![\"\"](\"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/angry.net\/blog2\/wp-content\/uploads\/2012\/08\/The-Stupid.jpg\")
<\/a><\/p>\n<\/p>\n
The idea to tax text messages has already been shot down by the FCC, so it\u2019s now a moot point. Still, they idea that Kalifornistan would tax each text message shows just how far gone that state is. Here are some of the details from Fox Business<\/b><\/a>:<\/p>\n Text messaging could be the next victim in California\u2019s push for higher taxes.<\/b><\/p>\n Nope, but more on that later in this post.<\/p>\n State regulators are considering charging a fee for text messaging on mobile phones in order to help programs that make phone service accessible to the poor, according to a report from the <\/b>Mercury News<\/b><\/u><\/span><\/a>. The proposal, which is scheduled for a vote next month by the California Public Utilities Commission, faces opposition from the wireless industry and business groups. <\/b><\/p>\n Oh, so this wasn\u2019t even going to be voted on by the Kalifornistan People\u2019s Congress? Good to know that Kalifornistan is now fully into taxation without representation. I seem to recall a small rebellion against the British Crown some 248 years ago regarding that very subject.<\/p>\n It\u2019s unclear how much individuals would have to pay for texting services, but according to the Mercury News, it would likely be billed as a flat surcharge per customer, not a fee a per text.<\/strong><\/p>\n I have little doubt that the original idea floated in some meeting did suggest a per text tax. I also suspect it was shot down due to the people running the Utilities Commission not wanting to end up decorating lamposts.<\/p>\n In a lengthy report, the California Public Utilities Commission lays out the reasoning for the texting tax, revealing that California\u2019s total reported revenue from the state telecommunications industry declined to $11.2 billion in 2017 from $16.5 billion in 2011, while the Public Purpose Program budget has soared to $998 million in 2017, compared to $670 million 2011. The revenue from the telecommunications industry is used to fund the program. <\/b><\/p>\n Gee, I wonder why that is? Could it be that people are moving out of the state and your tax base is shrinking? Naw, that couldn\u2019t be it.<\/p>\n Business groups estimated the new charges for wireless customers could equal about $44.5 million a year. For customers, it could end up costing more than $220 million, because the proposal allows the charge to be retroactively applied for the past five years. <\/b><\/p>\n Oh that\u2019s a great way to get the revolution started. There\u2019s nothing like retroactive taxation to make people look at their stocks of ammunition. However, it\u2019s all a moot point now. The Federal Communications Commission shot their cunning plan down in flames. According to a report in Fox News<\/b><\/a>:<\/p>\n The California Public Utilities Commission has withdrawn from its January meeting agenda a scheduled vote on imposing a tax on text messaging. The move came after the Federal Communications Commission in Washington declared text messaging to be an \u201cinformation service,\u201d not a telecommunications service, and thus not subject to a surcharge under California law. <\/b><\/p>\n \u201cPrior to this FCC ruling,\u201d the CPUC wrote in a statement posted on Twitter, \u201ctext messaging was not a classified service under federal law. <\/b><\/p>\n \u201cIn light of the FCC\u2019s action,\u201d the statement added, \u201cassigned Commissioner Carla J. Peterman has withdrawn from the CPUC\u2019s Jan. 10, 2019 Voting Meeting agenda the draft decision in Docket R.17-06-023, which proposed to clarify that text messaging service should be subject to the [state of California\u2019s[ statutory surcharge requirement.\u201d <\/b><\/p>\n So, how about that, Progressives? President Trump\u2019s FCC shutdown one of the tax happy agencies and saved you a bundle of money. Does that make you feelz better?<\/p>\n Jim Patterson, a Republican former mayor of Fresno who now represents the state\u2019s 23rd District as a state assemblyman, was among those hailing the CPUC\u2019s decision to cancel the vote. <\/b><\/p>\n \u201cYou can bet I\u2019ll keep a watchful eye on them for future shenanigans,\u201d Patterson wrote on Twitter. \u201cFor now\u2026consider the Text Tax cancelled.\u201d <\/b><\/p>\n Previously, Patterson had characterized the text tax plan as \u201can outrageous attempt at a money grab from California families.\u201d <\/b><\/p>\n Of course it was. As far as the Kalifornistan government is concerned, all your money belongs to them. They might allow you to keep a small amount of it. No, actually, they want that too.<\/p>\n The CPUC had claimed that revenues for its subsidy programs have been falling as consumers switch from traditional landline telecom services to text messaging, FOX 11 of Los Angeles reported<\/a>. <\/b><\/p>\n Now here is an interesting thought. I have my SMS service turned off to my cellphone. When I need to send out a text message, I use Google Voice, or WhatsApp. Since I use a pay as you go service, (Ting.com<\/a>), I save a few dollars a month by not using their text service. I wonder how the CommuNazi Party Utilities Commission would handle that? I really can\u2019t see Googlag or Faceplant giving any information to the CPUC, unless they buy it.<\/p>\n As for the 5 year retroactive money grab? I suspect Antifa, which uses texting quite extensively, would pay the commission a visit. In fact, it might be the one thing to get Antifa, the Proud Boys and all the Trump supporters on the same side. Wouldn\u2019t that be a hoot?<\/p>\n Thatisall<\/p>\n ~The Angry Webmaster~<\/b><\/i><\/p>\n<\/p>\n<\/a><\/p>\n<\/p>\n<\/p>\n (1<\/strong> votes, average: 5.00<\/strong> out of 5)
<\/span><\/span>Loading...<\/span>\n