Unless you have some other way of subsidizing it, like forcing the people using it to view annoying ads, there isn't a way to get the cost back other than to simply charge for it. The cost of internet backbones and communications equiptment is amortized over time against the people doing the downloading... of course, the people seving up the content pay too

And this is the first I've heard of our tax dollars funding wifi... I'm not sure if I believe that any more than Al Gore inventing the internets. Most internet access is privately funded, and indeed between that and your cell-phone bill my salary is paid!

Now that said there is a difference between a reasonable fee to charge for convenience versus the cost.. if your home cable/dsl connection is $50/monthly, paying $20+ a day in a hotel for the same (or less) bandwidth is robbery... but then so is making calls on a hotel telephone.

 

[bigD]

In Austin, free wireless is everywhere. I heard that there's a higher amount of free wireless here than anywhere in the country. Dunno if that's true or not, but it sure feels like it. I love it.

 

[KigAir]

I don't understand this idea that some people have that Internet access should be free.

 

[bigD]

I think it comes from the fact that in the beginnings of public internet access, it was ALL free (at least around here). Coffee shops, libraries, restaurants, and so on - you didn't pay.

I agree that there's no reason it *should* be free, but people always complain when something starts off as free and then ends up costing money.

Imagine if everyone started charging for restroom usage. Certainly there's no reason they can't do that - but imagine the backlash if it happened!

 

[Icelandair]

They used to have pay restrooms and people would trash them in anger.

 

[Carl_Everett]

There is significant cost in running a network access site like at airports or hotels. The T1 or better line, last I checked $800/month or more, the wireless hubs 3-4K and depending on the site, you will need more than one, routers, 3-5K, (not always the cheap stuff you get at compusa), customer service reps wages, system and network administrators, which can be expensive (I used to be one) other overhead such as ip address name space, domain servers, firewall hardware and software.

A basic wireless network setup at an airport or a hotel, I would guess could go for 25-30K, plus the monthly costs depending on the size of the install.

This stuff is very expensive, and the stuff you get for your home system doesn't cut it with the loads that they carry on these sites.

When you add all that in, and then needed to make a profit... I think the costs are justified in most cases.

Some of the hotels that I stay at that offer free internet access use DSL, if they pay $100 a month for it, I'd be shocked. They also use the same cheap wireless routers that you buy at Best Buy. Those cost about $50 bucks each. I guess there would be some cost to run Cat 5 to each router, but I doubt it would be more that $5000 at initial start up for that. Some hotels offer high speed via Cat 5 to each room, that obviously would increase the cost, but I have also seen ethernet via power and via phone line at some hotels.

I once heard a hotel manager on a radio talk show. He said it costs virtually nothing to offer free internet access. He said that the hotels that charge for it typically don't market the hotel for the typical internet user. So any money generated from it is gravy. Almost like the Pay-Per-View movies they offer. The "lower cost" hotels are in stiff competition for guests, so not having free internet is like not having a TV in each room. It is kind of funny, most high end hotels don't offer free breakfast either. On a layover, I'd much rather have Wingate or Holiday Inn Express than a Hyatt. But that's just me.

 

[Vik]

Some airports have it for free like Hong Kong and FLL.

running a wireless network is NOT free, bandwidth is not free, dealing with the liability of running a wireless network is NOT free .. its simply just NOT free.

I dont know where you cooked up your theory, but its just plain WRONG.

Now do they charge WAYYY too much for it? Yes. I paid 15 euros for 3 hours of access at an airport last month. The problem is volume. If more people use it, prices will come down.