|
Published: May 20, 2008
Porn tax
Proposal to levy hefty tax on smut stalls in California Assembly
Even in the face of an estimated $20 billion budget deficit, a bill that would raise revenues by imposing a 25% tax on earnings of the pornography industry is meeting with stiff resistance in the California legislature, with opponents claiming it would drive a multi-billion-dollar industry out of the state.
 The bill, AB 2914, authored by Assemblyman Charles Calderon, D-Whittier, would levy a 25% tax on gross revenues from the sale of pornographic magazines, photos, books, films and videotapes, and on the gross earnings of live sexually explicit entertainment and pay-per-view pornography provided to hotel guests.
According to a legislative analysis of the bill, it could raise up to $665 million a year in new revenues for the financially strapped state.
"AB 2914 would tax adult entertainment and adult entertainment venues in a manner similar to the way in which cigarettes and alcohol are already taxed in this state,” said Calderon in the legislative analysis. “Currently, these two products are taxed at higher rates, and the additional revenues are used to address the negative effects of their use. This measure would tax adult entertainment in a comparable manner, with the intent to use the funds to address the various secondary effects associated with the production and consumption of adult entertainment. The secondary effects of production are especially noteworthy as California is the capital of the adult entertainment industry in the United States.”
Money raised by the new tax would be used for “law enforcement, testing and treatment of sexually transmitted diseases, treatment for drug and alcohol abuse, health care and mental health treatment," said Calderon. "AB 2914 does not make a judgment on the adult entertainment industry. It merely asks the industry to help mitigate some of its ancillary effects in the state that is its production capital, not unlike the state already does with alcohol and cigarettes."
At a May 12 hearing, opponents testified that imposing a 25% tax on porn industry profits could drive the business out of California, at a cost in jobs and other revenues of as much as $3.5 billion. It would have an especially hard impact, witnesses testified, on the San Fernando Valley, said to be the “porn capital of the world.”
Republicans in the legislature have indicated they would vote against the bill because it is a tax increase and they oppose any tax increase of any stripe. Under state law, tax increases require a 2/3 majority of both houses of the legislature.
Following the May 12 hearing, Calderon’s bill was referred to the “suspense file” of the Assembly Committee on Revenue and Taxation. Although theoretically the bill could be taken out of the suspense file and considered again, the move most likely means the measure is dead for this session of the legislature.
Posted Tuesday, May 20, 2008 4:54 AM By Fr. M.P.
"opponents testified that imposing a 25% tax on porn industry profits could drive the business out of California". This reminds me of when St. Paul drove a demon out of a sooth-sayer as well as getting a goddess cult reduced due to conversions, and those particular evil-doers went after him because it was bad for business. This is a good example of the greed of vice in action. The state doesn't mind sin as long as it makes money on the deal. Truly a pagan mindset.
|
Posted Tuesday, May 20, 2008 8:12 AM By Margie
I will remember when they make the cuts, that they did not need the smut tax. I wonder why certain constituents who enjoy the pleasures of pornography are catered to in this CA budget of austerity...
So, we come to this: smut is a protected species in CA!
|
Posted Tuesday, May 20, 2008 9:27 AM By The other Mike
I generally oppose tax increases but I have to applaud Assemblyman Calderon and his approach to ridding California of the smut industry. $3.5 billion in jobs is alot to lose, but what the heck...they're porn jobs, not real jobs! And when they're gone, also gone are the related disease, drugs, and broken lives associated with that industry.
|
Posted Tuesday, May 20, 2008 9:46 AM By Dave
Of course when the money goes into the general fund, it will become a source of revenue that would vanish if the desired effects took place.
Honestly, does the state really want to tolerate exploitation for the sake of money>
Yes I know, stupid question. Sorry
|
Posted Tuesday, May 20, 2008 9:49 AM By Cyrus Johnson
In our use of language can we get over applying the word "adult" to describe activities which are very much not? Last I checked this base material is more evocative of adolecent, and worse depraved, human folly than true adult behavior. Calling smut adult is an affront to adults.
|
Posted Tuesday, May 20, 2008 11:45 AM By Bill
Doesn't anyone find it ironic that:
"Republicans in the legislature have indicated they would vote against the bill because it is a tax increase and they oppose any tax increase of any stripe. Under state law, tax increases require a 2/3 majority of both houses of the legislature."
Aren't they the party of the "religious right?"
|
Posted Tuesday, May 20, 2008 12:37 PM By Brian
There is nothing wrong with the adult industry unless you apply the antics of zealots. That having been said, why place a significant tax on something that already generates tax revenues, and is enjoyed by consenting adults? Are we not the nation that is proud of the right to do as we please, provided we don't violate others' rights?
|
Posted Tuesday, May 20, 2008 12:47 PM By Laurette Elsberry
Where does Cdl. Mahony stand on this? His actions in the past show that he protects the "movie industry" in Southern California.
|
Posted Tuesday, May 20, 2008 1:06 PM By Harry
There have been many businesses driven out of California because of excessive taxes, permits etc., etc. In fact, it's an issue among business people throughout the state, much talked about and much complained about.
The legislators never thought about the jobs lost and people hurt by all of this and said business simply had to take their lumps and go elsewhere or close down. Now, however, when the powerful porn industry gets threatened with a tax, suddenly we become conscious of the loss to our state if this particular business were to suffer the same fate as so many others have.
|
Posted Tuesday, May 20, 2008 1:58 PM By Dan
Fr. M.P., your allusion to Acts 19 and the effect of Paul's preaching is most apropos. There doesn't seem to be any conviction in the legislature that pornography is a stench in the nostrils of God-- only a possible way to get more money. Laurette, you raise a good question. I have not heard his Eminence make any remarks about this; certainly there would be no time like the present for him to do so.
|
Posted Tuesday, May 20, 2008 2:15 PM By Papamac
Laurette..Recent publications by the USCCB movie guru tell us where the good Cardinal most likely stands, he certainly remained mum when that body was hammered over the cruddy and some very sexually explicit movies that they thought would be A-OK for Christians to view, including their favorite 'BROKEBACK MOUNTAIN" We have some morally reprehensible people in this and the Federal legislatures that are going to be caught between a rock and a hard place over a bill like this. Give the people a break by getting taxes from the sleaze merchants, sound good, but then again, does it not hit some of their best friends right between the ? "whatevers" MGB
|
Posted Tuesday, May 20, 2008 5:12 PM By Anthony
Let's get our own houses in order before we sanctimoniously and hypocritically take on the adult entertainment industry (a well-regulated, lawful, business that includes consenting adults and whose product is intended solely for adults). One in four married people has cheated on his/her partner. I'll take the rap as being one; if, in your relationship, you haven't cheated then it's a 50/50 shot that your partner has.
Brian, above, got it right.
|
Posted Tuesday, May 20, 2008 5:55 PM By John L. Sillasen
Anthony, sounds like you're on the hook. Deep down do you believe that if the devil can do it, then you can too? What about the idea that if Jesus can do it, then so can you? Or would you call this "fifty-fifty"?
|
Posted Tuesday, May 20, 2008 6:11 PM By Dan
"One in four married people has cheated on his/her partner. I'll take the rap as being one; if, in your relationship, you haven't cheated then it's a 50/50 shot that your partner has. Brian, above, got it right."
Really? None of us should be a cheerleader for the lies of satan and the beautiful side of evil. Anthony and Brian, you have to choose between Christ or the devil -- it's that simple. It sounds to me like you have already made your choice, and if so it is a very tragic one.
|
Posted Tuesday, May 20, 2008 11:41 PM By Anne
When a politician says that he is going to help produce jobs, I say to myself, "Hmmm, I wonder what kind of jobs he is talking about--good or bad? As for me, one of my favorite saints is St. Nicholas. He saved three woman from having to live a life of prostitution. I think I will pray to him about this situation. Maybe they will tax them so badly, they go bankrupt. Sorry, Fr. M.P. I could not help commenting about this.
|
Posted Tuesday, May 20, 2008 11:42 PM By Anne
Of course, you are right Fr. M.P. They should not be in business in the first place.
|
Posted Wednesday, May 21, 2008 5:32 AM By Fr. M.P.
Anthony, the abortion industry is a "lawful business" too. Does that make it right or good? When adults consent then they are consenting to mortal sin. Does that bother you? Didn't Jesus say to be perfect as our heavenly Father is perfect? Perfection covers all areas of life, does it not? Aren't you "sanctimoniously and hypocritically" telling us to conveniently forget about one type of sin because of another?
|
Posted Wednesday, May 21, 2008 11:46 AM By Anne
You are right, Fr. M.P., and many of these women in the industry are either drugged or on alcohol or drugs to take away their good judgement and ease their conscience; or they are in a situation where they are so impoverised that they take such jobs.
Fellows, if you do not want your mother, sister, daughter, etc., so used, don't use someone else's mother, sister, daughter, etc. In the end, "What goes around comes around".
|
Posted Wednesday, May 21, 2008 1:51 PM By John L. Sillasen
Also to note about lawfulness: The Holocaust was lawful. In short, anything done by a government is lawful.
|
Posted Thursday, May 29, 2008 7:09 PM By Randy
I think a tax would compliment the adult industry.
Those inside the business really should think about what a tax will actually do for them.
There is a huge upside if you understand the law.
|
Posted Monday, July 21, 2008 1:17 PM By dan
Porn is a $3.5 billion dollar industry principally locaated in California. At the current state and federal business and indivdual taxe rates for each - how much goes into their coffers. Each government entity should set up a seperate revolving fund account this will exactly indicate what the business is all about and who are the main culprits of this scurge to this nation under God. It is amazing how many suckers fall for the illict use of God given power of the human race to reproduce itself.
|
© California Catholic Daily 2008. All Rights Reserved.
|