Re:Athletes Don’t Own Their Tattoos – a Problem for Video Ga...
by PurpleBoxDragon on Thursday December 27, 2018 @01:47PM
(#18771499)
Especially since it escapes taxation. If you taxed IP like you do real property, we would see quite a different system form.
[ Parent
| on HN ]
Re:Athletes Don’t Own Their Tattoos – a Problem for Video Ga...
by larkeith on Thursday December 27, 2018 @02:06PM
(#18771652)
That's an interesting point. Has taxing IP ever been investigated and/or implemented? What were the conclusions?
Re:Athletes Don’t Own Their Tattoos – a Problem for Video Ga...
by kstrauser on Thursday December 27, 2018 @02:28PM
(#18771837)
I wrote up a proposal for just that and sent it to Dianne Feinstein. I'm still waiting to hear back.
Re:Athletes Don’t Own Their Tattoos – a Problem for Video Ga...
by pacoWebConsult on Friday December 28, 2018 @09:41AM
(#18776926)
She'll hold onto it until it's convenient to expose, just like she did with the Blasey-Ford allegations.
Re:Athletes Don’t Own Their Tattoos – a Problem for Video Ga...
by jkim1258 on Friday December 28, 2018 @04:01AM
(#18775668)
Income generated from IP, such as licensing fees, do get taxed, though. Are you referring to the lack of excise-like taxes on IP?
Re:Athletes Don’t Own Their Tattoos – a Problem for Video Ga...
by PurpleBoxDragon on Friday December 28, 2018 @09:15AM
(#18776801)
I'm thinking of the same way that land you owned is taxed even if it isn't being used for anything, with a tax partially based on how much the market values the land (so land that is nowhere interesting is barely taxed while land that is highly desired is highly taxed).
This way, a company couldn't just hold onto an IP and no do anything unless it wanted to keep paying the taxes, and the higher the demand for the IP the higher the taxes.