Wazua
»
Club SK
»
Politics
»
M7 Social Media TAX -Excellent
Rank: Elder Joined: 9/19/2015 Posts: 2,871 Location: hapo
|
my fear is that someone like tom boy could actually be a gov't official. Boss, FB is just a simple website, just like wazua. It just has more users than wazua. Do you want to now tax linkedin, dailymail, cnn.com, and every website that Kenyans use on the internet? In fact my participating in this topic is a sign that I may be in support of backward thinking. So I'll make this short. Museveni ni ngombe na aje achukue zile zake zimebaki huku. Thieves are not good people. Tumeelewana?
|
|
|
Rank: User Joined: 8/15/2013 Posts: 13,237 Location: Vacuum
|
Lol....Nyasaye!!!!....govt already taxes you to use FB through the excise and VAT tax on airtime and internet connection. If Obiero did it, Who Am I?
|
|
|
Rank: Elder Joined: 7/23/2008 Posts: 3,017
|
tom_boy wrote:Long reply. Clearly FB is very emotive for some. However, the logic is very simple. People go to FB to enjoy. They should be taxed for that value add. When you go to a club, you both pay fuel to get there and buy stuff/drinks to enjoy n the club. These drinks are taxed. Only problem is that the FB product is not physical, but it still delivers enjoyment, therefore it should be taxed.
FB is distracting. People can't work because of it. At some level it lowers individual productivity just like pombe.. That's a social evil.
If the major club is shut down, a new club will come up. If FB goes, I am sure a new dominant player will come in, willing to pay tax. The only reason we don't have another mpesa operation is because mpesa is present. Remove the current mpesa and in 1 yr flat, people will not remember mpesa existed. Other players will have come in.
Both the club owner (FB ET al) and club goers (@masukuma, @muchr ET al) should pay taxes.
FB sio githeri ama omena. The truth is its possible to tax FB use based on access by Kenyans or by IPs based in Kenya. But what you first have to define is what/who you want to tax, is it FB the company, people advertising in FB, or registered FB users. It is not possible to tax FB the company due to residence rules etc, they are not based in Kenya, so would fail the residency test which is a pre-requisite for taxation purposes, you would only be left with taxing their product/service as an import, so question is how would you go about determining the value of the import for tax purposes and who would be the importer of the service who would bear the tax. People who would qualify as importers for service are the users or adverts originating from Kenyan IP addresses, in both cases, you would be making the product expensive for Kenyans while in no way affecting FB. Adverts are easy to capture but the problem is who would collect the tax for you. FB will be least bothered to collect and remit the advertising taxes to you knowing very well that you have very little chance of shutting them down in an open democracy, while users would not be willing to remit anything plus its impossible to measure their value. And that leaves you to tax data, which be default affects users idling on FB and those using data for important conference calls to negotiate business deals etc. So the impact of the tax automatically shifts from FB to your poor Housegirl trying to upload a photo of herself lying on your sofa. In conclusion, you cannot tax FB, you can discourage its use, if that's what you want by taxing data, the way Museveni has done. I can bet Safaricom probably makes a shilling for every penny facebook makes on our data, so maybe we should target Safaricom "The purpose of bureaucracy is to compensate for incompetence and lack of discipline." James Collins
|
|
|
Rank: Member Joined: 2/20/2007 Posts: 767
|
Obi 1 Kanobi wrote:tom_boy wrote:Long reply. Clearly FB is very emotive for some. However, the logic is very simple. People go to FB to enjoy. They should be taxed for that value add. When you go to a club, you both pay fuel to get there and buy stuff/drinks to enjoy n the club. These drinks are taxed. Only problem is that the FB product is not physical, but it still delivers enjoyment, therefore it should be taxed.
FB is distracting. People can't work because of it. At some level it lowers individual productivity just like pombe.. That's a social evil.
If the major club is shut down, a new club will come up. If FB goes, I am sure a new dominant player will come in, willing to pay tax. The only reason we don't have another mpesa operation is because mpesa is present. Remove the current mpesa and in 1 yr flat, people will not remember mpesa existed. Other players will have come in.
Both the club owner (FB ET al) and club goers (@masukuma, @muchr ET al) should pay taxes.
FB sio githeri ama omena. The truth is its possible to tax FB use based on access by Kenyans or by IPs based in Kenya. But what you first have to define is what/who you want to tax, is it FB the company, people advertising in FB, or registered FB users. Tax FB the company and the people using FB. Social media has reached a level at which it is intoxicating and addictive. Just like alcohol and cigarettesIt is not possible to tax FB the company due to residence rules etc, they are not based in Kenya, so would fail the residency test which is a pre-requisite for taxation purposes, you would only be left with taxing their product/service as an import, so question is how would you go about determining the value of the import for tax purposes and who would be the importer of the service who would bear the tax. companies that sell goods in Kenya get taxed in Kenya irrespective of their residence. I guess the question is, is FB selling a commodity? What commodity? Are the consumers paying for that commodity? How are they paying for it? If indeed a bonafide transaction is taking place between consumer and provider, why should they not pay tax? Facebook commodity is the "feel good factor" that you get after spending hours on FB. A factor that is so good that you prefer to spend time on FB than on another site. You pay for this convenience with your personal data. Your phonebook details, your habits that are being tracked. Your eyes to see ads and buy into concepts. FB makes money out of this data by targeted advertising. So Kenyan consumer data is not worthless to FB as many are want to think. It is a product with value and so FB should pay tax for it.People who would qualify as importers for service are the users or adverts originating from Kenyan IP addresses, in both cases, you would be making the product expensive for Kenyans while in no way affecting FB. Adverts are easy to capture but the problem is who would collect the tax for you. FB will be least bothered to collect and remit the advertising taxes to you knowing very well that you have very little chance of shutting them down in an open democracy, while users would not be willing to remit anything plus its impossible to measure their value. And that leaves you to tax data, which be default affects users idling on FB and those using data for important conference calls to negotiate business deals etc. Let there be a fee payable by FB to allow it to operate in Kenya. FB will choose to pay or not to pay. If they choose not to pay, they should be made to ensure that FB is not accessible from Kenya. Kenya has a right to determine what products are consumed in Kenya or not. FB are at liberty to recover the cost from the advertisers. So the impact of the tax automatically shifts from FB to your poor Housegirl trying to upload a photo of herself lying on your sofa. In conclusion, you cannot tax FB, you can discourage its use, if that's what you want by taxing data, the way Museveni has done. How does my housegirl uploading her photo help the economy? In fact, she should pay for the luxury of uploading photos on FB while she should be watching the kids. One of the functions of tax is to discourage one habit while encouraging another. A tax on social media sites will discourage wasting time on useless status updates and gossip but encourage other sites that offer constructive ideas like wazua. I can bet Safaricom probably makes a shilling for every penny facebook makes on our data, so maybe we should target Safaricom The world is moving towards targeting, efficiency and traceability. Safaricom should be taxed on data. Websites should be taxed also based on the commodity they provide. some commodities are worthless and encourage social evils like gossip, slandering, homosexuality, teenage sex etc. Social media sites like FB, Instagram et a fall in this category. Just like tax on beer and cigarettes is high, so should be the tax on these social media sites. I know many people who are extremely successful and yet are not on social media or even whatsup. So these sites are not a prerequisite for success. They exist to mine our data and use it to make money. For this reason, they should pay tax. FB sio githeri ama omena! They must find it difficult....... those who have taken authority as the truth, rather than truth as the authority. -G. Massey.
|
|
|
Rank: Elder Joined: 10/4/2006 Posts: 13,821 Location: Nairobi
|
sijui tunakupoteza wapi - FACEBOOK DOES NOT OPERATE IN KENYA. you as a user goes all the way to the US to get serviced. sijui tunakupotezea wapi? facebook is ACCESSIBLE from Kenya that's all. Facebook is a website running on SERVERS.. in the US. The US are the only people who can tax them unless they open an operation in your country. THEY WILL NOT PAY TAX IN KENYA unless they open an office here so your argument that they SHOULD PAY TAX is really moot. The only question here is WHAT CAN GAVA DO ABOUT IT 1) block facebook and wait for facebook to come and negotiate 2) tax the user who is accessing facebook over and above the VAT and excise duty they have paid to access the internet. these can be done and have been done and so far what I can tell you is that these actions need a bit of thought.. you may discover that kumbe facebook sio omena ama githeri... it's more important than those 2 things. That's why I urged people to measure the diameter of their anuses before swallowing a mango whole. just because umemeza haimaanishi kazi imekwisha hapo. Secondly, who is this person who determines what is a 'social evil' or not? All Mushrooms are edible! Some Mushroom are only edible ONCE!
|
|
|
Rank: Elder Joined: 2/26/2012 Posts: 15,980
|
Yaani someone thinks they have a valid point on this useless tax? Ai! "There are only two emotions in the market, hope & fear. The problem is you hope when you should fear & fear when you should hope: - Jesse Livermore
.
|
|
|
Rank: Member Joined: 2/20/2007 Posts: 767
|
masukuma wrote:sijui tunakupoteza wapi - FACEBOOK DOES NOT OPERATE IN KENYA. you as a user goes all the way to the US to get serviced. sijui tunakupotezea wapi? facebook is ACCESSIBLE from Kenya that's all. Facebook is a website running on SERVERS.. in the US. The US are the only people who can tax them unless they open an operation in your country. THEY WILL NOT PAY TAX IN KENYA unless they open an office here so your argument that they SHOULD PAY TAX is really moot.
The only question here is WHAT CAN GAVA DO ABOUT IT
1) block facebook and wait for facebook to come and negotiate
2) tax the user who is accessing facebook over and above the VAT and excise duty they have paid to access the internet.
these can be done and have been done and so far what I can tell you is that these actions need a bit of thought.. you may discover that kumbe facebook sio omena ama githeri... it's more important than those 2 things. That's why I urged people to measure the diameter of their anuses before swallowing a mango whole. just because umemeza haimaanishi kazi imekwisha hapo.
Secondly, who is this person who determines what is a 'social evil' or not? Your IQ must be very low. You can't debate your point bila matusi. I cannot continue to debate with a fool who cannot communicate without abuse and who thinks FB is just a server. Bure kabisa They must find it difficult....... those who have taken authority as the truth, rather than truth as the authority. -G. Massey.
|
|
|
Rank: Elder Joined: 7/28/2015 Posts: 9,562 Location: Rodi Kopany, Homa Bay
|
tom_boy wrote:masukuma wrote:sijui tunakupoteza wapi - FACEBOOK DOES NOT OPERATE IN KENYA. you as a user goes all the way to the US to get serviced. sijui tunakupotezea wapi? facebook is ACCESSIBLE from Kenya that's all. Facebook is a website running on SERVERS.. in the US. The US are the only people who can tax them unless they open an operation in your country. THEY WILL NOT PAY TAX IN KENYA unless they open an office here so your argument that they SHOULD PAY TAX is really moot.
The only question here is WHAT CAN GAVA DO ABOUT IT
1) block facebook and wait for facebook to come and negotiate
2) tax the user who is accessing facebook over and above the VAT and excise duty they have paid to access the internet.
these can be done and have been done and so far what I can tell you is that these actions need a bit of thought.. you may discover that kumbe facebook sio omena ama githeri... it's more important than those 2 things. That's why I urged people to measure the diameter of their anuses before swallowing a mango whole. just because umemeza haimaanishi kazi imekwisha hapo.
Secondly, who is this person who determines what is a 'social evil' or not? Your IQ must be very low. You can't debate your point bila matusi. I cannot continue to debate with a fool who cannot communicate without abuse and who thinks FB is just a server. Bure kabisa 
|
|
|
Rank: Elder Joined: 7/23/2008 Posts: 3,017
|
tom_boy wrote:Obi 1 Kanobi wrote:tom_boy wrote:Long reply. Clearly FB is very emotive for some. However, the logic is very simple. People go to FB to enjoy. They should be taxed for that value add. When you go to a club, you both pay fuel to get there and buy stuff/drinks to enjoy n the club. These drinks are taxed. Only problem is that the FB product is not physical, but it still delivers enjoyment, therefore it should be taxed.
FB is distracting. People can't work because of it. At some level it lowers individual productivity just like pombe.. That's a social evil.
If the major club is shut down, a new club will come up. If FB goes, I am sure a new dominant player will come in, willing to pay tax. The only reason we don't have another mpesa operation is because mpesa is present. Remove the current mpesa and in 1 yr flat, people will not remember mpesa existed. Other players will have come in.
Both the club owner (FB ET al) and club goers (@masukuma, @muchr ET al) should pay taxes.
FB sio githeri ama omena. The truth is its possible to tax FB use based on access by Kenyans or by IPs based in Kenya. But what you first have to define is what/who you want to tax, is it FB the company, people advertising in FB, or registered FB users. Tax FB the company and the people using FB. Social media has reached a level at which it is intoxicating and addictive. Just like alcohol and cigarettesIt is not possible to tax FB the company due to residence rules etc, they are not based in Kenya, so would fail the residency test which is a pre-requisite for taxation purposes, you would only be left with taxing their product/service as an import, so question is how would you go about determining the value of the import for tax purposes and who would be the importer of the service who would bear the tax. companies that sell goods in Kenya get taxed in Kenya irrespective of their residence. I guess the question is, is FB selling a commodity? What commodity? Are the consumers paying for that commodity? How are they paying for it? If indeed a bonafide transaction is taking place between consumer and provider, why should they not pay tax? Facebook commodity is the "feel good factor" that you get after spending hours on FB. A factor that is so good that you prefer to spend time on FB than on another site. You pay for this convenience with your personal data. Your phonebook details, your habits that are being tracked. Your eyes to see ads and buy into concepts. FB makes money out of this data by targeted advertising. So Kenyan consumer data is not worthless to FB as many are want to think. It is a product with value and so FB should pay tax for it.People who would qualify as importers for service are the users or adverts originating from Kenyan IP addresses, in both cases, you would be making the product expensive for Kenyans while in no way affecting FB. Adverts are easy to capture but the problem is who would collect the tax for you. FB will be least bothered to collect and remit the advertising taxes to you knowing very well that you have very little chance of shutting them down in an open democracy, while users would not be willing to remit anything plus its impossible to measure their value. And that leaves you to tax data, which be default affects users idling on FB and those using data for important conference calls to negotiate business deals etc. Let there be a fee payable by FB to allow it to operate in Kenya. FB will choose to pay or not to pay. If they choose not to pay, they should be made to ensure that FB is not accessible from Kenya. Kenya has a right to determine what products are consumed in Kenya or not. FB are at liberty to recover the cost from the advertisers. So the impact of the tax automatically shifts from FB to your poor Housegirl trying to upload a photo of herself lying on your sofa. In conclusion, you cannot tax FB, you can discourage its use, if that's what you want by taxing data, the way Museveni has done. How does my housegirl uploading her photo help the economy? In fact, she should pay for the luxury of uploading photos on FB while she should be watching the kids. One of the functions of tax is to discourage one habit while encouraging another. A tax on social media sites will discourage wasting time on useless status updates and gossip but encourage other sites that offer constructive ideas like wazua. I can bet Safaricom probably makes a shilling for every penny facebook makes on our data, so maybe we should target Safaricom The world is moving towards targeting, efficiency and traceability. Safaricom should be taxed on data. Websites should be taxed also based on the commodity they provide. some commodities are worthless and encourage social evils like gossip, slandering, homosexuality, teenage sex etc. Social media sites like FB, Instagram et a fall in this category. Just like tax on beer and cigarettes is high, so should be the tax on these social media sites. I know many people who are extremely successful and yet are not on social media or even whatsup. So these sites are not a prerequisite for success. They exist to mine our data and use it to make money. For this reason, they should pay tax. FB sio githeri ama omena! @Tomboy, your argument is similar to demanding that we tax the parent companies of Toyota, Mercedes, microsoft or any other producer of imported goods that are imported and consumed in Kenya. FYI, we don't tax the foreign producers of the imports we consume, we tax Kenyans for consuming the imported goods. We can only tax the company when they open a plant in Kenya, then we can tax them for the profits they generate from Kenya. I hope this helps you understand how taxation works. "The purpose of bureaucracy is to compensate for incompetence and lack of discipline." James Collins
|
|
|
Rank: Elder Joined: 10/4/2006 Posts: 13,821 Location: Nairobi
|
tom_boy wrote:masukuma wrote:sijui tunakupoteza wapi - FACEBOOK DOES NOT OPERATE IN KENYA. you as a user goes all the way to the US to get serviced. sijui tunakupotezea wapi? facebook is ACCESSIBLE from Kenya that's all. Facebook is a website running on SERVERS.. in the US. The US are the only people who can tax them unless they open an operation in your country. THEY WILL NOT PAY TAX IN KENYA unless they open an office here so your argument that they SHOULD PAY TAX is really moot.
The only question here is WHAT CAN GAVA DO ABOUT IT
1) block facebook and wait for facebook to come and negotiate
2) tax the user who is accessing facebook over and above the VAT and excise duty they have paid to access the internet.
these can be done and have been done and so far what I can tell you is that these actions need a bit of thought.. you may discover that kumbe facebook sio omena ama githeri... it's more important than those 2 things. That's why I urged people to measure the diameter of their anuses before swallowing a mango whole. just because umemeza haimaanishi kazi imekwisha hapo.
Secondly, who is this person who determines what is a 'social evil' or not? Your IQ must be very low. You can't debate your point bila matusi. I cannot continue to debate with a fool who cannot communicate without abuse and who thinks FB is just a server. Bure kabisa enyewe mimi ndio mjinga hapa... arguing with people who take proverbs to be literal things... hujawahi sikia hii proverb? Quote:If you want to swallow a mango seed, you first of all calculate the diameter of your anus. maana ya ndani is to urge people to think through their actions? yes... Facebook is a bunch of servers and a bunch of people servicing those servers. Mimi ndio mjinga coz I almost fell for your ad hominem - jibu maswali zangu halafu you tell us tunakupotezea wapi! All Mushrooms are edible! Some Mushroom are only edible ONCE!
|
|
|
Rank: Member Joined: 2/20/2007 Posts: 767
|
Obi 1 Kanobi wrote:tom_boy wrote:Obi 1 Kanobi wrote:tom_boy wrote:Long reply. Clearly FB is very emotive for some. However, the logic is very simple. People go to FB to enjoy. They should be taxed for that value add. When you go to a club, you both pay fuel to get there and buy stuff/drinks to enjoy n the club. These drinks are taxed. Only problem is that the FB product is not physical, but it still delivers enjoyment, therefore it should be taxed.
FB is distracting. People can't work because of it. At some level it lowers individual productivity just like pombe.. That's a social evil.
If the major club is shut down, a new club will come up. If FB goes, I am sure a new dominant player will come in, willing to pay tax. The only reason we don't have another mpesa operation is because mpesa is present. Remove the current mpesa and in 1 yr flat, people will not remember mpesa existed. Other players will have come in.
Both the club owner (FB ET al) and club goers (@masukuma, @muchr ET al) should pay taxes.
FB sio githeri ama omena. The truth is its possible to tax FB use based on access by Kenyans or by IPs based in Kenya. But what you first have to define is what/who you want to tax, is it FB the company, people advertising in FB, or registered FB users. Tax FB the company and the people using FB. Social media has reached a level at which it is intoxicating and addictive. Just like alcohol and cigarettesIt is not possible to tax FB the company due to residence rules etc, they are not based in Kenya, so would fail the residency test which is a pre-requisite for taxation purposes, you would only be left with taxing their product/service as an import, so question is how would you go about determining the value of the import for tax purposes and who would be the importer of the service who would bear the tax. companies that sell goods in Kenya get taxed in Kenya irrespective of their residence. I guess the question is, is FB selling a commodity? What commodity? Are the consumers paying for that commodity? How are they paying for it? If indeed a bonafide transaction is taking place between consumer and provider, why should they not pay tax? Facebook commodity is the "feel good factor" that you get after spending hours on FB. A factor that is so good that you prefer to spend time on FB than on another site. You pay for this convenience with your personal data. Your phonebook details, your habits that are being tracked. Your eyes to see ads and buy into concepts. FB makes money out of this data by targeted advertising. So Kenyan consumer data is not worthless to FB as many are want to think. It is a product with value and so FB should pay tax for it.People who would qualify as importers for service are the users or adverts originating from Kenyan IP addresses, in both cases, you would be making the product expensive for Kenyans while in no way affecting FB. Adverts are easy to capture but the problem is who would collect the tax for you. FB will be least bothered to collect and remit the advertising taxes to you knowing very well that you have very little chance of shutting them down in an open democracy, while users would not be willing to remit anything plus its impossible to measure their value. And that leaves you to tax data, which be default affects users idling on FB and those using data for important conference calls to negotiate business deals etc. Let there be a fee payable by FB to allow it to operate in Kenya. FB will choose to pay or not to pay. If they choose not to pay, they should be made to ensure that FB is not accessible from Kenya. Kenya has a right to determine what products are consumed in Kenya or not. FB are at liberty to recover the cost from the advertisers. So the impact of the tax automatically shifts from FB to your poor Housegirl trying to upload a photo of herself lying on your sofa. In conclusion, you cannot tax FB, you can discourage its use, if that's what you want by taxing data, the way Museveni has done. How does my housegirl uploading her photo help the economy? In fact, she should pay for the luxury of uploading photos on FB while she should be watching the kids. One of the functions of tax is to discourage one habit while encouraging another. A tax on social media sites will discourage wasting time on useless status updates and gossip but encourage other sites that offer constructive ideas like wazua. I can bet Safaricom probably makes a shilling for every penny facebook makes on our data, so maybe we should target Safaricom The world is moving towards targeting, efficiency and traceability. Safaricom should be taxed on data. Websites should be taxed also based on the commodity they provide. some commodities are worthless and encourage social evils like gossip, slandering, homosexuality, teenage sex etc. Social media sites like FB, Instagram et a fall in this category. Just like tax on beer and cigarettes is high, so should be the tax on these social media sites. I know many people who are extremely successful and yet are not on social media or even whatsup. So these sites are not a prerequisite for success. They exist to mine our data and use it to make money. For this reason, they should pay tax. FB sio githeri ama omena! @Tomboy, your argument is similar to demanding that we tax the parent companies of Toyota, Mercedes, microsoft or any other producer of imported goods that are imported and consumed in Kenya. FYI, we don't tax the foreign producers of the imports we consume, we tax Kenyans for consuming the imported goods. We can only tax the company when they open a plant in Kenya, then we can tax them for the profits they generate from Kenya. I hope this helps you understand how taxation works. I salute you @obi, your IQ must be very high. You can drive a point without resorting to insults. Your point on Toyota makes sense to the extent that Toyota produces a car, another person imports it. The importer is taxed. In the FB scenario, the producer and distributor are the same person. Can we at least agree that whenever you log on to FB, a transaction takes place. You are willing to spend money on data to gain that feel good feeling of communicating on social media. On the other hand, FB has employed thousands to look into how to suck data from you so as to use it to their gain/profit. Now since we all are objects of the State, the State ought to benefit from this transaction. We agree that it's not impossible to tax FB ET al. The methodology is there. Implementation might be dodgy to start with but I think it can be done. It's unfair for FB to benefit from the collective psyche and data of a nation yet pay no tribute to that nation. They must find it difficult....... those who have taken authority as the truth, rather than truth as the authority. -G. Massey.
|
|
|
Rank: Elder Joined: 10/4/2006 Posts: 13,821 Location: Nairobi
|
tom_boy wrote:Obi 1 Kanobi wrote:tom_boy wrote:Obi 1 Kanobi wrote:tom_boy wrote:Long reply. Clearly FB is very emotive for some. However, the logic is very simple. People go to FB to enjoy. They should be taxed for that value add. When you go to a club, you both pay fuel to get there and buy stuff/drinks to enjoy n the club. These drinks are taxed. Only problem is that the FB product is not physical, but it still delivers enjoyment, therefore it should be taxed.
FB is distracting. People can't work because of it. At some level it lowers individual productivity just like pombe.. That's a social evil.
If the major club is shut down, a new club will come up. If FB goes, I am sure a new dominant player will come in, willing to pay tax. The only reason we don't have another mpesa operation is because mpesa is present. Remove the current mpesa and in 1 yr flat, people will not remember mpesa existed. Other players will have come in.
Both the club owner (FB ET al) and club goers (@masukuma, @muchr ET al) should pay taxes.
FB sio githeri ama omena. The truth is its possible to tax FB use based on access by Kenyans or by IPs based in Kenya. But what you first have to define is what/who you want to tax, is it FB the company, people advertising in FB, or registered FB users. Tax FB the company and the people using FB. Social media has reached a level at which it is intoxicating and addictive. Just like alcohol and cigarettesIt is not possible to tax FB the company due to residence rules etc, they are not based in Kenya, so would fail the residency test which is a pre-requisite for taxation purposes, you would only be left with taxing their product/service as an import, so question is how would you go about determining the value of the import for tax purposes and who would be the importer of the service who would bear the tax. companies that sell goods in Kenya get taxed in Kenya irrespective of their residence. I guess the question is, is FB selling a commodity? What commodity? Are the consumers paying for that commodity? How are they paying for it? If indeed a bonafide transaction is taking place between consumer and provider, why should they not pay tax? Facebook commodity is the "feel good factor" that you get after spending hours on FB. A factor that is so good that you prefer to spend time on FB than on another site. You pay for this convenience with your personal data. Your phonebook details, your habits that are being tracked. Your eyes to see ads and buy into concepts. FB makes money out of this data by targeted advertising. So Kenyan consumer data is not worthless to FB as many are want to think. It is a product with value and so FB should pay tax for it.People who would qualify as importers for service are the users or adverts originating from Kenyan IP addresses, in both cases, you would be making the product expensive for Kenyans while in no way affecting FB. Adverts are easy to capture but the problem is who would collect the tax for you. FB will be least bothered to collect and remit the advertising taxes to you knowing very well that you have very little chance of shutting them down in an open democracy, while users would not be willing to remit anything plus its impossible to measure their value. And that leaves you to tax data, which be default affects users idling on FB and those using data for important conference calls to negotiate business deals etc. Let there be a fee payable by FB to allow it to operate in Kenya. FB will choose to pay or not to pay. If they choose not to pay, they should be made to ensure that FB is not accessible from Kenya. Kenya has a right to determine what products are consumed in Kenya or not. FB are at liberty to recover the cost from the advertisers. So the impact of the tax automatically shifts from FB to your poor Housegirl trying to upload a photo of herself lying on your sofa. In conclusion, you cannot tax FB, you can discourage its use, if that's what you want by taxing data, the way Museveni has done. How does my housegirl uploading her photo help the economy? In fact, she should pay for the luxury of uploading photos on FB while she should be watching the kids. One of the functions of tax is to discourage one habit while encouraging another. A tax on social media sites will discourage wasting time on useless status updates and gossip but encourage other sites that offer constructive ideas like wazua. I can bet Safaricom probably makes a shilling for every penny facebook makes on our data, so maybe we should target Safaricom The world is moving towards targeting, efficiency and traceability. Safaricom should be taxed on data. Websites should be taxed also based on the commodity they provide. some commodities are worthless and encourage social evils like gossip, slandering, homosexuality, teenage sex etc. Social media sites like FB, Instagram et a fall in this category. Just like tax on beer and cigarettes is high, so should be the tax on these social media sites. I know many people who are extremely successful and yet are not on social media or even whatsup. So these sites are not a prerequisite for success. They exist to mine our data and use it to make money. For this reason, they should pay tax. FB sio githeri ama omena! @Tomboy, your argument is similar to demanding that we tax the parent companies of Toyota, Mercedes, microsoft or any other producer of imported goods that are imported and consumed in Kenya. FYI, we don't tax the foreign producers of the imports we consume, we tax Kenyans for consuming the imported goods. We can only tax the company when they open a plant in Kenya, then we can tax them for the profits they generate from Kenya. I hope this helps you understand how taxation works. I salute you @obi, your IQ must be very high. You can drive a point without resorting to insults. Your point on Toyota makes sense to the extent that Toyota produces a car, another person imports it. The importer is taxed. In the FB scenario, the producer and distributor are the same person. Can we at least agree that whenever you log on to FB, a transaction takes place. You are willing to spend money on data to gain that feel good feeling of communicating on social media. On the other hand, FB has employed thousands to look into how to suck data from you so as to use it to their gain/profit. Now since we all are objects of the State, the State ought to benefit from this transaction. We agree that it's not impossible to tax FB ET al. The methodology is there. Implementation might be dodgy to start with but I think it can be done. It's unfair for FB to benefit from the collective psyche and data of a nation yet pay no tribute to that nation. facebook does not come to kenya... YOU GO TO USA AND BRING SOME HTML HERE. facebook is not IMPORTING - YOU ARE.Facebook is not distributing - YOU ARE. Wazua or Nation website is not knocking on your browser - you deliberately go out and look for it. How come this point is so hard to explain? The cost of using this service is that you leave you data and they figure out what to do with it. You get value - they get value. not sure why people are so green eyed when facebook gives them a free service and then they discover facebook actually makes money. All Mushrooms are edible! Some Mushroom are only edible ONCE!
|
|
|
Rank: Member Joined: 2/20/2007 Posts: 767
|
masukuma wrote:tom_boy wrote:Obi 1 Kanobi wrote:tom_boy wrote:Obi 1 Kanobi wrote:tom_boy wrote:Long reply. Clearly FB is very emotive for some. However, the logic is very simple. People go to FB to enjoy. They should be taxed for that value add. When you go to a club, you both pay fuel to get there and buy stuff/drinks to enjoy n the club. These drinks are taxed. Only problem is that the FB product is not physical, but it still delivers enjoyment, therefore it should be taxed.
FB is distracting. People can't work because of it. At some level it lowers individual productivity just like pombe.. That's a social evil.
If the major club is shut down, a new club will come up. If FB goes, I am sure a new dominant player will come in, willing to pay tax. The only reason we don't have another mpesa operation is because mpesa is present. Remove the current mpesa and in 1 yr flat, people will not remember mpesa existed. Other players will have come in.
Both the club owner (FB ET al) and club goers (@masukuma, @muchr ET al) should pay taxes.
FB sio githeri ama omena. The truth is its possible to tax FB use based on access by Kenyans or by IPs based in Kenya. But what you first have to define is what/who you want to tax, is it FB the company, people advertising in FB, or registered FB users. Tax FB the company and the people using FB. Social media has reached a level at which it is intoxicating and addictive. Just like alcohol and cigarettesIt is not possible to tax FB the company due to residence rules etc, they are not based in Kenya, so would fail the residency test which is a pre-requisite for taxation purposes, you would only be left with taxing their product/service as an import, so question is how would you go about determining the value of the import for tax purposes and who would be the importer of the service who would bear the tax. companies that sell goods in Kenya get taxed in Kenya irrespective of their residence. I guess the question is, is FB selling a commodity? What commodity? Are the consumers paying for that commodity? How are they paying for it? If indeed a bonafide transaction is taking place between consumer and provider, why should they not pay tax? Facebook commodity is the "feel good factor" that you get after spending hours on FB. A factor that is so good that you prefer to spend time on FB than on another site. You pay for this convenience with your personal data. Your phonebook details, your habits that are being tracked. Your eyes to see ads and buy into concepts. FB makes money out of this data by targeted advertising. So Kenyan consumer data is not worthless to FB as many are want to think. It is a product with value and so FB should pay tax for it.People who would qualify as importers for service are the users or adverts originating from Kenyan IP addresses, in both cases, you would be making the product expensive for Kenyans while in no way affecting FB. Adverts are easy to capture but the problem is who would collect the tax for you. FB will be least bothered to collect and remit the advertising taxes to you knowing very well that you have very little chance of shutting them down in an open democracy, while users would not be willing to remit anything plus its impossible to measure their value. And that leaves you to tax data, which be default affects users idling on FB and those using data for important conference calls to negotiate business deals etc. Let there be a fee payable by FB to allow it to operate in Kenya. FB will choose to pay or not to pay. If they choose not to pay, they should be made to ensure that FB is not accessible from Kenya. Kenya has a right to determine what products are consumed in Kenya or not. FB are at liberty to recover the cost from the advertisers. So the impact of the tax automatically shifts from FB to your poor Housegirl trying to upload a photo of herself lying on your sofa. In conclusion, you cannot tax FB, you can discourage its use, if that's what you want by taxing data, the way Museveni has done. How does my housegirl uploading her photo help the economy? In fact, she should pay for the luxury of uploading photos on FB while she should be watching the kids. One of the functions of tax is to discourage one habit while encouraging another. A tax on social media sites will discourage wasting time on useless status updates and gossip but encourage other sites that offer constructive ideas like wazua. I can bet Safaricom probably makes a shilling for every penny facebook makes on our data, so maybe we should target Safaricom The world is moving towards targeting, efficiency and traceability. Safaricom should be taxed on data. Websites should be taxed also based on the commodity they provide. some commodities are worthless and encourage social evils like gossip, slandering, homosexuality, teenage sex etc. Social media sites like FB, Instagram et a fall in this category. Just like tax on beer and cigarettes is high, so should be the tax on these social media sites. I know many people who are extremely successful and yet are not on social media or even whatsup. So these sites are not a prerequisite for success. They exist to mine our data and use it to make money. For this reason, they should pay tax. FB sio githeri ama omena! @Tomboy, your argument is similar to demanding that we tax the parent companies of Toyota, Mercedes, microsoft or any other producer of imported goods that are imported and consumed in Kenya. FYI, we don't tax the foreign producers of the imports we consume, we tax Kenyans for consuming the imported goods. We can only tax the company when they open a plant in Kenya, then we can tax them for the profits they generate from Kenya. I hope this helps you understand how taxation works. I salute you @obi, your IQ must be very high. You can drive a point without resorting to insults. Your point on Toyota makes sense to the extent that Toyota produces a car, another person imports it. The importer is taxed. In the FB scenario, the producer and distributor are the same person. Can we at least agree that whenever you log on to FB, a transaction takes place. You are willing to spend money on data to gain that feel good feeling of communicating on social media. On the other hand, FB has employed thousands to look into how to suck data from you so as to use it to their gain/profit. Now since we all are objects of the State, the State ought to benefit from this transaction. We agree that it's not impossible to tax FB ET al. The methodology is there. Implementation might be dodgy to start with but I think it can be done. It's unfair for FB to benefit from the collective psyche and data of a nation yet pay no tribute to that nation. facebook does not come to kenya... YOU GO TO USA AND BRING SOME HTML HERE. facebook is not IMPORTING - YOU ARE.Facebook is not distributing - YOU ARE. Wazua or Nation website is not knocking on your browser - you deliberately go out and look for it. How come this point is so hard to explain? The cost of using this service is that you leave you data and they figure out what to do with it. You get value - they get value. not sure why people are so green eyed when facebook gives them a free service and then they discover facebook actually makes money. 1. FB is not a free service. You have already stated that it is in exchange for my data. 2. I did not go to US to access facebook. Not even figuratively. FB has made its product available to me in Kenya. Ask yourself, can a website be configured in such a way that it is available only in certain countries and not in others. 3. FB should pay for the privilege of accessing data from Kenyans. A Kenyan belongs to the Govt. Everything a Kenyan owns, it has been given to him by Govt and can be taken away by Govt. That's the theory of Govt. Govt can take your life but you try commit suicide and fail and you can be prosecuted. They must find it difficult....... those who have taken authority as the truth, rather than truth as the authority. -G. Massey.
|
|
|
Rank: Elder Joined: 2/26/2012 Posts: 15,980
|
tom_boy wrote:Obi 1 Kanobi wrote:tom_boy wrote:Obi 1 Kanobi wrote:tom_boy wrote:Long reply. Clearly FB is very emotive for some. However, the logic is very simple. People go to FB to enjoy. They should be taxed for that value add. When you go to a club, you both pay fuel to get there and buy stuff/drinks to enjoy n the club. These drinks are taxed. Only problem is that the FB product is not physical, but it still delivers enjoyment, therefore it should be taxed.
FB is distracting. People can't work because of it. At some level it lowers individual productivity just like pombe.. That's a social evil.
If the major club is shut down, a new club will come up. If FB goes, I am sure a new dominant player will come in, willing to pay tax. The only reason we don't have another mpesa operation is because mpesa is present. Remove the current mpesa and in 1 yr flat, people will not remember mpesa existed. Other players will have come in.
Both the club owner (FB ET al) and club goers (@masukuma, @muchr ET al) should pay taxes.
FB sio githeri ama omena. The truth is its possible to tax FB use based on access by Kenyans or by IPs based in Kenya. But what you first have to define is what/who you want to tax, is it FB the company, people advertising in FB, or registered FB users. Tax FB the company and the people using FB. Social media has reached a level at which it is intoxicating and addictive. Just like alcohol and cigarettesIt is not possible to tax FB the company due to residence rules etc, they are not based in Kenya, so would fail the residency test which is a pre-requisite for taxation purposes, you would only be left with taxing their product/service as an import, so question is how would you go about determining the value of the import for tax purposes and who would be the importer of the service who would bear the tax. companies that sell goods in Kenya get taxed in Kenya irrespective of their residence. I guess the question is, is FB selling a commodity? What commodity? Are the consumers paying for that commodity? How are they paying for it? If indeed a bonafide transaction is taking place between consumer and provider, why should they not pay tax? Facebook commodity is the "feel good factor" that you get after spending hours on FB. A factor that is so good that you prefer to spend time on FB than on another site. You pay for this convenience with your personal data. Your phonebook details, your habits that are being tracked. Your eyes to see ads and buy into concepts. FB makes money out of this data by targeted advertising. So Kenyan consumer data is not worthless to FB as many are want to think. It is a product with value and so FB should pay tax for it.People who would qualify as importers for service are the users or adverts originating from Kenyan IP addresses, in both cases, you would be making the product expensive for Kenyans while in no way affecting FB. Adverts are easy to capture but the problem is who would collect the tax for you. FB will be least bothered to collect and remit the advertising taxes to you knowing very well that you have very little chance of shutting them down in an open democracy, while users would not be willing to remit anything plus its impossible to measure their value. And that leaves you to tax data, which be default affects users idling on FB and those using data for important conference calls to negotiate business deals etc. Let there be a fee payable by FB to allow it to operate in Kenya. FB will choose to pay or not to pay. If they choose not to pay, they should be made to ensure that FB is not accessible from Kenya. Kenya has a right to determine what products are consumed in Kenya or not. FB are at liberty to recover the cost from the advertisers. So the impact of the tax automatically shifts from FB to your poor Housegirl trying to upload a photo of herself lying on your sofa. In conclusion, you cannot tax FB, you can discourage its use, if that's what you want by taxing data, the way Museveni has done. How does my housegirl uploading her photo help the economy? In fact, she should pay for the luxury of uploading photos on FB while she should be watching the kids. One of the functions of tax is to discourage one habit while encouraging another. A tax on social media sites will discourage wasting time on useless status updates and gossip but encourage other sites that offer constructive ideas like wazua. I can bet Safaricom probably makes a shilling for every penny facebook makes on our data, so maybe we should target Safaricom The world is moving towards targeting, efficiency and traceability. Safaricom should be taxed on data. Websites should be taxed also based on the commodity they provide. some commodities are worthless and encourage social evils like gossip, slandering, homosexuality, teenage sex etc. Social media sites like FB, Instagram et a fall in this category. Just like tax on beer and cigarettes is high, so should be the tax on these social media sites. I know many people who are extremely successful and yet are not on social media or even whatsup. So these sites are not a prerequisite for success. They exist to mine our data and use it to make money. For this reason, they should pay tax. FB sio githeri ama omena! @Tomboy, your argument is similar to demanding that we tax the parent companies of Toyota, Mercedes, microsoft or any other producer of imported goods that are imported and consumed in Kenya. FYI, we don't tax the foreign producers of the imports we consume, we tax Kenyans for consuming the imported goods. We can only tax the company when they open a plant in Kenya, then we can tax them for the profits they generate from Kenya. I hope this helps you understand how taxation works. I salute you @obi, your IQ must be very high. You can drive a point without resorting to insults. Your point on Toyota makes sense to the extent that Toyota produces a car, another person imports it. The importer is taxed. In the FB scenario, the producer and distributor are the same person.
Can we at least agree that whenever you log on to FB, a transaction takes place. You are willing to spend money on data to gain that feel good feeling of communicating on social media. On the other hand, FB has employed thousands to look into how to suck data from you so as to use it to their gain/profit. Now since we all are objects of the State, the State ought to benefit from this transaction. We agree that it's not impossible to tax FB ET al. The methodology is there. Implementation might be dodgy to start with but I think it can be done. It's unfair for FB to benefit from the collective psyche and data of a nation yet pay no tribute to that nation. I see you still have not gotten the wrap of this argument. FB is a notice board in California whose information is stored in servers distributed around the world, NONE IN KENYA Now FB has made this noticeboard available to raia allover the world. When you sign in for free, you can have access to the notice board where you post your stuff share like comment watch live events aired on the board etc etc To gain access to the notice board, you have to have a compatible device that connects to FB and other notice boards (internet) out there through pipes called ISPs. These ISPs are located here and they pay taxes for being residents. These are the distributors. At no point does FB channel anything to you Raia as a resident also pays taxes once they buy the device, buy data which they can use for whatever. When you login to FB the transaction that takes place is btn you and the ISP not facebook. You are using the ISP to see what the noticeboard called FB is showcasing . Now there's nothing wrong about feeling good on seeing what is posted. FB has employed 25 thousand people and some robots to peruse this notice board. These people are based in California and some in Europe and pay taxes to their respective host countries "There are only two emotions in the market, hope & fear. The problem is you hope when you should fear & fear when you should hope: - Jesse Livermore
.
|
|
|
Rank: Elder Joined: 7/23/2008 Posts: 3,017
|
murchr wrote:tom_boy wrote:Obi 1 Kanobi wrote:tom_boy wrote:Obi 1 Kanobi wrote:tom_boy wrote:Long reply. Clearly FB is very emotive for some. However, the logic is very simple. People go to FB to enjoy. They should be taxed for that value add. When you go to a club, you both pay fuel to get there and buy stuff/drinks to enjoy n the club. These drinks are taxed. Only problem is that the FB product is not physical, but it still delivers enjoyment, therefore it should be taxed.
FB is distracting. People can't work because of it. At some level it lowers individual productivity just like pombe.. That's a social evil.
If the major club is shut down, a new club will come up. If FB goes, I am sure a new dominant player will come in, willing to pay tax. The only reason we don't have another mpesa operation is because mpesa is present. Remove the current mpesa and in 1 yr flat, people will not remember mpesa existed. Other players will have come in.
Both the club owner (FB ET al) and club goers (@masukuma, @muchr ET al) should pay taxes.
FB sio githeri ama omena. The truth is its possible to tax FB use based on access by Kenyans or by IPs based in Kenya. But what you first have to define is what/who you want to tax, is it FB the company, people advertising in FB, or registered FB users. Tax FB the company and the people using FB. Social media has reached a level at which it is intoxicating and addictive. Just like alcohol and cigarettesIt is not possible to tax FB the company due to residence rules etc, they are not based in Kenya, so would fail the residency test which is a pre-requisite for taxation purposes, you would only be left with taxing their product/service as an import, so question is how would you go about determining the value of the import for tax purposes and who would be the importer of the service who would bear the tax. companies that sell goods in Kenya get taxed in Kenya irrespective of their residence. I guess the question is, is FB selling a commodity? What commodity? Are the consumers paying for that commodity? How are they paying for it? If indeed a bonafide transaction is taking place between consumer and provider, why should they not pay tax? Facebook commodity is the "feel good factor" that you get after spending hours on FB. A factor that is so good that you prefer to spend time on FB than on another site. You pay for this convenience with your personal data. Your phonebook details, your habits that are being tracked. Your eyes to see ads and buy into concepts. FB makes money out of this data by targeted advertising. So Kenyan consumer data is not worthless to FB as many are want to think. It is a product with value and so FB should pay tax for it.People who would qualify as importers for service are the users or adverts originating from Kenyan IP addresses, in both cases, you would be making the product expensive for Kenyans while in no way affecting FB. Adverts are easy to capture but the problem is who would collect the tax for you. FB will be least bothered to collect and remit the advertising taxes to you knowing very well that you have very little chance of shutting them down in an open democracy, while users would not be willing to remit anything plus its impossible to measure their value. And that leaves you to tax data, which be default affects users idling on FB and those using data for important conference calls to negotiate business deals etc. Let there be a fee payable by FB to allow it to operate in Kenya. FB will choose to pay or not to pay. If they choose not to pay, they should be made to ensure that FB is not accessible from Kenya. Kenya has a right to determine what products are consumed in Kenya or not. FB are at liberty to recover the cost from the advertisers. So the impact of the tax automatically shifts from FB to your poor Housegirl trying to upload a photo of herself lying on your sofa. In conclusion, you cannot tax FB, you can discourage its use, if that's what you want by taxing data, the way Museveni has done. How does my housegirl uploading her photo help the economy? In fact, she should pay for the luxury of uploading photos on FB while she should be watching the kids. One of the functions of tax is to discourage one habit while encouraging another. A tax on social media sites will discourage wasting time on useless status updates and gossip but encourage other sites that offer constructive ideas like wazua. I can bet Safaricom probably makes a shilling for every penny facebook makes on our data, so maybe we should target Safaricom The world is moving towards targeting, efficiency and traceability. Safaricom should be taxed on data. Websites should be taxed also based on the commodity they provide. some commodities are worthless and encourage social evils like gossip, slandering, homosexuality, teenage sex etc. Social media sites like FB, Instagram et a fall in this category. Just like tax on beer and cigarettes is high, so should be the tax on these social media sites. I know many people who are extremely successful and yet are not on social media or even whatsup. So these sites are not a prerequisite for success. They exist to mine our data and use it to make money. For this reason, they should pay tax. FB sio githeri ama omena! @Tomboy, your argument is similar to demanding that we tax the parent companies of Toyota, Mercedes, microsoft or any other producer of imported goods that are imported and consumed in Kenya. FYI, we don't tax the foreign producers of the imports we consume, we tax Kenyans for consuming the imported goods. We can only tax the company when they open a plant in Kenya, then we can tax them for the profits they generate from Kenya. I hope this helps you understand how taxation works. I salute you @obi, your IQ must be very high. You can drive a point without resorting to insults. Your point on Toyota makes sense to the extent that Toyota produces a car, another person imports it. The importer is taxed. In the FB scenario, the producer and distributor are the same person.
Can we at least agree that whenever you log on to FB, a transaction takes place. You are willing to spend money on data to gain that feel good feeling of communicating on social media. On the other hand, FB has employed thousands to look into how to suck data from you so as to use it to their gain/profit. Now since we all are objects of the State, the State ought to benefit from this transaction. We agree that it's not impossible to tax FB ET al. The methodology is there. Implementation might be dodgy to start with but I think it can be done. It's unfair for FB to benefit from the collective psyche and data of a nation yet pay no tribute to that nation. I see you still have not gotten the wrap of this argument. FB is a notice board in California whose information is stored in servers distributed around the world, NONE IN KENYA Now FB has made this noticeboard available to raia allover the world. When you sign in for free, you can have access to the notice board where you post your stuff share like comment watch live events aired on the board etc etc To gain access to the notice board, you have to have a compatible device that connects to FB and other notice boards (internet) out there through pipes called ISPs. These ISPs are located here and they pay taxes for being residents. These are the distributors. At no point does FB channel anything to you Raia as a resident also pays taxes once they buy the device, buy data which they can use for whatever. When you login to FB the transaction that takes place is btn you and the ISP not facebook. You are using the ISP to see what the noticeboard called FB is showcasing . Now there's nothing wrong about feeling good on seeing what is posted. FB has employed 25 thousand people and some robots to peruse this notice board. These people are based in California and some in Europe and pay taxes to their respective host countries Touche' that explains everything perfectly. @Tomboy, if you can't get this after the above by @Muchr, then you can't be helped. "The purpose of bureaucracy is to compensate for incompetence and lack of discipline." James Collins
|
|
|
Rank: Elder Joined: 7/1/2011 Posts: 8,804 Location: Nairobi
|
I think this is a most difficult debate, and intriguingly the two sides represented so far have some serious points for consideration.
To begin with I don't agree that if something is pleasurable then it should be taxed. Or if it causes addiction then it should also be taxed simply because of the addiction.
I also don't agree that Kenyans belong to the Kenyan government, and hence what Kenyans produce or deserve, belongs to the Kenyan government.
On the other hand, if I consider 'face book' as a 'social utility' - and that's how the web application is fronted- and how the gains from this utility are distributed, then I believe that there's a huge disparity and the people who provide the bulk of the resources get very little.
Besides, a corporation like face book, has now entered into the tricky waters of global governance and the so called philanthropic capitalism, whose operations are very questionable when it comes to matters of human rights and dignity.
That by itself is cause for a re-think of how such corporations can in fact be of fair benefit to its users and environment.
In my opinion then, these utilities ought in fact to be made to redistribute their gains through some means, and the benefits should go to the users directly, and in forms that users themselves can determine and manipulate for their benefits.
Governments then, can form a compact with the people they work with so that these people and utility users can increase tax revenues to the treasury.
|
|
|
Rank: Elder Joined: 7/1/2011 Posts: 8,804 Location: Nairobi
|
|
|
|
Rank: Elder Joined: 9/19/2015 Posts: 2,871 Location: hapo
|
tom_boy wrote:
1. FB is not a free service. You have already stated that it is in exchange for my data.
2. I did not go to US to access facebook. Not even figuratively. FB has made its product available to me in Kenya. Ask yourself, can a website be configured in such a way that it is available only in certain countries and not in others.
3. FB should pay for the privilege of accessing data from Kenyans. A Kenyan belongs to the Govt. Everything a Kenyan owns, it has been given to him by Govt and can be taken away by Govt. That's the theory of Govt. Govt can take your life but you try commit suicide and fail and you can be prosecuted.
Now I understand you. For a moment there I thought you don't know how the internet works. Now I know you really don't know how the internet works. Please read what Murchr has posted for you. If you can't get that, then you can't be helped. Thieves are not good people. Tumeelewana?
|
|
|
Rank: Elder Joined: 10/4/2006 Posts: 13,821 Location: Nairobi
|
the fellow actually believes individuals belong to the state. not only the state... Government... what an interesting line of fiction. All Mushrooms are edible! Some Mushroom are only edible ONCE!
|
|
|
Rank: Veteran Joined: 10/29/2008 Posts: 1,566
|
Too much back and forth here.... Simple points if you ask me. As the structure of things in the global arena stand now, it is not practically possible for Kenya/UG to tax the likes of facebook, whatsapp etc. It is also practically unviable/unrealistic and unachievable to filter the users of internet so as to target & only tax the segment that is using social media. Hence if Kenya/Ug insists on taxing they would have to lump all internet users together for the tax, which beats the original intention as sold - unless it is a gimmick. However, IF, and that a ‘YUGE’ if, it were possible to successfully target the users of social media specifically and slap a tax on them without encroaching on other internet users I would be kosher with it. It’s a luxury that at times borders on social evil. Lets be sincere - Govts thrive on tax and since it is a generally accepted norm that essentials of life shouldn’t be put too high for the average Joe especially by taxing them - got to go slow on those. As a matter of fact in critical times, access to certain basic foodstuff can even be subsidized by Govt. Wherefore; I would in fact say tax 10% on social media usage and 30% on porn access. But for now that’s only a pipe dream – like Horses and beggars. Isuni yilu yi maa me muyo - ni Mbisuu
|
|
|
Wazua
»
Club SK
»
Politics
»
M7 Social Media TAX -Excellent
Forum Jump
You cannot post new topics in this forum.
You cannot reply to topics in this forum.
You cannot delete your posts in this forum.
You cannot edit your posts in this forum.
You cannot create polls in this forum.
You cannot vote in polls in this forum.
|