Re:BitPatron – A Bitcoin Censorship-Free Patreon Alternative
by darawk on Friday January 11, 2019 @08:42PM
(#18888936)
That's why you should tax only fixed, country specific assets, such as land and intellectual property. They are protected by the government, therefore they cannot be hidden from the government.
[ Parent
| on HN ]
Re:BitPatron – A Bitcoin Censorship-Free Patreon Alternative
by chii on Friday January 11, 2019 @10:37PM
(#18889453)
> intellectual property
this type of property is notoriously easy to hide!
Taxing income is the least worst. The best is taxing capital gains/profits from corporations.
Re:BitPatron – A Bitcoin Censorship-Free Patreon Alternative
by darawk on Saturday January 12, 2019 @12:06AM
(#18889777)
> this type of property is notoriously easy to hide!
Not if you want it to be protected by a patent, trademark, or copyright.
Re:BitPatron – A Bitcoin Censorship-Free Patreon Alternative
by jsty on Saturday January 12, 2019 @04:59AM
(#18890529)
IP offshoring is a big tax avoidance strategy already. Not that it couldn't be made harder to exploit, but it's not a fait accompli to simply tax the IP resident in a country.
Re:BitPatron – A Bitcoin Censorship-Free Patreon Alternative
by chongli on Saturday January 12, 2019 @11:18AM
(#18891807)
You tax it at the point of enforcement. If someone wants to avoid paying the tax, then everybody gets to copy their stuff for free. It seems straightforward to me.
Re:BitPatron – A Bitcoin Censorship-Free Patreon Alternative
by stickfigure on Saturday January 12, 2019 @11:27AM
(#18891861)
Sure, because we don't have an asset tax. If we had an asset tax, you'd have to register your IP. If you don't register your IP, you don't get protection. Not too different from real estate; if you don't have title, you don't own it.
I haven't considered all the economic consequences of this, but it does seem like enforcement is a minor problem.
Re:BitPatron – A Bitcoin Censorship-Free Patreon Alternative
by zozbot123 on Saturday January 12, 2019 @11:31AM
(#18891881)
Taxing IP would be counterproductive, except as a pure revelation mechanism for "IP that its owners actually care about". The whole point of IP is to be an incentive for creative work, and taxes destroy that incentive. It's better to roll IP rights back, and/or have rigorous requirements (such as registration and archiving of the work which is to be protected), but have very limited taxation on the IP itself.