Philadelphia charges bloggers $300 licensing fee!

She says it's a hobby, not a business. Unfortunately, anything that brings in money is a business and my guess is that this is why she and other bloggers registered such interest with their taxes. Otherwise, why did she bother?

But $300 is harsh. Talk about an obstacle to entrepreneurism. Governments can be so dumb when it comes to encouraging enterprise.

Yeah, I understand that she is taking in money...I just think that there should be some kind of minimum that a business has to earn before having to pay such a steep license fee.

Also, as a former journalist I am a big fan of freedom of speech, and when the government starts charging such a steep fee to bloggers, they stifle the bloggers' ability to express themselves in a public forum.

[ 1 ] Thanks

{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[2505360].message }}

Orator

14 years ago

I'm not a lawyer, but it seems to me this is just the kind of thing that will provoke a first amendment court fight. I'm also a little skeptical about their ability to enforce this either.

Thanks

{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[2505392].message }}

John Henderson

14 years ago

The tax doesn't infringe upon bloggers' freedom of speech, it infringes upon their freedom to earn. If Marilyn Bess hadn't made any cash from the blog, Philadelphia wouldn't be asking for $300.

[ 2 ] Thanks
1 reply

{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[2505415].message }}

Black Hat Cat

Banned 14 years ago

Originally Posted by John Henderson

The tax doesn't infringe upon bloggers' freedom of speech, it infringes upon their freedom to earn. If Marilyn Bess hadn't made any cash from the blog, Philadelphia wouldn't be asking for $300.

Yes, they would, if they knew about it:

"the city requires privilege licenses for any business engaged in any "activity for profit," says tax attorney Michael Mandale of Center City law firm Mandale Kaufmann. This applies "whether or not they earned a profit during the preceding year,he adds."

Pay Up :: News :: Article :: Philadelphia City Paper

Thanks
1 reply

{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[2508163].message }}

John Henderson

14 years ago

Originally Posted by Black Hat Cat

Yes, they would, if they knew about it:

"the city requires privilege licenses for any business engaged in any "activity for profit," says tax attorney Michael Mandale of Center City law firm Mandale Kaufmann. This applies "whether or not they earned a profit during the preceding year,he adds."

Pay Up :: News :: Article :: Philadelphia City Paper

BHC, you're right. My wording was inexact and I stand corrected. Her intention to earn money meant that she is liable to pay this small business levy.

But it still isn't infringing on her freedom of speech.

Thanks

{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[2510386].message }}

~kev~

14 years ago

Add a political section to your blog. When the Jim Crow laws were challenged in the supreme court, having to pay a fee or tax to exercise your rights was outlawed.

Political expression is a right, and can not be taxed, or fined.

That would be like the state charging a fee for people to be able to pray.

You do not have to pay a fee to vote, or pray, or buy a news paper. Nor should you have to pay a fee to express your political opinion.

Thanks
2 replies

Signature

Country Lifestyle Network

{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[2505428].message }}

seasoned

14 years ago

Originally Posted by ~kev~

Add a political section to your blog. When the Jim Crow laws were challenged in the supreme court, having to pay a fee or tax to exercise your rights was outlawed.

Political expression is a right, and can not be taxed, or fined.

That would be like the state charging a fee for people to be able to pray.

You do not have to pay a fee to vote, or pray, or buy a news paper. Nor should you have to pay a fee to express your political opinion.

Yeah, but THEY will argue that any income must have a license! They will argue this isn't about free speech.

Political agencies, at least ones accepting donations apparently always must get a license, etc....

BTW as I recall, business licenses charge the cost of the license(A FIXED cost), and the revenue of the business. You can't make any money unless you earn perhaps 150% of the cost of the license every year. USUALLY that cost is LESS than $300. It depends on the CITY in which you live. It can be as low as FREE(some cities don't require it), and probably averages more like $100.

ALSO, some places MAY let you do a HOBBY if it is like $400 or less(basically not taxed federally).

Steve

Thanks

{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[2507460].message }}

Greg guitar

14 years ago

Originally Posted by ~kev~

Add a political section to your blog. When the Jim Crow laws were challenged in the supreme court, having to pay a fee or tax to exercise your rights was outlawed.

Political expression is a right, and can not be taxed, or fined.

That would be like the state charging a fee for people to be able to pray.

You do not have to pay a fee to vote, or pray, or buy a news paper. Nor should you have to pay a fee to express your political opinion.

This idea is one I suspect could get you in a lot of hot water. Adding political content to your business does not make it tax exempt, just because political speech is protected.

I'm pretty sure the media companies that make big money from political shows have to pay taxes on their ad revenues. It is not a tax on speech; it's a tax on profits from your business. You can say whatever you want and the IRS will leave you alone-but the moment you start making profits, the IRS wants their cut. They couldn't give a rat's hindquarters whether your hamburger ads are surrounded by political rants-that won't change your tax rate, let alone make you exempt, nor should it.

The idea reminds me of the clever advice that made the rounds decades ago, espousing the strategy of turning your home into a church to avoid paying your taxes. Unfortunately, the IRS isn't that stupid, and people who tried it got in trouble, if they weren't a real church.

Thanks
1 reply

{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[2507696].message }}

jacktackett

14 years ago

Originally Posted by cosmokid

Sorry,
At least for the moment. In a general way. Except for cases like Amazon where certain states like Colorado and New York ( and a couple of others?) were demanding that the affiliates be responsible for the tax - and of course up thread someone mentioned that this battle is currently being fought in court..

Just to clarify - in NC the affiliate does not have to collect the sales tax on affiliate sales. The state is trying to force Amazon et al to collect the tax and then remit it to the state.

The Supreme Court ruled many years ago when states tried to collect money from direct marketers - long before there was an Internet by the way - that states could only force a company to collect sales tax if it had a physical presence in the state - like a retail shop, an office, or a warehouse(AKA Nexus). This ruling made it ILLEGAL for a state to force an out of state entity to collect sales tax.

Its the law of the land so states like NC are trying an end run around the law by saying that an affiliate is basically an employee of the company and thus creates a physical presence in the state - so the company with an affiliate HAS to collect and remit the tax.

Note - this does not absolve the affiliate from paying income TAX on their earnings. So what NC did in trying to collect sales tax their citizens weren't paying, is to drive out amazon, overstock and several other affiliate programs and thus loose out on that income tax. Way to go NC! I know 3 people, who employeed 11 folks total - earning multiple millions from affiliate sales that had to move to SC and TN after NC did that (again-hint there folks - maybe you should not put all your revenue eggs in one basket - just saying!)

Alas NC did pass another law on downloads - so when I sell an ebook I have to determine if my customer is from NC and charge an extra 7 to 8.5 percent to cover the tax. Why a range? Well NC has 100 counties and the sales tax is set by county and sometimes by city. So its different depending on where the user is located - and YES - it is a ROYAL PITA to keep track of this. This is why if you're from NC you've started to get charged sales tax by Clickbank - because they have to remit the tax to NC. This is because the download tax is not a sales tax - its another tax introduced by our state government.

--Jack

Thanks

Signature

Let's get Tim the kidney he needs!HELP Tim

Mega Monster WSO for KimW http://ow.ly/4JdHm

{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[2508168].message }}

mikemac1

14 years ago

As a local resident of Philadelphia, I just want to reiterate that this is a business license fee not a "blogger tax" or has anything to do with freedom of speech.

Philadelphia, like many cities in the U.S., is having major budget issues (and let's not get into why or who's fault that is) and like many major cities has one time business licensing fees that need to be paid by all businesses.

Yes, that seems unfair that she has not made enough to cover the tax but I know plenty of people who started offline businesses in Philadelphia, some of these businesses unfortunately failed and due to loans/debts, they never made a dime and in most cases owe thousands of dollars and they still had to pay the city licensing fees.

Now the business license in Philadelphia is a hotly debate topic here and for many years people have been trying to get rid of it (another debate for another day).

Lastly, let me throw this out there, technically this fee is applicable to anyone who has done business within or with someone from Philadelphia, so if any of you have ever received an order from someone living in Philadelphia, technically you have to pay the fee or the $50 annual out-of-town fee...

Here's the details...

The lifetime license fee is $300, made payable to the City of Philadelphia. Some businesses—such as out-of-state companies that do business in the City sporadically—may elect to pay a $50 annual fee.

BTW, here's the link...City of Philadelphia Business Services Center - Business Privilege License

Now, I'm not taking a stance either way on this, but what many of you need to realize is that there are many local laws (especially taxes and fees) that many offline businesses have been paying for years and when cities are looking for their tax money (especially in this economic state) one thing that gets brought up quickly is the online businesses, so this may be the first time many of you are hearing about this but it won't be the last. As stated on this forum many times, you're running a business, so treat it like one, hire a good accountant and know what you're doing.

[ 6 ] Thanks
6 replies

{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[2505587].message }}

Rashell

14 years ago

mikemac1,

quick question... do you have to pay a "business privilege license" fee for having a yard sale, babysitting, lemonade stands, etc? also do you have to pay this fee for every new business you start?

why don't bureaucrats ever come up with "work for someone else privilege license" or "on welfare privilege license"? aren't those revenue streams too? why does seeking career independence become a "privilege" unlike the other income sources?

Of course, the fact that the city views her "hobby" as a business should give her a heads up that she should become more aware of her privileges (and rights) as a business owner.

Rashell

Thanks
2 replies

{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[2505757].message }}

Andrew Stevens

14 years ago

What percentage of bloggers in Philadelphia are going to pay this, my guess is 0-0.5 percent.

Thanks
1 reply

Signature

Wholesale Sneakers - Wholesale Retro Jordans - Wholesale Yeezys
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[2505768].message }}

williamd52

14 years ago

Rashell is exactly right. She wrote;

why don't bureaucrats ever come up with "work for someone else privilege license" or "on welfare privilege license"?
The answer to the "on welfare privilege license" is because most cities don't take into account how large a percentage of the population in their city DOES NOT WORK.
So a much larger percentage of the population does not contribute to the tax base as far as employment taxes,school taxes, social security,health care, or sales taxes on food, gasoline and many other things.
Cities all over the country are faced with an ever decreasing tax base. People are choosing to move out of large cities and re-locating to bedroom communities. Or what used to be called suburbs. Increasing crime rates, ever increasing taxes,lower quality of living, and school systems that are sub-par or just plain unsafe are some of the reasons people are moving out of the larger urban areas.
The people who do not work pay much less taxes,or in the case of Federal income taxes, NONE, yet receive a monthly check courtesy of the taxpayers .And also a Federal tax refund in many cases. Or as the government calls it, a tax credit. Yes, a refund on taxes they never paid. People who do work are forced to bear the burden of paying taxes to support those that do not work.
So government bureaucrats, in their infinite wisdom, choose to levy even more taxes on those that work.
Whether or not the blogger in question made a reasonable amount of money does not concern the government. Only the fact that ANY income, no matter how small, was made.
It's a sign of the times. Sigh.

Thanks
1 reply

Signature

marina militare homage

{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[2538047].message }}

David McKee

14 years ago

Originally Posted by williamd52

So government bureaucrats, in their infinite wisdom, choose to levy even more taxes on those that work.
Whether or not the blogger in question made a reasonable amount of money does not concern the government. Only the fact that ANY income, no matter how small, was made.
It's a sign of the times. Sigh.

That is why So many of those who desire to be capitalists will go and are going "underground" - Call it criminal (the bureaucrats will), call it dark and dangerous, call it "wicked" - call it what you like, but the sad truth is some who become "pirates" are forced to that decision.

And so I quote:

"When robbery is done in open daylight by sanction of the law, as it is done today, then any act of honor or restitution has to be hidden underground."

Ragnar Danneskjold

Thanks

Signature

Are you an affiliate marketer? My site has tons of free stuff and 14,000 pages of Clickbank research. www.affiliatesledgehammer.com
Buy a Freedom Bulb! Don't let the government tell you what kind of light bulb you can use!

{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[2562139].message }}

Scott Ames

14 years ago

Lastly, let me throw this out there, technically this fee is applicable to anyone who has done business within or with someone from Philadelphia, so if any of you have ever received an order from someone living in Philadelphia, technically you have to pay the fee or the $50 annual out-of-town fee...

Yeah... that's going to happen.

I'm starting my own tax. Anyone that does business within the bounds of my property have to pay a $50 license fee. I'm off to order a $20 book from Amazon then send them a $50 license fee demand for doing business here.

Thanks

Signature

Success consists of going from failure to failure without loss of enthusiasm. -Winston Churchill

{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[2508377].message }}

Dan C. Rinnert

14 years ago

Originally Posted by cosmokid

When I recently set up my LLC here in New Jersey and I was explaining my various types of earnings to my accountant, he was clear about one thing:

As long as a third party service (i.e. Clickbank, Paypal, etc) is taking payments for me, THEY are the point of sale and are responsible for collecting sales tax. I do not need a business license to operate businesses which use these third party payment systems.

In ClickBank's case, they are the product seller. Technically, they purchase your product from you at a wholesale price and resell it to the buyer at the retail cost. That's also why ClickBank has to handle 1099's for affiliates because, under their setup, affiliates are not really yours but ClickBank's.

But, how is accepting PayPal any different from accepting VISA and MasterCard? If PayPal was considered the point of sale, I'm sure California would have jumped on that long ago and been forcing them to collect sales tax on every PayPal purchase.

Thanks
1 reply

Signature

Dan's content is irregularly read by handfuls of people. Join the elite few by reading his blog: dcrBlogs.com, following him on Twitter: dcrTweets.com or reading his fiction: dcrWrites.com but NOT by Clicking Here!

Dan also writes content for hire, but you can't afford him anyway.

{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[2505780].message }}

scrofford

14 years ago

Originally Posted by Dan C. Rinnert

In ClickBank's case, they are the product seller. Technically, they purchase your product from you at a wholesale price and resell it to the buyer at the retail cost. That's also why ClickBank has to handle 1099's for affiliates because, under their setup, affiliates are not really yours but ClickBank's.

But, how is accepting PayPal any different from accepting VISA and MasterCard? If PayPal was considered the point of sale, I'm sure California would have jumped on that long ago and been forcing them to collect sales tax on every PayPal purchase.

EXACTLY! The business is on the internet, not in a city. The internet spans many cities, states and countries. If that lady didn't have a business per say in Philadelphia then how can the city ask for a license tax? The blog was on the internet. There is no way that business license tax will fly unless she was registered as a business within that city.

Thanks

{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[2505968].message }}

Lance K

14 years ago

Originally Posted by mikemac1

Lastly, let me throw this out there, technically this fee is applicable to anyone who has done business within or with someone from Philadelphia, so if any of you have ever received an order from someone living in Philadelphia, technically you have to pay the fee or the $50 annual out-of-town fee...

Here's the details...

The lifetime license fee is $300, made payable to the City of Philadelphia. Some businesses—such as out-of-state companies that do business in the City sporadically—may elect to pay a $50 annual fee.

BTW, here's the link...City of Philadelphia Business Services Center - Business Privilege License

The way I read the quoted material doesn't match what you said about receiving an order from someone in Philadelphia.

Thanks

Signature

"You can have everything in life you want if you will just help enough other people get what they want."
~ Zig Ziglar

{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[2508408].message }}

BizmanJoe

14 years ago

Originally Posted by cosmokid

When I recently set up my LLC here in New Jersey and I was explaining my various types of earnings to my accountant, he was clear about one thing:

As long as a third party service (i.e. Clickbank, Paypal, etc) is taking payments for me, THEY are the point of sale and are responsible for collecting sales tax. I do not need a business license to operate businesses which use these third party payment systems.

When I become the point of sale, however, through using my own merchant account and shopping cart, I need a business license because I have now become a storefront and a point of sale.

It sounds like the blogger might have room to protest this if she is not a point of sale and is using things like Adsense, Clickbank, or various affiliate networks to make money on her blog.

If she's not collecting payments herself for stuff she sells, she should be okay.

Unless Philadelphia is a kingdom onto itself - which apparently it thinks it is.

Very important point made here. I think we should all be very aware of this...

Thanks

{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[2508687].message }}

Gator1

14 years ago

Originally Posted by cosmokid

When I recently set up my LLC here in New Jersey and I was explaining my various types of earnings to my accountant, he was clear about one thing:

As long as a third party service (i.e. Clickbank, Paypal, etc) is taking payments for me, THEY are the point of sale and are responsible for collecting sales tax. I do not need a business license to operate businesses which use these third party payment systems.

When I become the point of sale, however, through using my own merchant account and shopping cart, I need a business license because I have now become a storefront and a point of sale.

It sounds like the blogger might have room to protest this if she is not a point of sale and is using things like Adsense, Clickbank, or various affiliate networks to make money on her blog.

If she's not collecting payments herself for stuff she sells, she should be okay.

Unless Philadelphia is a kingdom onto itself - which apparently it thinks it is.

My accountant explained this to me almost like this. He had also told that income is income and it doesn't really matter where it comes from as long as it's legal.

Thanks

{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[2509983].message }}

Terry Crim

14 years ago

This has been said earlier but paypal is not considered a 3rd party service when it comes to accepting payments. Paypal gives you instant access to the funds. As long as you have access to the money, it is considered to be income and has to be reported which you have to do yourself because paypal wont do it for you. They also do not collect sales tax, that is your responsibility.

Services like ClickBank handle the transactions for you are actually selling the product themselves and then kicking percentage back to you. They are the end seller not you. Paypal is something I look at as a low cost merchant account, with low barrier of entrance. Everything is handled by you they are the gateway and credit card processor in one. Where a merchant account, regular one, you need two services that work together. Paypal it is all built-in one. That is how I see it.

in 2011, paypal will start reporting to the IRS the activity starting at a certain dollar amount or 200 transactions whichever is first. You still have to report everything to the IRS yourself. What this new rule in 2011 is for is to see if you are reporting everything. If paypal reports the revenue and you do not, IRS will do an audit on all your revenue from ALL sources for probably multiple years.

I was told by a former IRS agent that even though it is good idea to keep last 7 years of taxes, now I think recommendation is 3, that an Audit can actually go back any time frame the auditor wants to. 10 years, 15 years or more. Have fun with that if you get audited. LOL

What I posted in this post is my own views based on my own due diligence. I am not giving legal or tax advice at all so don't take my words as gospel and go start doing business based from what I said above.

Never take legal or financial advice from any forum, it is bad juju on you if you do.

- T

Originally Posted by cosmokid

As long as a third party service (i.e. Clickbank, Paypal, etc) is taking payments for me, THEY are the point of sale and are responsible for collecting sales tax. I do not need a business license to operate businesses which use these third party payment systems.

Thanks

{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[2510074].message }}

Drewry_Media

14 years ago

Philadelphia already has lots of money, so why are they even driving up the nerve to start charging bloggers to blog online for? Three hundred dollars can pay a hosting bill with unlimited bandwidth for an entire year. And, alot of ppl don't even make that much online from Google AdSense.

Thanks

Signature

Drewry l DNN

{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[2505766].message }}

mikemac1

14 years ago

@Rashell - I'm not defending this fee. It's actually called the Business Privilege License, and forever, many argue why you have to pay a fee for the "privilege" to do business in Philadelphia.

What I'm pointing out is that if you are doing business (in this case in Philadelphia but I'm sure there are more fees/taxes in other states, cities, etc as well), you better prepare yourself and be aware what you need to do to be in business in the first place because Philadelphia (like many others) are looking at everything to be able to generate tax revenue.

Thanks
1 reply

{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[2505839].message }}

Rashell 14 years ago

mikemac1,

I'm not defending this fee.

Got it...

But really I was wondering if they impose this "privilege" on other forms of self-employment income. Do they go after the teenage/college kid who sets up a babysitting job after school? Or do they consider a yard sale a business, since in 1 weekend it could make over the $50?

Does anyone know where the rabbit hole ends?

Rashell
- Thanks
{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[2505927].message }}

mattlaclear

14 years ago

If the city of Philadelphia are claiming her hobby is a business then she should treat it as such and claim it on her taxes. There are far more tax breaks available for business owners. For instance she can claim her hosting costs, a portion of her rent or mortgage paid, etc. I'm sure in the end she'll come up with more than $300 in deductions. Not to count the fact she can claim any losses her business suffered for the year as well. We live in a great country that rewards entrepreneurs. So she should take advantage of it.

[ 4 ] Thanks
3 replies

Signature

Free Training for SEO Providers in the United States - https://happyseoclients.com/happy-seo-clients-training/

{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[2505966].message }}

sbucciarel

Banned 14 years ago

Originally Posted by mattlaclear

If the city of Philadelphia are claiming her hobby is a business then she should treat it as such and claim it on her taxes. There are far more tax breaks available for business owners. For instance she can claim her hosting costs, a portion of her rent or mortgage paid, etc. I'm sure in the end she'll come up with more than $300 in deductions. Not to count the fact she can claim any losses her business suffered for the year as well. We live in a great country that rewards entrepreneurs. So she should take advantage of it.

Yep ... this is what I would do if forced to pay it. Nickel and dime them to death with business expenses. I'd probably even go out and buy some new equipment to claim and start outsourcing a bunch so I could claim it.

Thanks
2 replies

{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[2506444].message }}

David McKee

14 years ago

Originally Posted by sbucciarel

Yep ... this is what I would do if forced to pay it. Nickel and dime them to death with business expenses. I'd probably even go out and buy some new equipment to claim and start outsourcing a bunch so I could claim it.

I love it! That is the best answer yet... And then, find the little schmuck a**wipe who sent the original notice to her, and show them just how much it "cost" them to send her the permit notice.

We need to show government bureaucrats are idiots at every possible opportunity. It should be a shameful thing to be a government worker until that day when government starts doing only what it was created to do, and gets the hell out of the way in every other personal endeavor.

Thanks

Signature

Are you an affiliate marketer? My site has tons of free stuff and 14,000 pages of Clickbank research. www.affiliatesledgehammer.com
Buy a Freedom Bulb! Don't let the government tell you what kind of light bulb you can use!

{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[2506476].message }}

Don Schenk

14 years ago

Originally Posted by sbucciarel

Yep ... this is what I would do if forced to pay it. Nickel and dime them to death with business expenses. I'd probably even go out and buy some new equipment to claim and start outsourcing a bunch so I could claim it.

Unfortunately the $300 for a business license is just another business expense. Yes, it is a tax of sort, but it is independent of whether or not she made a profit. It really is nit-picky, but then picking nits is what bureaucrats are all about.

:-Don

[ 1 ] Thanks

Signature

Studies prove happier people have massively more success. It has worked for me. Use this one trick too... Click Here

Total Competition Stomper - Simply the most powerful tactic your IM or Offline business will ever use... See it here!

{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[2508423].message }}

Michael Oksa

14 years ago

Originally Posted by mattlaclear

If the city of Philadelphia are claiming her hobby is a business then she should treat it as such and claim it on her taxes. There are far more tax breaks available for business owners. For instance she can claim her hosting costs, a portion of her rent or mortgage paid, etc. I'm sure in the end she'll come up with more than $300 in deductions. Not to count the fact she can claim any losses her business suffered for the year as well. We live in a great country that rewards entrepreneurs. So she should take advantage of it.

I agree with treating it like a business, but maybe she doesn't want to.

However, for the sake of clarity, I think it best to point out that she may NOT be able to take those deductions.

For example, you can ONLY claim a portion of your rent, utilities, etc. IF you set aside a part of your house EXCLUSIVELY for doing business. That means if you have a TV that you watch sports on in the same room you have your computer, then you can't claim it.

Of course, I'm not a tax professional, so...

ALWAYS check with a QUALIFIED tax professional before claiming any decductions. There are a lot of myths out there, and the tax laws are always changing. For example, the new 1099 situation. (Ugh)

All the best,
Michael

[ 1 ] Thanks
1 reply

Signature

"Ich bin en fuego!"

{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[2506573].message }}

mattlaclear

14 years ago

Originally Posted by Michael Oksa

...ALWAYS check with a QUALIFIED tax professional before claiming any decductions. There are a lot of myths out there, and the tax laws are always changing. For example, the new 1099 situation. (Ugh)

All the best,
Michael

If anyone is daft enough to take tax advice from a Warrior thread I doubt they are going to pay much attention to your disclaimer Michael. But yeah what you said.

[ 3 ] Thanks
1 reply

Signature

Free Training for SEO Providers in the United States - https://happyseoclients.com/happy-seo-clients-training/

{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[2506615].message }}

Michael Oksa

14 years ago

Originally Posted by mattlaclear

If anyone is daft enough to take tax advice from a Warrior thread I doubt they are going to pay much attention to your disclaimer Michael. But yeah what you said.

Hi Matt,

Sadly, I believe you are correct.

For the record, it wasn't anything personal. I was just trying to balance things out. A lot of people think they know what they can deduct, but reality is often different, hence my warning.

All the best,
Michael

Thanks

Signature

"Ich bin en fuego!"

{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[2507085].message }}

Lance K

14 years ago

Originally Posted by mattlaclear

If the city of Philadelphia are claiming her hobby is a business then she should treat it as such and claim it on her taxes. There are far more tax breaks available for business owners. For instance she can claim her hosting costs, a portion of her rent or mortgage paid, etc. I'm sure in the end she'll come up with more than $300 in deductions. Not to count the fact she can claim any losses her business suffered for the year as well. We live in a great country that rewards entrepreneurs. So she should take advantage of it.

Yeah, but if you take a bunch of deductions you had better be able to justify them to the IRS. And "The city of Philadelphia says I'm running a business" won't hold much weight with the IRS.

Thanks
1 reply

Signature

"You can have everything in life you want if you will just help enough other people get what they want."
~ Zig Ziglar

{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[2508294].message }}

mattlaclear

14 years ago

Originally Posted by Lance K

Yeah, but if you take a bunch of deductions you had better be able to justify them to the IRS. And "The city of Philadelphia says I'm running a business" won't hold much weight with the IRS.

Missed my point Lance. Which was that the lady should start treating her hobby as a business. Which would mean she could take the appropriate deductions.

Thanks
1 reply

Signature

Free Training for SEO Providers in the United States - https://happyseoclients.com/happy-seo-clients-training/

{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[2508338].message }}

Lance K 14 years ago

Originally Posted by mattlaclear

Missed my point Lance. Which was that the lady should start treating her hobby as a business. Which would mean she could take the appropriate deductions.

Sorry. I should have elaborated. I got your point. I just figured there were probably some who thought they could take deductions just because they paid the licensing fee and never tried to turn a profit. Kinda like your disclaimer to Michael O. about people taking accounting advice on the forum.

I know that you and I (and others) know that you meant appropriate deductions. But I'm also fairly certain that there are others who probably read a few of the comments about deductions as a way to "stick it to the man" in regard to the fees.

But I'm with you...best solution = run a legitimate business.
- Thanks
Signature

"You can have everything in life you want if you will just help enough other people get what they want."
~ Zig Ziglar
{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[2508363].message }}

Caleb Spilchen

14 years ago

It may look like I don't have this problem either, but right now; I might incorporate as a protection for myself, and I'm also going to get hit with the taxes. This relates to this person, because I'm a blogger and product marketer (but, I make a lot more then $50), and I want to actually pay the fees.

But it's not just that licensing fee, you have to pay business, corporate, income tax. I don't get it, why do you get taxed so much? I'm Canadian, and our taxes are still less, but yet it's still a heckovalot of money, and I'm just a Teen

Caleb

Thanks
2 replies

Signature

Canadian Expat Living in Medellin, Colombia

{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[2506051].message }}

Istvan Horvath 14 years ago

Originally Posted by Caleb Spilchen

I'm Canadian, and our taxes are still less,

"Less" than what? We are one of the most heavily taxed nation on the earth :p
- [ 2 ] Thanks
- 1 reply
Signature
{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[2506108].message }}
- Caleb Spilchen 14 years ago
  
  Originally Posted by Istvan Horvath
  
  "Less" than what? We are one of the most heavily taxed nation on the earth :p
  
  Actually Istvan,
  
  According to CNN during the Health Care Debacle in the states, (Which as a Canadian watching...), Canadians pay less tax.
  
  I don't know if your from Ontario, but this HST thing, is well.. Annoying!
  
  Caleb
  
  Thanks
  
  Signature
  
  Canadian Expat Living in Medellin, Colombia
  
  {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[2506135].message }}

Dan C. Rinnert

14 years ago

Originally Posted by Caleb Spilchen

But it's not just that licensing fee, you have to pay business, corporate, income tax. I don't get it, why do you get taxed so much? I'm Canadian, and our taxes are still less, but yet it's still a heckovalot of money, and I'm just a Teen

In the U.S., we pay somewhere around 60% of our income in taxes. That's total taxes, not just actual income taxes.

When we were still British colonies, we paid about less than 1% of our income in total taxes.

It's looking like taxation without representation would have been cheaper.

[ 6 ] Thanks
1 reply

Signature

Dan's content is irregularly read by handfuls of people. Join the elite few by reading his blog: dcrBlogs.com, following him on Twitter: dcrTweets.com or reading his fiction: dcrWrites.com but NOT by Clicking Here!

Dan also writes content for hire, but you can't afford him anyway.

{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[2506130].message }}

tommygadget

14 years ago

Originally Posted by Dan C. Rinnert

In the U.S., we pay somewhere around 60% of our income in taxes. That's total taxes, not just actual income taxes.

When we were still British colonies, we paid about less than 1% of our income in total taxes.

It's looking like taxation without representation would have been cheaper.

Dan, that is bleeping awesome. That made me fall off my chair

TomG.

Thanks
1 reply

Signature

$10,000/Month With Adsense? SIX Week Adsense Bootcamp Shows You How! Newbie friendly!

Do Nothing, Make Money!

Live Coaching Via Skype + Killer Bonuses!

{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[2512727].message }}

Greg guitar

14 years ago

Originally Posted by tommygadget

Dan, that is bleeping awesome. That made me fall off my chair

TomG.

In the US we pay 60% taxes? Is there another US besides the USA? How is it awesome to use outrageously inflated figures to make your argument sound more dramatic? Now if you wanted to say we get a crummy deal for our money, I'd agree, but we don't pay 60% of our income in taxes.

In fact, being in business for yourself here has unbelievable tax advantages. An IRS agent told me when I asked if I should be concerned about showing too little profit, that I shouldn't worry about it, since they expect that you will have zero taxable income your first 3 years in business, and if you can't use all your deductions in a given years, they let you claim them in future years. Not too shabby!

If it wasn't for the fact that we get so little for our money, (no civilized nation should allow people to be put out of their homes due to catastrophic medical expenses) I'd say we are a nation of whiners and crybabies (not anyone here, of course), because we always moan about having to pay taxes, but we sure do love our roads, schools, libraries, bridges, emergency services, yada yada yada. Heck, a lot of the biggest whiners I've known have been people who never met a war they didn't like, and war has to be about the most wasteful expenditure there is.

I do think it's absurd to charge $300 for a business license, but on the other hand, if whoever said it was a lifetime fee is correct, it's cheaper over time than here, if you plan to be in business a while. At $60 a year, you would be saving money starting the 6th year, and going on for the life of the business.

Thanks
1 reply

{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[2513515].message }}

Dan C. Rinnert

14 years ago

Originally Posted by Greg guitar

In the US we pay 60% taxes? Is there another US besides the USA? How is it awesome to use outrageously inflated figures to make your argument sound more dramatic? Now if you wanted to say we get a crummy deal for our money, I'd agree, but we don't pay 60% of our income in taxes.

There are federal income taxes and, in some areas, state and city income taxes. There may also be property taxes, sales taxes, social security taxes, medicare taxes, unemployment insurance taxes, excise taxes, transfer taxes, estate taxes, capital gains taxes, alcohol and tobacco taxes, toll taxes, utility taxes, motor vehicle taxes, fuel taxes, luxury taxes, telephone and communication taxes, hotel room and visitor taxes, commercial rent taxes, environmental impact taxes, air emission taxes, deed taxes, gambling taxes, fur clothing taxes, mortgage registry taxes, retirement taxes, use taxes, gift taxes, and other miscellaneous and special taxes.

Thanks

Signature

Dan's content is irregularly read by handfuls of people. Join the elite few by reading his blog: dcrBlogs.com, following him on Twitter: dcrTweets.com or reading his fiction: dcrWrites.com but NOT by Clicking Here!

Dan also writes content for hire, but you can't afford him anyway.

{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[2513650].message }}

dannyadams Banned 14 years ago

[DELETED]

{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[2513786].message }}
- CDarklock 14 years ago
  
  Originally Posted by dannyadams
  
  Hey liberals...get this...WE PROTECT OURSELVES.
  
  How about the electric company?
  
  "Pay what we charge or we shut off the power."
  
  What are you going to do? Switch?
  
  How many people provide electricity in your area?
  
  What about water and sewage? Gas lines? Cable? Phone? Road maintenance?
  
  Everybody thinks that if the government collapses, they'll get to run their own little kingdom. In reality, you'll probably get to be a serf. The people who will run kingdoms are already running them, insofar as they can under the law... and when the government collapses, they'll just reach out and take all the things they wanted that were illegal for them to take before.
  
  Oh, and all the people who are down here in the gutter with you talking about how you're all going to rule the world when it all crumbles? They're lying. Someone has to clean the toilets, and if you don't know who - it's going to be you.
  
  It is CLEARLY established multiple times that you cannot regulate things differently based on whether they are charged for or given away for free.
  
  And it's also CLEARLY established that this doesn't have squat to do with the issue at hand. If you say "I am running a business," you need a business licence, whether you charge for it or not. The case law you brought in was completely irrelevant.
  
  Thanks
  
  Signature
  
  "The Golden Town is the Golden Town no longer. They have sold their pillars for brass and their temples for money, they have made coins out of their golden doors. It is become a dark town full of trouble, there is no ease in its streets, beauty has left it and the old songs are gone." - Lord Dunsany, The Messengers
  
  {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[2513972].message }}

David McKee

14 years ago

Well... Time to get out the TOR networks and the hidden site hosting and begin black market, underground payment processors (Please pay in real gold).

Thanks

Signature

Are you an affiliate marketer? My site has tons of free stuff and 14,000 pages of Clickbank research. www.affiliatesledgehammer.com
Buy a Freedom Bulb! Don't let the government tell you what kind of light bulb you can use!

{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[2506454].message }}

cashcow

14 years ago

If the city of Philadelphia are claiming her hobby is a business then she should treat it as such and claim it on her taxes. There are far more tax breaks available for business owners. For instance she can claim her hosting costs, a portion of her rent or mortgage paid, etc. I'm sure in the end she'll come up with more than $300 in deductions. Not to count the fact she can claim any losses her business suffered for the year as well. We live in a great country that rewards entrepreneurs. So she should take advantage of it.

Yeah ... and possibly even be able to deduct the $300 fee for the license from her federal taxes!

Lee

Thanks

Signature

Gone Fishing

{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[2506628].message }}

Colin Palfrey

14 years ago

I think she would have a good case that she doesn't even own a blog.

That blog is a sub-domain of Wordpress.com, and they clearly state that they retain ownership, and can close the blog anytime they like. She doesn't own a blog, she just wrote on someone else's web property, and therefore the blog isn't legally hers.

Thanks
1 reply

Signature

I write articles and eBooks - PM me for details!

{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[2506681].message }}

Mr. Subtle 14 years ago

Even though small-time bloggers aren't exactly raking in the dough, the city requires privilege licenses for any business engaged in any "activity for profit," says tax attorney Michael Mandale of Center City law firm Mandale Kaufmann. This applies "whether or not they earned a profit during the preceding year," he adds.

So even if your blog collects a handful of hits a day, as long as there's the potential for it to be lucrative — and, as Mandale points out, most hosting sites set aside space for bloggers to sell advertising — the city thinks you should cut it a check. According to Andrea Mannino of the Philadelphia Department of Revenue, in fact, simply choosing the option to make money from ads — regardless of how much or little money is actually generated — qualifies a blog as a business. The same rules apply to freelance writers. As former City Paper news editor Doron Taussig once lamented, the city considers freelancers — which both Bess and Barry are, in addition to their blog work — "businesses," and requires them to pay for a license and pay taxes on their profits, on top of their state and federal taxes.

The city of Philly found out about Bess because she reported the $50 she earned on her income taxes. She also states (on her blog too) that she is a freelance writer.
- [ 1 ] Thanks
Signature
{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[2506762].message }}

funkynassau

14 years ago

That is outrageous! If she was a real biz she'd have deductions galore and she'd be able to write off that fee too.

Thanks
1 reply

Signature

ChipFixx custom mixed auto touchup paint kits.
http://www.chipfixx.ca

{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[2506823].message }}

jacktackett

14 years ago

Originally Posted by funkynassau

That is outrageous! If she was a real biz she'd have deductions galore and she'd be able to write off that fee too.

and the payment of her business license would be deductible from her income - but she still has to pay.

look - if you're running a business you have to abide by the laws. If you don't like the law - either elect someone to change the law - or pack up and move somewhere else. Sucks big time I know.

Here in NC the state tried to force Amazon and other big online retailers to collect sales tax (since its citizens only reported like 50 bucks in sales tax and the state things that a bit underreported *) by claiming affiliates in the state created a nexus (aka a physical presence) in the state thus requiring them to collect tax. So did Amazon say ok and start collecting the tax or did they just kick every affiliate out of the program? They kicked every affiliate out of the program thus eliminating the nexus.

That didn't stop the state - after that they sent an NC court order to force Amazon to send in every purchase made by an NC state citizen in the last 7 years (7 yrs is our tax statue of limitations). Amazon said take a hike NC. They're fighting it out in court now.

I know of at least 3 former state residents who had to leave the state since most of their business relied on Amazon (hint - maybe you should not put all your revenue eggs in one basket eh?).

Personally I agree - such a business license is a pain, but the law is the law. If I were a corporation or LLC I'd have to pay a very large business license tax as well here in NC/Wake county. But since I've stayed a sole proprietor I don't have to pay that for my classification. However - there are at least 3 bills in the state legislature and a motion in our local city council to close that loop hole and make people like us pay a license fee. So given the economic situation we find ourselves in - I fully expect to have to pay a license next year.

--Jack

(*) I'm being a bit of a smart a** here - I have no idea what the real amount is - but it was obviously way under reported.)

Thanks
1 reply

Signature

Let's get Tim the kidney he needs!HELP Tim

Mega Monster WSO for KimW http://ow.ly/4JdHm

{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[2507319].message }}

greyhat-greenstacks

14 years ago

It doesn't matter which way you spin the reasoning behind charging a blogger to do what they love, it holds its rediculousness.

Thanks
3 replies

Signature

HCG - HCG Weight Loss

{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[2507332].message }}

Steven Carl Kelly

14 years ago

Originally Posted by greyhat-greenstacks

It doesn't matter which way you spin the reasoning behind charging a blogger to do what they love, it holds its rediculousness.

So you're saying that if a guy LOVES selling hot dogs all day, Philadelphia shouldn't require him to have a license for his hot dog cart?

[ 1 ] Thanks
3 replies

Signature

Read this SURPRISING REPORT Before You Buy ANY WSO! Click Here
FREE REPORT: Split Test Your Landing Pages the Easy Way

{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[2507389].message }}

theemperor

14 years ago

Originally Posted by Steven Carl Kelly

So you're saying that if a guy LOVES selling hot dogs all day, Philadelphia shouldn't require him to have a license for his hot dog cart?

So you are saying that the state should require you to have a license to do anything that makes money whatsoever?

Thanks
1 reply

Signature

Learn to code faster, and remove the roadblocks. Get stuff done and shipped! PM me and I can help you with programming tutoring, specialising in Web and the following languages: Javascript ~ HTML ~ CSS ~ React ~ JQuery ~ Typescript ~ NodeJS ~ C#.

{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[2507404].message }}

Steven Carl Kelly

14 years ago

Originally Posted by theemperor

So you are saying that the state should require you to have a license to do anything that makes money whatsoever?

If the city (not state, in this case) where you operate your business requires a license, then you should have to purchase a license. Unless you feel the law doesn't apply equally to everyone.

[ 2 ] Thanks
1 reply

Signature

Read this SURPRISING REPORT Before You Buy ANY WSO! Click Here
FREE REPORT: Split Test Your Landing Pages the Easy Way

{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[2507437].message }}

theemperor

14 years ago

Originally Posted by Steven Carl Kelly

If the city (not state, in this case) where you operate your business requires a license, then you should have to purchase a license. Unless you feel the law doesn't apply equally to everyone.

I think you missed the point by about ... 100 yards.

I am not debating you should run your business by the law.

I am saying the law in this case is wrong and a law where you pay $300 even if you just wash your neighbours car for $10 (or make $10 from adsense) and that is all you do all year, is clearly wrong!!

Sorry when I said the "state" I meant the generic term i.e. the government of your country, who ultimately allow such laws to exist, even if defined at a more local level such as a city.

Thanks

Signature

Learn to code faster, and remove the roadblocks. Get stuff done and shipped! PM me and I can help you with programming tutoring, specialising in Web and the following languages: Javascript ~ HTML ~ CSS ~ React ~ JQuery ~ Typescript ~ NodeJS ~ C#.

{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[2511005].message }}

Gary King 14 years ago

Originally Posted by greyhat-greenstacks

It doesn't matter which way you spin the reasoning behind charging a blogger to do what they love, it holds its rediculousness.

If she's making 50 bucks in "the last few" years and doesn't currently have a full time job (as the article states) she should GET a full time job. I realize that not everyone looking for a job at the moment can find one, but seriously, 50 bucks?

She should not accept payment for her services or not put ads on her blog (if they are there, I didn't visit it). Otherwise, it's a FAILING business, but it's still a business.

I LOVE making money, lots of it. I truly wish I could get the government to not charge me for doing what I love.

Yes, it's crazy that a business license is $300 for a $25/year (or whatever menial sum) business, but how do you draw the line with business that are just not turning a profit?

If we can say "hey, this is a hobby, I'm making multiple six figures, but it's not a business", then I'm in. Those that are "real" (however that gets defined, I guess they purchased their license in advance) businesses, get slapped with their fees even if they are losing money.

Originally Posted by Steven Carl Kelly

So you're saying that if a guy LOVES selling hot dogs all day, Philadelphia shouldn't require him to have a license for his hot dog cart?

mmm... hot dogs... oh yeah, agreed Steven.
- Thanks
Signature

===========================
OFFLINERS! Warning: Unless You Know These Pricing Secrets, You are Leaving THOUSANDS on the Table. Get Your Free Report Now.
{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[2507483].message }}

Dan C. Rinnert

14 years ago

Originally Posted by Steven Carl Kelly

So you're saying that if a guy LOVES selling hot dogs all day, Philadelphia shouldn't require him to have a license for his hot dog cart?

What does the business license accomplish, other than padding the city's coffers so the politicians can spend it?

The minimum wage in Pennsylvania is $7.25 an hour. So, if someone wants to take the risk of being an entrepreneur, they have to sacrifice a week's wages to do it. And that will serve to discourage entrepreneurship rather than encourage it. It discourages the less affluent from getting ahead.

Will someone who makes fifty bucks or less a year be willing to pay $300? I suspect a lot would drop AdSense or affiliate programs or whatever rather than have to pay $300, which, in the story's example, is 6 times the annual earnings.

So, now instead of collecting taxes on that extra $50 of income, Philadelphia may collect zero additional taxes on $0 of extra income. And, if some people simply decide to up and move, the city takes a larger hit.

[ 1 ] Thanks
3 replies

Signature

Dan's content is irregularly read by handfuls of people. Join the elite few by reading his blog: dcrBlogs.com, following him on Twitter: dcrTweets.com or reading his fiction: dcrWrites.com but NOT by Clicking Here!

Dan also writes content for hire, but you can't afford him anyway.

{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[2507513].message }}

Steven Carl Kelly

14 years ago

Originally Posted by Dan C. Rinnert

What does the business license accomplish, other than padding the city's coffers so the politicians can spend it?

The minimum wage in Pennsylvania is $7.25 an hour. So, if someone wants to take the risk of being an entrepreneur, they have to sacrifice a week's wages to do it. And that will serve to discourage entrepreneurship rather than encourage it. It discourages the less affluent from getting ahead.

So? I'm not involved in that debate.

Thanks

Signature

Read this SURPRISING REPORT Before You Buy ANY WSO! Click Here
FREE REPORT: Split Test Your Landing Pages the Easy Way

{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[2507528].message }}

Gary King

14 years ago

Originally Posted by Michael Oksa

What if she would have made $35 from the blog?
What if she would have made $20 from the blog?
What if she would have made $5 from the blog?

Just pointing out that it works both ways.
All the best,
Michael

MAN, I need a better avatar!

http://www.warriorforum.com/main-int...ng-fee.html#44

Originally Posted by Steven Carl Kelly

EXACTLY!
She only made $50, but HOW MUCH she made isn't relevant at all.

Agreed, see above.

Originally Posted by Dan C. Rinnert

Will someone who makes fifty bucks or less a year be willing to pay $300? I suspect a lot would drop AdSense or affiliate programs or whatever rather than have to pay $300, which, in the story's example, is 6 times the annual earnings.

Your position is understood Dan, but where's the bottom? Hopefully they wouldn't pay $300 to "make" $50, but hey, it's their business to do so. Where is the limit that says it's a "business"?

If someone thinks they will make a million but loses a million instead, can they say they didn't mean it and get their license fees back?

Can someone that does make a million agree to pay their fee after getting caught? Difficult questions all around.

Thanks

Signature

===========================

OFFLINERS! Warning: Unless You Know These Pricing Secrets, You are Leaving THOUSANDS on the Table. Get Your Free Report Now.

{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[2507957].message }}

Lance K

14 years ago

Originally Posted by Dan C. Rinnert

What does the business license accomplish, other than padding the city's coffers so the politicians can spend it?

The minimum wage in Pennsylvania is $7.25 an hour. So, if someone wants to take the risk of being an entrepreneur, they have to sacrifice a week's wages to do it. And that will serve to discourage entrepreneurship rather than encourage it. It discourages the less affluent from getting ahead.

If someone isn't willing to sacrifice a weeks worth of wages to start a business, being an entrepreneur probably isn't going to work out that well for them anyway.

If free enterprise equaled zero friction, there wouldn't be any employees left.

Thanks

Signature

"You can have everything in life you want if you will just help enough other people get what they want."
~ Zig Ziglar

{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[2508320].message }}

theemperor 14 years ago

Yes it is rediculous. I was about to say how in the UK it is much better, then I realised we have a little thing called "National Insurance" with a different band for self employed, which soaks up a few quid each month, regardless of profit or loss of the business. Lucily it doesn't need to be coughed up all at once.
- Thanks
Signature
Learn to code faster, and remove the roadblocks. Get stuff done and shipped! PM me and I can help you with programming tutoring, specialising in Web and the following languages: Javascript ~ HTML ~ CSS ~ React ~ JQuery ~ Typescript ~ NodeJS ~ C#.
{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[2507396].message }}
Michael Oksa 14 years ago

Originally Posted by greyhat-greenstacks

It doesn't matter which way you spin the reasoning behind charging a blogger to do what they love, it holds its rediculousness.

Not really. They're not charging because the blogger is blogging. They are charging because the blogger was also earning money, and thereby operating as a business according to local law.

Also, what if "what they love" happens to be earning money?

~Michael
- Thanks
Signature

"Ich bin en fuego!"
{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[2507621].message }}

crazyjohn2121

14 years ago

wow, that is pretty nuts. Let's hope it doesn't spread to other places

Thanks

{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[2507065].message }}

Steven Carl Kelly

14 years ago

What if she would have made $500 from the blog?
What if she would have made $900 from the blog?
What if she would have made $1500 from the blog?
What if she would have made $7500 from the blog?

[ 1 ] Thanks
1 reply

Signature

Read this SURPRISING REPORT Before You Buy ANY WSO! Click Here
FREE REPORT: Split Test Your Landing Pages the Easy Way

{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[2507144].message }}

Michael Oksa

14 years ago

Originally Posted by Steven Carl Kelly

What if she would have made $500 from the blog?
What if she would have made $900 from the blog?
What if she would have made $1500 from the blog?
What if she would have made $7500 from the blog?

What if she would have made $35 from the blog?
What if she would have made $20 from the blog?
What if she would have made $5 from the blog?

Just pointing out that it works both ways.

As to whether or not the law applies equally to everyone, I think it should, and there's an easy way to do it.

Re-write to have limit of some kind. Say $150, or whatever. It sounds like they found out about her AFTER she earned the money, so setting a cap at which the $300 licensing would kick in shouldn't be too difficult.

That being said, it is ultimately up to each and everyone of us to know what the regulations are within our prospective jurisdictions. Do you know yours? (I mean yours collectively, not specifically).

My guess is that most of us think we know. A lot of towns and cities publish them online. You can also check with your local clerk of courts, or city hall.

All the best,
Michael

Thanks
2 replies

Signature

"Ich bin en fuego!"

{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[2507487].message }}

Steven Carl Kelly

14 years ago

Originally Posted by Michael Oksa

What if she would have made $35 from the blog?
What if she would have made $20 from the blog?
What if she would have made $5 from the blog?

EXACTLY!

She only made $50, but HOW MUCH she made isn't relevant at all. There are thousands of businesses operating in Philadelphia today that aren't making a DIME and are, in fact, bleeding money. Yet all of them still have to pay for a business license.

Thanks
2 replies

Signature

Read this SURPRISING REPORT Before You Buy ANY WSO! Click Here
FREE REPORT: Split Test Your Landing Pages the Easy Way

{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[2507504].message }}

Michael Oksa

14 years ago

Originally Posted by Steven Carl Kelly

EXACTLY!

She only made $50, but HOW MUCH she made isn't relevant at all. There are thousands of businesses operating in Philadelphia today that aren't making a DIME and are, in fact, bleeding money. Yet all of them still have to pay for a business license.

True. But WHY do they have to pay that license? Is it because it's a separate location? Does it cost the city some money as far as infrastructure goes?

Is there anything wrong with setting a tripping point for the licensing fee to kick in for online businesses? See, all it would take is a re-wording of the law. Let's face it, online businesses are NOT the same as offline ones.

I'm not saying there shouldn't be a licensing fee, the only thing I'm debating is if the current rules in Philadelphia couldn't be improved.

Regardless, as the law stands now, she needs to pay it. It may suck, but that's the way it is, at least until the law changes.

All the best,
Michael

[ 1 ] Thanks
1 reply

Signature

"Ich bin en fuego!"

{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[2507609].message }}

Steven Wagenheim

14 years ago

I wish I lived in Philly right now so I could drag this right to the Supreme
Court. This is the most ridiculous thing I've heard since I've been on this
planet...and that's a damn long time.

Almost tempted to move there and give them my reply when they try to
tax me.

But sadly, I have to live in the garbage dump state of the US.

Oh well...can't have everything I guess.

Thanks
1 reply

Signature

My Soundcloud Music Channel

{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[2508565].message }}

Tim Franklin

14 years ago

Originally Posted by Steven Wagenheim

I wish I lived in Philly right now so I could drag this right to the Supreme
Court. This is the most ridiculous thing I've heard since I've been on this
planet...and that's a damn long time.

Almost tempted to move there and give them my reply when they try to
tax me.

But sadly, I have to live in the garbage dump state of the US.

Oh well...can't have everything I guess.

Dude, your never going to believe this but when I looked at your post, (above,) I said out loud to myself, he must live in New Jersey, I then looked over at your info and sure enough, I ROFL, for a half hour.

Thanks

Signature

Bitcoin | Crypto | Blockchain Secrets |

{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[2512979].message }}

scrofford

14 years ago

Originally Posted by Steven Carl Kelly

EXACTLY!

She only made $50, but HOW MUCH she made isn't relevant at all. There are thousands of businesses operating in Philadelphia today that aren't making a DIME and are, in fact, bleeding money. Yet all of them still have to pay for a business license.

Forgive me if I'm wrong, but I wonder how relevant it is that her blog is on the internet? Internet business is on the internet. Not in a state or country. So even though the states or countries require a business license, is it something that can be enforced because the business or blog is actually not in that state or country. It may be accessed by the owner there, but it is also accessed by people all over the world. How can a city, state or country enforce something like this? It's not like an internet business is a brick and mortar business where the physical place is in a city or town or state.

Now I understand that taxes can be enforced because that is money earned from the business, yet it doesn't matter where the person lives. In the U.S. the IRS taxes us if we make money-it doesn't matter how. But I don't see especially in this situation how it can be enforced. Maybe I'm missing something.

Thanks

{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[2507872].message }}

David McKee

14 years ago

Originally Posted by Michael Oksa

... Just pointing out that it works both ways.

As to whether or not the law applies equally to everyone, I think it should, and there's an easy way to do it.

Re-write to have limit of some kind. Say $150, or whatever. It sounds like they found out about her AFTER she earned the money, so setting a cap at which the $300 licensing would kick in shouldn't be too difficult.

That being said, it is ultimately up to each and everyone of us to know what the regulations are within our prospective jurisdictions. Do you know yours? (I mean yours collectively, not specifically).

My guess is that most of us think we know. A lot of towns and cities publish them online. You can also check with your local clerk of courts, or city hall...

Nope... Blogs are speech and as such should be free. If I tell my neighbor about a great deal at some store over my fence, I don;t expect that I have to pay a tax for telling him that... Same thing if I do it on a blog,. and if I make income from it - hell I am already paying taxes!

It should not apply to anyone - the damn politicians are simply stupid people too dumb/lazy/whatever to make it on their own so they subscribe to the "Might makes Right" code of taking from the achievers because they themselves could not achieve.

I will do whatever it takes to avoid their spurious charges and payments, TOR networks, re-hosting in other countries, whatever. I would rather spend the money avoiding these idiots - it gives a kind of warm fuzzy feeling every-time you outwit a politician...even though it is not too hard.

Atlas Shrugged!

-DTM

Thanks
1 reply

Signature

Are you an affiliate marketer? My site has tons of free stuff and 14,000 pages of Clickbank research. www.affiliatesledgehammer.com
Buy a Freedom Bulb! Don't let the government tell you what kind of light bulb you can use!

{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[2511186].message }}

Michael Oksa

14 years ago

Originally Posted by David McKee

Nope... Blogs are speech and as such should be free. If I tell my neighbor about a great deal at some store over my fence, I don;t expect that I have to pay a tax for telling him that... Same thing if I do it on a blog,. and if I make income from it - hell I am already paying taxes!

It should not apply to anyone - the damn politicians are simply stupid people too dumb/lazy/whatever to make it on their own so they subscribe to the "Might makes Right" code of taking from the achievers because they themselves could not achieve.

I will do whatever it takes to avoid their spurious charges and payments, TOR networks, re-hosting in other countries, whatever. I would rather spend the money avoiding these idiots - it gives a kind of warm fuzzy feeling every-time you outwit a politician...even though it is not too hard.

Atlas Shrugged!

-DTM

Are you reading everything I wrote? If so, you would see my point.

The words on blogs are speech. The ads or other revenue streams are sources of income. Newspapers and other news outlets are not taxed for printing or airing words, they are, however, taxed for the revenues generated through advertising.

They are NOT being charged for having a blog. Their WORDS do NOT require a licensing fee. IF they were being charged to simply express themselves (which they are NOT being charged for) then THAT would be unconstitutional.

They are being charged for EARNING MONEY, which according to LOCAL ordinance makes them a business.

Furthermore, if you refer freinds to a business and you GET PAID by that business for referring them, that is income.

Again, I think the current policy is flawed, but as it stands, it IS constitutional.

But stop assuming you know my feelings on such things based on my comments. I am not saying it's a good policy, I'm only trying to explain the basics (and they are the basics) of the Constitution.

All the best,
Michael

Thanks

Signature

"Ich bin en fuego!"

{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[2511586].message }}

dannyadams

Banned 14 years ago

[DELETED]

{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[2511776].message }}

Dan C. Rinnert

14 years ago

Originally Posted by dannyadams

That is EXACTLY what they are doing. If a business license is required to have a blog that makes money, you'd need the license BEFORE you made a profit. Making a profit without the license would be a crime. Therefor it would be impossible for them to "only charge for blogs that make money".

If the blogger does not put any form of monetization on their blog, it will not make money and thus would not require a business license. But, as soon as they put up an AdSense block, they are (at least according to the city of Philadelphia) a business and must have a business license.

Thanks

Signature

Dan's content is irregularly read by handfuls of people. Join the elite few by reading his blog: dcrBlogs.com, following him on Twitter: dcrTweets.com or reading his fiction: dcrWrites.com but NOT by Clicking Here!

Dan also writes content for hire, but you can't afford him anyway.

{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[2511790].message }}

dirtdigger

14 years ago

Maybe someone in Philly should start tracking government employees and every time they have a garage sale or do some type of side income producing activity turn them in to the city. It might start hitting home.

Thanks

{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[2507155].message }}

Lucky500

14 years ago

That is ridiculous. Let's hope this does not become a trend.

Thanks

{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[2507606].message }}

ChickenMan

14 years ago

This is wrong on so many levels. Making money off a blog is no different from making money from selling stuff at a yard sale, flea market, etc. if you do it all the time.

This is pretty unconstitutional.

Thanks
1 reply

Signature

If money grew on trees, we'd all die from a lack of oxygen.

{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[2507640].message }}

Michael Oksa

14 years ago

Originally Posted by ChickenMan

This is wrong on so many levels. Making money off a blog is no different from making money from selling stuff at a yard sale, flea market, etc. if you do it all the time.

This is pretty unconstitutional.

How in the world is it unconstitutional? As long as the laws are on the books, and haven't been struck down by a higher court, they are the law. And seeing as to how the Rule of Law is what the Constitution is about, I would say it IS constitutional. It may suck, but I don't see any valid constitutionaliy arguments here.

Furthermore, most municipalities have rules in place to take care of those who do those things "all the time". At some point what is being touted as a yard sale or flea market could be considered a business, and subject to similar licensing fees.

All the best,
Michael

Thanks
1 reply

Signature

"Ich bin en fuego!"

{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[2507672].message }}

ChickenMan

14 years ago

Originally Posted by Michael Oksa

How in the world is it unconstitutional? As long as the laws are on the books, and haven't been struck down by a higher court, they are the law. And seeing as to how the Rule of Law is what the Constitution is about, I would say it IS constitutional. It may suck, but I don't see any valid constitutionaliy arguments here.

Furthermore, most municipalities have rules in place to take care of those who do those things "all the time". At some point what is being touted as a yard sale or flea market could be considered a business, and subject to similar licensing fees.

All the best,
Michael

Because the taxes and fees outweigh the income she's earning, which is not even much. Hell, IRS won't even bother to tax anyone for something that small. That's how it's unconstitutional. Yes, there are rules but guess what - slavery was a rule, separate but equal was a rule, etc.

But my business law professor put it in a better prospective - it may be "legal" but that doesn't make it ethical and it doesn't make it right. It's just corrupt government getting greedier and greedier imo.

A lot of the comments in that article and one linked to it bring up similar cases - should lemonade stands be taxed and required to pay a few? What about people selling a few goods on eBay. What about Girl Scouts selling cookies.

Thanks
1 reply

Signature

If money grew on trees, we'd all die from a lack of oxygen.

{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[2507723].message }}

Michael Oksa

14 years ago

Originally Posted by ChickenMan

Because the taxes and fees outweigh the income she's earning, which is not even much. Hell, IRS won't even bother to tax anyone for something that small. That's how it's unconstitutional. Yes, there are rules but guess what - slavery was a rule, separate but equal was a rule, etc.

But my business law professor put it in a better prospective - it may be "legal" but that doesn't make it ethical and it doesn't make it right. It's just corrupt government getting greedier and greedier imo.

A lot of the comments in that article and one linked to it bring up similar cases - should lemonade stands be taxed and required to pay a few? What about people selling a few goods on eBay. What about Girl Scouts selling cookies.

No, but it does keep it constitutional.

Girl Scouts are not the same. They don't create the product, and they don't keep their profits either.

~Michael

Thanks

Signature

"Ich bin en fuego!"

{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[2507764].message }}

Tim Franklin

14 years ago

We interrupt your normally over hyped programming to display the following message. One moment please...

This has been tried over and over again and it has never been enforceable, in this case it will be the same, a blog does not meet the definition of a business even in the city so it is just a hyped up story.

Sure it is dramatic, sure it is hype, sure it sounds scary, but that is the way the media is, in the end a blog does not nor will it ever meet the minimum definition of what a business is, unless and until, it meets the minimum 601.00 dollar's in profits which will then generate a 1099 from the IRS, then it is a taxable entity, but still it might not be a business.

Simple as that,
we now return you to your scheduled over hyped programming.

[ 2 ] Thanks

Signature

Bitcoin | Crypto | Blockchain Secrets |

{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[2507787].message }}

ChickenMan

14 years ago

Couldn't have said it better.

No, but it does keep it constitutional.

Girl Scouts are not the same. They don't create the product, and they don't keep their profits either.

~Michael

Excessive taxation without any representation? Seems unconstitutional to me.

Thanks
1 reply

Signature

If money grew on trees, we'd all die from a lack of oxygen.

{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[2507793].message }}

Michael Oksa

14 years ago

Originally Posted by ChickenMan

Couldn't have said it better.

Excessive taxation without any representation? Seems unconstitutional to me.

Nope. Just taxation without representation. No word about "excessive".

I won't mention my specific beliefs, but I have the feeling people reading my comments in this thread will get the wrong idea. Very wrong.

@Tim, she's not being taxed for blogging. She's being required to follow local law because she is making money with her blog and considered a business because if it.

It's sort of like a newspaper. They aren't taxed for writing news stories (always loved that oxymoron), but they are taxed for ad revenues.

All the best,
Michael

Thanks
1 reply

Signature

"Ich bin en fuego!"

{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[2507827].message }}

Bill Farnham

14 years ago

Originally Posted by sbucciarel

Yep ... this is what I would do if forced to pay it. Nickel and dime them to death with business expenses. I'd probably even go out and buy some new equipment to claim and start outsourcing a bunch so I could claim it.

Where we're at we have to pay taxes yearly on all equipment we claim for business use.

So buying 'new equipment' would just increase the taxes we'd need to pay regardless of profit or loss.

Not sure what the strategy is here...

~Bill

Thanks

Signature

{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[2507839].message }}

cashcow

14 years ago

Well I bet she's getting a lot of people to her blog because of it!

Thanks

Signature

Gone Fishing

{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[2507799].message }}

dannyadams

Banned 14 years ago

[DELETED]

{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[2507832].message }}

Michael Oksa

14 years ago

Originally Posted by dannyadams

Since the constitutionality of this issue was raised, I felt like giving my opinion.

I read the article and it does not say that she was required to get a license because she made money. The article mentions nothing like that at all. The article says that she made money through Ehow and her blog but never says that the fee was required because she made money.

If they are requiring a business license for ALL blogs, in my view, that would be a violation of the first amendment.

According to this article, it seems pretty clear that EARNING MONEY is exactly what triggered the fee.

Philly requiring bloggers to pay $300 for a business license | Washington Examiner

One person only made $11 over 2 years and had to pay it. (!)

No where does it say they are being made to pay to publish words on a blog. THAT would be unconstitutional.

All the best,
Michael

Thanks

Signature

"Ich bin en fuego!"

{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[2507842].message }}

dannyadams

Banned 14 years ago

[DELETED]

{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[2509436].message }}

Terry Crim

14 years ago

I didn't read anything there that came from the city itself, what I read was personal opinion than factual statement directly from the city.

"To the city of Philadelphia, it's a potential moneymaker, and the city wants its cut."

That is an opinion from the article author.

Yes, I get what you are saying about how the city wants it's share and that is the main topic that keeps this thread going that government stepping in and taking as much as they can.

My view is this.

These rules as far as I understand it are not new, right? That there is a fee for any business located in the city. The fee may or may not have gone up, but the rule is there in city law.

The question is what is and is not a business?

I would think that this would be clearly stated in some documentation provided by the city AND if not in the law itself, or addendum.

If not, there could be a possible loophole that the blogger could use to get out of paying this fee at least this time until an addendum is filed for this law.

Question I have is why didn't the blogger know that accepting money wouldn't be considered doing business, she filed taxes for it. Which is how the city found out about it in the first place.

I get both sides of this issue and have been around long enough to realize not everyone thinks the same. I also agree with and want less government regulation, taxes etc... but the thing is, these rules are there and have been for some time.

It is not about tax on freedom of speech or on blogging it is a one time lifetime fee that the city of Philadelphia imposes on businesses operating within the city. This blogger filed I assume a self income tax on this blogging ad monies. Which puts this activity for this person under the classification as a business activity and requires the one time fee to the city.

This could be just a tax issue, not filed correctly and obviously an ignorance issue with not knowing about this city law.

Either way my view on this is this blogger needs professional guidance from both a business lawyer and a Certified Public Accountant.

Whether the city should or should not impose this fee on this blogger or all bloggers, I see it as if they intend to make money through their activity and it falls under the city's business rule where businesses have to file this one time fee. Yes, the city should.

Ignorance is not an excuse or defense, that's how I see it. Would it be possible for this blogger to get out of paying this? I would like to see some loophole she could use such as something that limits revenue under certain amount to not be classified as a business. I don't live there so no idea.

- T

Originally Posted by dannyadams

It actually says just the opposite. Quoting from the article...

"To the city of Philadelphia, it's a potential moneymaker, and the city wants its cut."

What I see is "Potential Moneymaker". Is someone who writes about their family vacations a "Potential Moneymaker"? What about someone who comments on politics or religion?

I agree with you that it is a states rights issue but the constitution still applies. We can't claim the 10th without claiming the 1st.

If she needs to pay a $300 license fee, ALL BLOGS, profitable or not will have to have that license in order to operate in that jurisdiction.

If a blog is an entity that requires a license, profit has nothing to do with it. If someone cuts hair for free in their basement and only cuts friends and relatives, in my jurisdiction they need to be licensed. If someone does security work and looks after a friends business, they need to be a licensed security guard whether they charge or not.

It has absolutely nothing to do with how much money, if any, the entity makes. Charging to earn is what taxes are for. Charging for the right to be in a certain profession is what business licenses are for.

@The guy who was talking about bringing this to SCOTUS...First of all, they'd probably never take the case. Second of all, if they do, it will be 4 years minimum before it's heard. By that time, none of this will matter.

Thanks

{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[2510032].message }}

Dan C. Rinnert

14 years ago

Originally Posted by dannyadams

If she needs to pay a $300 license fee, ALL BLOGS, profitable or not will have to have that license in order to operate in that jurisdiction.

Only if those blogs have some sort of potential profit mechanism, such as AdSense or affiliate programs. If they have no ads or any means of earning even a cent of money, then they would not be considered a business and thus not subject to the fee.

[ 2 ] Thanks

Signature

Dan's content is irregularly read by handfuls of people. Join the elite few by reading his blog: dcrBlogs.com, following him on Twitter: dcrTweets.com or reading his fiction: dcrWrites.com but NOT by Clicking Here!

Dan also writes content for hire, but you can't afford him anyway.

{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[2510417].message }}

dannyadams

Banned 14 years ago

[DELETED]

{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[2511792].message }}

Dan C. Rinnert

14 years ago

Originally Posted by dannyadams

Business licenses are not licenses to make money. They are licenses to perform the duty.

Based on your logic...
What if I start a blog with no ads on it? I don't need a license. But if I decide to put ads on it, do I need a license before or after I put the ads up?

If I get the license before I made any money, they would be charging me for MY WORDS. That is a CLEAR violation of free speech.

if I got the license after I made money, it's a 300% tax...NOT a business license.

If you start a blog with no ads on it and no monetization methods, then you wouldn't need a license.

Once you decide you want to make money with your blog, then it becomes a business. So, before you can start putting up ads, you need a business license.

You are not being charged for your words at all. You are being charged for the opportunity to operate a business within Philadelphia.

Thanks

Signature

Dan's content is irregularly read by handfuls of people. Join the elite few by reading his blog: dcrBlogs.com, following him on Twitter: dcrTweets.com or reading his fiction: dcrWrites.com but NOT by Clicking Here!

Dan also writes content for hire, but you can't afford him anyway.

{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[2511803].message }}

Steven Carl Kelly 14 years ago

Originally Posted by dannyadams

If I get the license before I made any money, they would be charging me for MY WORDS. That is a CLEAR violation of free speech.

No, it is NOT. Not even CLOSE.
- Thanks
Signature

Read this SURPRISING REPORT Before You Buy ANY WSO! Click Here
FREE REPORT: Split Test Your Landing Pages the Easy Way
{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[2511824].message }}

Tim Franklin

14 years ago

Seriously folks, this is just hype, there is nothing to this story, when you see ABC or Fox cover this story then it will carry some weight, otherwise, it is just a lot of speculation.

This has been tried in several states, and it has never stood up to a legal challenge.

So dont worry, it is not the end of the world, LOL,

the sky is not falling, If I had a buck for every time I got a letter in the mail asking for money I would be rich.

[ 1 ] Thanks

Signature

Bitcoin | Crypto | Blockchain Secrets |

{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[2507893].message }}

ChickenMan

14 years ago

I think I might ask my professor about this. I mean this is highly unethnical

Michael, in this case, there's no real revenue. It's not even a business because she's not providing a service or product to begin.

This is just a ridiculous and it can be classified as unconstitutional.

Thanks
2 replies

Signature

If money grew on trees, we'd all die from a lack of oxygen.

{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[2507894].message }}

Gary King

14 years ago

Originally Posted by ChickenMan

I think I might ask my professor about this. I mean this is highly unethnical

Michael, in this case, there's no real revenue. It's not even a business because she's not providing a service or product to begin.

This is just a ridiculous and it can be classified as unconstitutional.

Unethical - agreed.

Unconstitutional - still don't buy it.

Hype - absolutely - it's what makes news stories.

It may drive you insane that she's being asked to pay money when she earned so little, but she IS providing a service or product - she's getting paid to write for ehow.com and apparently somehow monetizing her blog.

[ 1 ] Thanks

Signature

===========================

OFFLINERS! Warning: Unless You Know These Pricing Secrets, You are Leaving THOUSANDS on the Table. Get Your Free Report Now.

{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[2507938].message }}

Michael Oksa

14 years ago

Originally Posted by ChickenMan

I think I might ask my professor about this. I mean this is highly unethnical

Michael, in this case, there's no real revenue. It's not even a business because she's not providing a service or product to begin.

This is just a ridiculous and it can be classified as unconstitutional.

So the money just magically appeared out of thin air? There is REAL revenue, to the tune of $50.

Or maybe you were referring to leprechauns when you said "unethnical"?

Anyway, you are confusing the Constitution with ethics. Be sure to pay close attention to your professor when you talk to them.

All the best,
Michael

Thanks

Signature

"Ich bin en fuego!"

{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[2507949].message }}

Mike Antoni

14 years ago

All I can suggest is that we all go back and read Atlas Shrugged...

[ 1 ] Thanks

Signature

Check out my Affiliate Internet Marketing Blog, lots of cool free stuff. And make sure you take a peek at Trilateral Profits. Internet Marketing Management

{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[2507974].message }}

Niteprowler

14 years ago

Two issues here...

A business is any activity engaged in for profit. Clearly at $ 50 it would not be considered "for profit" and even the IRS would consider it a hobby. Of course municipalities write their own laws... but this is a stretch to really consider it a business. Do they consider yard sales a business. I wonder if they make paperboys pay $ 300 bucks for a license... or kids shoveling snow in the winter or mowing grass in the summer....

What is inequitable is that this is a law that is largely unenforceable... simply because compliance would be voluntary and almost impossible to track.

Surely a city the size of Philly can come up with a better way to raise tax revenue than to tax hobbyists making a few measly bucks a year. They need some smarter minds writing laws that are more reasonable... and equitable.

Thanks

Signature

"The simple secret of the universe is that you create your own reality" - Edgar D. Mitchell

{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[2507989].message }}

Steven Carl Kelly

14 years ago

PEOPLE:

This is NOT a tax. She is not being TAXED. Please don't mix tax and business licensing together, they are distinct. Business licensing is NOT a tax.

Having a business "on the internet" does NOT excuse the business from local rules and regulations. Regardless of a business being "online" the business operates from a "base". In this case, her base is her home in Philadelphia. Thus, she is required to comply with the municipal laws where she is based.

So long as ALL similar businesses are required the same license, she is not being unfairly treated or discriminated against. Does it sound unfair because she only earned $50? Sure. But would it also sound unfair if she had earned $5,000?

Business licenses are not generally based on how much money a business makes, they are rather usually based on the TYPE of business that you intend to set up. You are supposed to have the license BEFORE you begin doing business, not AFTER you find out how much money you did or didn't earn.

Thanks
2 replies

Signature

Read this SURPRISING REPORT Before You Buy ANY WSO! Click Here
FREE REPORT: Split Test Your Landing Pages the Easy Way

{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[2508032].message }}

Tim Franklin

14 years ago

Originally Posted by Steven Carl Kelly

PEOPLE:

This is NOT a tax. She is not being TAXED. Please don't mix tax and business licensing together, they are distinct. Business licensing is NOT a tax.

Having a business "on the internet" does NOT excuse the business from local rules and regulations. Regardless of a business being "online" the business operates from a "base". In this case, her base is her home in Philadelphia. Thus, she is required to comply with the municipal laws where she is based.

So long as ALL similar businesses are required the same license, she is not being unfairly treated or discriminated against. Does it sound unfair because she only earned $50? Sure. But would it also sound unfair if she had earned $5,000?

Business licenses are not generally based on how much money a business makes, they are rather usually based on the TYPE of business that you intend to set up. You are supposed to have the license BEFORE you begin doing business, not AFTER you find out how much money you did or didn't earn.

Please let us know when the city prevails in this because they will be the first to do so, sorry I remain unconvinced that this story has legs, see this will never work, because, for one thing, if this logic were well founded in law, a person would require a "business license" for every place they do business online, all over the world, or just the US, how many states are there now?

Imagine if you had to buy a license for every single state, it just does not make any sense.

Thanks
1 reply

Signature

Bitcoin | Crypto | Blockchain Secrets |

{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[2508044].message }}

Steven Carl Kelly 14 years ago

Originally Posted by Tim Franklin

Please let us know when the city prevails in this because they will be the first to do so, sorry I remain unconvinced that this story has legs.

I doubt I'll keep up with the story, I have little interest in it, to be frank. It doesn't affect me, and whether the city prevails or does not isn't of much concern to myself.

However, a business license is generally a prerequisite to conducting business, not something you acquire as an afterthought.
- Thanks
Signature

Read this SURPRISING REPORT Before You Buy ANY WSO! Click Here
FREE REPORT: Split Test Your Landing Pages the Easy Way
{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[2508062].message }}

mcmahanusa

14 years ago

Originally Posted by Steven Carl Kelly

PEOPLE:

This is NOT a tax. She is not being TAXED. Please don't mix tax and business licensing together, they are distinct. Business licensing is NOT a tax.

Having a business "on the internet" does NOT excuse the business from local rules and regulations. Regardless of a business being "online" the business operates from a "base". In this case, her base is her home in Philadelphia. Thus, she is required to comply with the municipal laws where she is based.

So long as ALL similar businesses are required the same license, she is not being unfairly treated or discriminated against. Does it sound unfair because she only earned $50? Sure. But would it also sound unfair if she had earned $5,000?

Business licenses are not generally based on how much money a business makes, they are rather usually based on the TYPE of business that you intend to set up. You are supposed to have the license BEFORE you begin doing business, not AFTER you find out how much money you did or didn't earn.

Afraid I have to disagree with you on that one. While it is absolutely true that a licensing fee does not bear the title of a "tax", for all practical purposes it is a tax. You may call a milk cow by any name you choose, but it still remains a milk cow. In this country (other countries, too), governments choose to impose taxes but also choose to apply names such as "fees" and "licenses" and "permits", yet they are effectively taxes. Indeed, "hidden taxes" comprise a greater portion of our tax burden than income taxes and sales taxes.

[ 1 ] Thanks

Signature

Success is not to be pursued; it is to be attracted by the person you become - Jim Rohn

Visit our beautiful gardens

{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[2508187].message }}

Tim Franklin

14 years ago

Perhaps so Steven, I suspect after the dust settles, we wont hear anything else about this because it just is a non story, a municipality, (the "city" is entitled to charge for a license) for a valid legitimate business, which operates in or about the city or county property, since this is about commerce which transpires over state lines, the city has no recourse they can send a bill but it cannot be enforced.

Because the state controls interstate commerce not the city, that is why this will never be a story because the city has no legal ground to stand on.

Thanks

Signature

Bitcoin | Crypto | Blockchain Secrets |

{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[2508090].message }}

entrepreneurjay

14 years ago

Doesn't surprise me unfortunately I think it will spread like the plague eventually. Wherever the government can get their paws into your money they are gonna do so especially since so many states are so far in debt.

God I hope I am wrong!

Thanks

Signature

Mastering Blogging with Chat GPT: How to Make AI Generated Text Undetectable

{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[2508176].message }}

Niteprowler

14 years ago

The problem with such strict implementation and interpretation of laws is that it puts EVERY little hobby into the business category.

A business is a venture entered into for the generation of profit... not simply anything and everything that generates a dollar of income. At $ 50 of gross income there is no presumption of intent to make a profit imho... because there clearly would be no profit if any expenses are considered.

Where do we draw the line... the little old lady that does sewing alterations ? The kid shoveling snow for a few bucks ? The housewife that drives her neighbor to the store and takes gas money ? The list is endless... and there should clearly be a de minimus exemption for non-business / hobby income.

Sad how common sense takes a back seat to trying to squeeze every dollar possible out of every person.

Thanks

Signature

"The simple secret of the universe is that you create your own reality" - Edgar D. Mitchell

{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[2508216].message }}

Lance K

14 years ago

Originally Posted by Chris Kent

But $300 is harsh. Talk about an obstacle to entrepreneurism.

Tell me you're joking.

Thanks

Signature

"You can have everything in life you want if you will just help enough other people get what they want."
~ Zig Ziglar

{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[2508254].message }}

steve48135

14 years ago

Originally Posted by Chris Kent

She says it's a hobby, not a business. Unfortunately, anything that brings in money is a business and my guess is that this is why she and other bloggers registered such interest with their taxes. Otherwise, why did she bother?

But $300 is harsh. Talk about an obstacle to entrepreneurism. Governments can be so dumb when it comes to encouraging enterprise.

Encouraging new enterprise isn't in the governments interest right now. They'd rather make big money off the one's that are already profitable lol. What a shame though. Sometimes I sit back and think to myself "how is the little guy ever going to make it?":confused:

Thanks

{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[2508273].message }}

AcmeDude

14 years ago

That will have a somewhat impact for the bloggers in philadelphia. I dont think it makes sense since the hosting and domain is not in philadelphia. Its kinda sand that others that look on the blogging as a way of hobby are also charged like that

Thanks
1 reply

Signature

Affiliate Links are not allowed!

{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[2508280].message }}

Lee MacRae

14 years ago

The lifetime license fee is $300, made payable to the City of Philadelphia. Some businesses--such as out-of-state companies that do business in the City sporadically--may elect to pay a $50 annual fee.

Back in 2000. based on the US census. there were something like 18,443 cities, towns, villages etc in the USA. If they all decided to ask for a fee...

18,443 x $50 = $922,150.00

True, you may not sell to someone in all those places but selling over the internet makes it far more possible than 99% of brick and mortar businesses...the barrier to doing business over the net could become enormous.

Anyway

Philly....the check is in the mail :rolleyes:

Thanks
1 reply

{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[2508332].message }}

Lance K

14 years ago

Originally Posted by Lee MacRae

Back in 2000. based on the US census. there were something like 18,443 cities, towns, villages etc in the USA. If they all decided to ask for a fee...

18,443 x $50 = $922,150.00

True, you may not sell to someone in all those places but selling over the internet makes it far more possible than 99% of brick and mortar businesses...the barrier to doing business over the net could become enormous.

Anyway

Philly....the check is in the mail :rolleyes:

Just because you sell something to someone in Philly (or anywhere else) doesn't make Philly (or wherever the customer is located) the point of sale.

Thanks

Signature

"You can have everything in life you want if you will just help enough other people get what they want."
~ Zig Ziglar

{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[2508368].message }}

John Durham

14 years ago

what if half the time when she is writing her blog she is in another state?

Thanks

{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[2508446].message }}

Lauryn

14 years ago

It's becoming nothing short of amazing to see the levels governments will stoop to in order to squeeze financial blood from a turnip these days.

Thanks

Signature

I Go Hard = "Slanguage" for putting forth a lot of effort.

Don't be an arse and try to flip something you clearly have no knowledge of against me.

{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[2508490].message }}

pavionjsl

14 years ago

There is no justification for charging anyone to do a hobby, and that is what it is when you plow your 50.00 earned for the year back into your blog. That would be like taxing you for buying sneakers at an exorbitant rate just in case you win the Boston marathon. There are alot of people lately that forgot the message we all need to send is its not OK to run a city government over budget and take it out on anyone they can with a half a nothing reason. But on the other hand, a larger part of the people in PHILADELPHIA, want this kind of city management.........they voted for it.

Thanks

Signature

Dog Attacks Getting Worse In London

{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[2508549].message }}

mikemac1

14 years ago

The way I read the quoted material doesn't match what you said about receiving an order from someone in Philadelphia.

Lance - it's the following line from their website that need further clarification and some kind of precedent to establish what they are referring to...

This includes businesses that are located outside the city limits but do some or all of their business activities in the City.

We assume that this refers to the local surrounding suburbs of Philly but if the city can establish that you have done business within the city of Philadelphia and will continue to do so, they could ask for you to get a license.

I know for a fact that many major corps have opened offices within the city limits (even with just one or two people in them) to take some kind of advantage of the taxes here but the answers or clarifications to these laws/taxes/licenses/fees are best left to a professional and not my conjecture.

And let me just say one more thing and I don't want to speak for anyone else here but some of the people who have posted on this thread really need to just chill and understand that there has been a simple message throughout this...know matter where you live, there are laws/taxes/fees, etc. that you need to be aware of to be in business and that's what you are doing when you are making money online, you are in business, so I think it's safe to say no one is going to agree with this license fee (or tax or really any taxes) but like Matt and others have stated...run your business the right way and you won't have to worry about these sort of things.

If some people got as fired up or inspired about making their business successful as they do about this subject, they wouldn't be worried about $300.

[ 1 ] Thanks

{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[2508550].message }}

ChickenMan

14 years ago

Let me ask this to the ones who're actually agreeing with this bs rule - do you know what a business is?

This is not a business, it's a hobby. They can not force her to pay this fee for a license when she's not really running a business - providing a service or product. Her blog is her hobby, and her revenue from it is not even enough to be considered a business.

She does have enough to challenge this as a frivolous law and yes, like I said above, unconstitutional or at least imo it is.

Eighth Amendment to the United States Constitution - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Thanks
1 reply

Signature

If money grew on trees, we'd all die from a lack of oxygen.

{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[2508627].message }}

Michael Oksa

14 years ago

Originally Posted by ChickenMan

Let me ask this to the ones who're actually agreeing with this bs rule - do you know what a business is?

This is not a business, it's a hobby. They can not force her to pay this fee for a license when she's not really running a business - providing a service or product. Her blog is her hobby, and her revenue from it is not even enough to be considered a business.

She does have enough to challenge this as a frivolous law and yes, like I said above, unconstitutional or at least imo it is.

Eighth Amendment to the United States Constitution - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

The 8th Amendment refers to criminal offenses. She wasn't breaking the law.

It's also squarely in the realm of state's rights, so each jurisdiction can set different fines and bail for criminal offenses. So, even if it DID apply to her case (which it doesn't), it's not excessive. If somebody steals a gallon of gasoline, their fine may be much higher than $3.50 (or whatever the current cost is).

All the best,
Michael

Thanks
1 reply

Signature

"Ich bin en fuego!"

{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[2508776].message }}

seasoned

14 years ago

Originally Posted by Michael Oksa

The 8th Amendment refers to criminal offenses. She wasn't breaking the law.

It's also squarely in the realm of state's rights, so each jurisdiction can set different fines and bail for criminal offenses. So, even if it DID apply to her case (which it doesn't), it's not excessive. If somebody steals a gallon of gasoline, their fine may be much higher than $3.50 (or whatever the current cost is).

All the best,
Michael

Excessive bail shall not be required, nor excessive fines imposed, nor cruel and unusual punishments inflicted.

Thanks

{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[2510050].message }}

mikemac1

14 years ago

@ChickenMan - first of all, I don't think anyone is agreeing with this fee and second, before you post something get your facts straight and read the article, she made money not just from her blog but also as a freelance article writer and under the laws of the license, freelancers are required to pay the fee. You don't claim money you made from a hobby as income on your taxes and that is what she and the others did because they received 1099s which are earned income statements.

BTW, the BPT license has been around since 1985 and has been challenged many times before even by the city council of Philadelphia a few times, if any of you can get rid of it (even though many large and organized campaigns have been trying for 30 years), many here in Philadelphia will thank you.

Thanks

{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[2508647].message }}

BizmanJoe

14 years ago

I know the coffers of many cities are empty and they're trying to fill it but this bites it. The police in my area have been out in force writing tickets to drum up revenue for the city's coffers. It is so blatant, that people have been writing in to the local newspaper to complain and voice their opinions. I hope this is not a trend that will continue.

Thanks

{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[2508684].message }}

Lyn Woodring

14 years ago

After reading this thread I wonder if I have been asleep and woke up in a different country.
First my understanding of a business licensing fee, tax or whatever you call it was not to collect revenue but to protect the public at large. Since a business or a professional, Dr for instance, has the potential to harm the public the origional intent was regulation not revenue.
So this can be spun however you want but it still does not pass origional intent. IMO.
But then again not much that goes on in this country is lawful anyway.
A business is defined as any activity engaged in to make a profit. Profit meaning income not wages. Look it up sometime wages are not taxable even though they are taxed de facto. They force businesses to withhold and you to file to get them back. They don't get you on tax evasion but for perjury (for wage earners). Of course you can open a business...
Anyway my point is that whether something like this is lawful or not is not revelant (it isn't) but whether its de facto law (it is). The point of laws today are for the government's benefit not the people's.
In fact I'd go so far as say if courts was operating lawfully the governments would be found guilty of racketeering.

Thanks

{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[2509021].message }}

N4PGW

14 years ago

But $300 is harsh. Talk about an obstacle to entrepreneurism.

In some areas, business licenses are based on the earnings potential of a company. Computer businesses have one price and plumbers another. Would anyone here like to argue that this business does not have the potential of making $1,000,000 per year?

Thanks
1 reply

Signature

{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[2509120].message }}

seasoned

14 years ago

Originally Posted by N4PGW

In some areas, business licenses are based on the earnings potential of a company. Computer businesses have one price and plumbers another. Would anyone here like to argue that this business does not have the potential of making $1,000,000 per year?

I NEVER heard of that. what would be the point? USUALLY, they charge a base fee, and a percentage of assets. The business is declared elsewhere. Plumbers, fo example, need LICENSES!

Thanks
1 reply

{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[2510056].message }}

Terry Crim

14 years ago

Originally Posted by seasoned

I NEVER heard of that. what would be the point? USUALLY, they charge a base fee, and a percentage of assets. The business is declared elsewhere. Plumbers, fo example, need LICENSES!

I agree with Steve. Here there is fixed fee for each permit or license. Depending what it is you may have to take a test to prove you are qualified to get the license. Plumber, electrician etc... but those fees are a set price.

For business license, to operate a business in Iowa in my case I had to register with the city, register with the State twice. once for a tax permit, no cost for that. Then a registration for my LLC which now cost $30 or $35 every 2 years. 10 years ago there was no fee for LLC's now there is.

I don't remember if there was a fee for the city or not but if there was it was only one time.

Then I had to get a seperate checking account for the LLC and provide paperwork from my attorney to get the checking, at the time. I don't know if now that would be required or not. Filing, all of the filling you can do on your own with out an attorney but it is good idea to have one at least for the first time to go over all you are going to do so that you can choose the right business entity if any.

BUT either way a real person still has to be liable, and that is usually YOU the owner. Though you can have an agent I am sure when it comes to legal issues you will be the one in the hot seat in the end so getting a legal entity to hide assetts or protect identity I don't know about that stuff. I know it is harder to do now with new laws, terrorist activities etc... A real person has to be responsible not just some faceless LLC or S-corp.

I went on tangent.

Everything above is my own view, don't take it as business or legal advice. It's a forum. I am venting.

- T

Thanks

{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[2510131].message }}

JulieDay

14 years ago

I'm sure $300 is only the start. With cities headed for bankruptcy it will be $3000 before long.

Thanks

{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[2509147].message }}

MichaelHiles

14 years ago

I'm going to go against the grain here.

I think it's fantastic that the city of Philly is charging $300 for a business license.

This is the exercise of the right of a local government to be self-determining. Don't like it? You have several options.

Move.

Run for city council and work to repeal the license fee.

Back the political opposition to the license fee.

See, we're not just stuck in a situation in America where we're completely helpless against our government. We can actually fight back.

Although it's much harder at the federal level - which, to no surprise, is why there's this perpetual march towards Federalism in the US (along with the profit hating, big government sycophants).

At least, for now, Philly still has the right to decide this sort of thing, albeit completely retarded from a economic development perspective.

Someday soon, you'll get the joy of having to go down to your regional Federal Trade Commission Public License Office to get a Federal Business Permit. Keep voting for change and that's the change you'll get.

Thanks

Signature

10XTS... I got your digital strategy right here...

{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[2509177].message }}

Terry Crim

14 years ago

I read through the article and first page of this thread.

If you incorporate, LLC, s-corp etc... each and every state in the U.S. has an annual or bi-annual fee you must pay to keep your company registered and active. Fees range from $35 upto $650.00 for the states I have physically done business in. I have not done business physically in most states so do not know the fees for each state.

If you are doing business, accepting money in trade for your services / products then you are in business. If you have an ad on a website that pays you money, you are in business. As far as I know each state requires you register with them which may include getting a sales tax permit, even if you don't do physical business face to face.

There is an agreement with many states between each other that basically requires you to register with each if you do any business, sell anything to any resident or business residing in that state. Often there is a fee to be paid there. Here in the midwest the agreement between states has been in effect for over 20 years or more. This is NOT a new thing.

MOST online "businesses" ignore these rules or don't know about them. Most "businesses" entirely online are individuals trying to make extra money to pay bills and really have no idea what it takes to run a business, they just read forums like this and start doing something that may or may not bring in money. Then later after they get started ask about what they need, lawyers, accountants, taxes etc... To me this is backwards and in some cases can get you fined, depending what it is and specific situation. Sometimes you can beat these sometimes not.

I am one of the unique here that have real business experience offline and have started and ran many businesses since I was 15 years old. In the state I live, Iowa, I had to register with my state, get a sales tax permit, register as DBA with my local city. If anything changed I had to update my business with the city and state which may include reregistering for a sales tax permit. Then there is checking accounts, business accounts, tax reporting etc... no way I would do all this myself especially since tax codes change each year, more deductions, loopholes closing and opening etc...

I know at least two members of the warrior forum who also reside in Iowa that have NEVER done these things and is actually going against Iowa Law. There was a change to Iowa State tax law recently that added software to the taxable items you have to collect sales tax on. Which requires an Iowa Sales Tax Permit. At least one of these people does sell or has sold software and as far as I know, never collect sales tax on those sales. Fines, late penalty fees etc...

Again, nothing here is new and it didn't just go in effect without notice or discussion. The last paragraph is specific to Iowa but similar things go on in your area too. You are the one that has to seek out the information in many cases but it is not hidden and here in Iowa they have classes offered that teach you all the in's and out's on business requirements for state of Iowa and local jurisdictions, state sales tax, local option taxes etc... I am sure there is similar things in your state too.

The laws and regulations for your state and jurisdiction, City, locality is written and there for you to read and get information on. Most of it is online if your state has the current information online, otherwise you need to contact them and get the information.

A lot of the complaints I read in this thread are just ignorance and not being informed. Which does not surprise me, I have been a member of this forum since 1998 or so and ever since the beginning people have been complaining about business requirements and how government should get out of business etc etc...

Get over it. The reality is they are in your business and require you to do certain things. If you don't like it, quit and get a day job somewhere, where your boss has to do all these things for you instead of you being the boss and having to do it yourself.

There is a price to freedom. Financial and personal freedom. If you are not willing to pay that price, someone else will and reap the benefits and losses as they come.

I have been told and heard that not everyone is able to run their own business and be their own boss. Either through lack of focus, not able to get themselves to take action and do all the little and big things that need to be done. I see it every day here in my area too, where I see people loading shelves at the grocery store I go to. I compare the managers and workers and the different level of work that is being done. The managers jump in and do whatever it needs to be done where ever it needs, while the workers just do their own thing and pace themselves by the clock.
Workers tell you what isle number a certain product is in, managers take you to it and hand it to you. OR go get it for you while you stay there. I love that.

What is funny to me about these "new" rules is that number one they aren't new. Number two, it really doesn't take that long to comply.

The main issue with the OP article, is that if the blogger had an accountant or CPA more than likely she would not have been sent the letter or been required to pay the city's fee. How I read the article she did her state tax wrong and filed the blog income as business income, itemizing I suppose.

I don't know but that is what I read.

There is a lot of requirements to doing business not all are fun but time wise more is spent in complaining than actually doing what is needed.

I get a lot of complaints and some stop talking to me when I go on rants like this post but the thing is all of the requirements for starting and running a business are out there for you to read and learn about. Some are legal requirements you HAVE To do and there is no difference between an online business and offline business when it comes to taxes and registering.

Obviously farming and property management requirements are different than developing websites and many permits and regulations don't apply so on the forms you have to submit you don't check those things.

I don't know, I have been filing and filling forms since I was 15 when it comes to businesses I own and operate. All of a sudden it is a shock to people that now they are possibly being required to now do the same. Because obviously online and offline are totally different and should be treated as such and states are jealous that online people are making money and now want to start getting their share because they can't get their budgets sorted out.

LMAO.. I am laughing at that because from the stuff I get and read from my state, I have had to do this stuff all through the 80's, 90's and upto and through this year 2010. It just didn't just start or may sometime in the future. I have been doing this all along.

What is going to happen if there can be a consensus on how to is a sales tax for ALL states and all local option taxes in each state. So far there has been no consensus on how to do it. The states that do have an arrangement between each other, many don't comply and there has been no way to enforce compliance except lawsuit through course. If a state sues you that is a totally different kind of legal expense than if an irate customer does or personal injury case if you hurt someone somehow.

I am not an attorney or accountant and everything I wrote in this post is my own personal opinion. Facts or statements viewed as facts may not be accurate, please do your own due diligence before acting on anything I stated in this post. There is no legal or tax or financial advice given in this post, taking legal or financial advice from a public forum is fool hardy and more than likely will get you into trouble if acted upon without advice from your own legal counsel and/or tax accountant.

Feel free to disagree with me or continue complaining about government involvement but don't get swayed about not complying with your state or local regulations and rules at your own personal expense. The judge will dictate to you that ignorance is not a satisfactory defense and rule against you.

Where do you get the rules and regulations for your business and what your state requires? Your OWN legal counsel, Certified Public Accountant and the state tax office and state business development office. Then you should check with your local city and get all the forms and pamphlets they have. Not everything applies to you but it is good reading to go through everything, some of it is interesting even if it doesn't apply directly to you. I never filled out forms without talking with my lawyer and accountant, never, because somethings don't apply but if you fill out the form wrong or misfile tax forms you could end up being fined or sent fees you shouldn't pay.

That is all the advice I will give on this topic and none of it is to be considered legal advice because I am not an attorney and I have no clue how your business is setup.

Let's say I have a website development business and you have a website development business. We may even have same products and offer the same exact website templates. My business will be setup unique to my situation and yours to your situation. I could pay less taxes compared to you even though we both make the same exact monies a year. Why? Get your own lawyer and accountant to find out.

- T

Thanks

{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[2509961].message }}

mistermint

14 years ago

Makes me wonder if this will be the norm soon...Just another revenue sucking idea!

Thanks

Signature

www.make-cash-flow-forecast.com

Make cash flow forecasts in openoffice.

{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[2509996].message }}

Michael Oksa

14 years ago

I'm not a lawyer, but either my view is so far off base, or a lot of people here need to actually educate themselves before they start throwing certain terms around.

~Michael

Thanks
2 replies

Signature

"Ich bin en fuego!"

{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[2510459].message }}

Martin Luxton

14 years ago

People are going to have to get used to more regulation of the internet because more and more governments and councils will go after online businesses for fees.

You know why Youtube is banned in Turkey?

Because the government wants a slice of Google's profits. Google argues that, as it doesn't have a physical presence in Turkey, the government has no right to its money.

The counter-argument?

If Google wants Youtube unbanned it had better open an office in Turkey and pay local taxes.

Martin

Thanks
1 reply

{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[2510519].message }}

John Henderson

14 years ago

Originally Posted by Martin Luxton

The counter-argument?

If Google wants Youtube unbanned it had better open an office in Turkey and pay local taxes.

Isn't that just the most retarded point of view you've ever heard?

That's like saying "Our population will not be given phones until Alexander Graham Bell hands over some of his profits" or "Our population will not be given cars until Gottleib Daimler hands over some of his profits"

"In fact, we will live in the stone age until the inventor of the wheel hands over some of his profits".

Do they really think that Google gives a crap?

Thanks
1 reply

{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[2510577].message }}

Martin Luxton

14 years ago

Originally Posted by John Henderson

Isn't that just the most retarded point of view you've ever heard?

That's like saying "Our population will not be given phones until Alexander Graham Bell hands over some of his profits" or "Our population will not be given cars until Gottleib Daimler hands over some of his profits"

"In fact, we will live in the stone age until the inventor of the wheel hands over some of his profits".

Do they really think that Google gives a crap?

John,

Apparently Google makes a profit from its services in Turkey (e.g. Adwords). The money is physically paid by Turks resident in Turkey so I guess the government feels it has a point.

Whatever your feelings on the matter, it is just an example of how cash-strapped governments are now targeting the net for revenue.

I can see this situation becoming more and more common.

Martin

Thanks
2 replies

{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[2510657].message }}

Bill Farnham

14 years ago

Originally Posted by Martin Luxton

Whatever your feelings on the matter, it is just an example of how cash-strapped governments are now targeting the net for revenue.

Perhaps this has already been mentioned (I've read most of the replies, not all

) but a strong impetus for having internet businesses also pay the licensing fee comes from brick and morter store owners who put a lot of money in the coffers of the local politicians.

They're looking for a level playing field. As a former B&M retailer for over 15 years I can fully appreciate the sentiment. I've also helped a friend run for city council and got to see how that side of things work. The local tax paying business community carries a lot of weight. If they want to see a fee applied to internet businesses all they have to do is put pressure on the local officials.

It's pay to play all the way...

~Bill

Thanks
1 reply

Signature

{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[2510728].message }}

David McKee

14 years ago

Originally Posted by Bill Farnham

but a strong impetus for having internet businesses also pay the licensing fee comes for brick and morter store owners who put a lot of money in the coffers of the local politicians.

They're looking for a level playing field....
~Bill

Not if it is some mom blogging about child care and making 50 measly bucks a year - not the same thing and not a "level playing field". Brick and Mortar also have land use, utilities, zoning, etc etc. Which the internet does not, there is no "level playing field" because in many regards it is like two different planets. I have also worked in both (my dad owns a brick and mortar grocery store that is actually made of brick and mortar!)

If you are in a legitimate business online with a registered trademark, and a registered business license so that you can sell products and pay your taxes on a quarterly basis, etc. If you are selling food/vitamins/internal use products you will also have additional licenses, permits, etc. All of this exists now.

This topic, however, is someone earning some adword income - hardly anything that can be "licensed" or that should be - and frankly I think other than direct taxation on income, there really is no legal case for it.

-DTM

Thanks

Signature

Are you an affiliate marketer? My site has tons of free stuff and 14,000 pages of Clickbank research. www.affiliatesledgehammer.com
Buy a Freedom Bulb! Don't let the government tell you what kind of light bulb you can use!

{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[2511237].message }}

John Henderson

14 years ago

Originally Posted by Martin Luxton

Apparently Google makes a profit from its services in Turkey (e.g. Adwords). The money is physically paid by Turks resident in Turkey so I guess the government feels it has a point.

So the Turkish government could in fact get its hands on some of Google's payouts thru income tax?

Originally Posted by Martin Luxton

Whatever your feelings on the matter, it is just an example of how cash-strapped governments are now targeting the net for revenue.

I understand, Martin; you were just illustrating the situation with an example.

My previous post looks like a bit of a rant, but for goodness sake... The internet is the best thing that could possibly happen to a developing country. How did somebody once describe it? "The cheapest printing press in history connected to the cheapest postal service in history". And the government of Turkey is shutting parts of it out? That's just short sighted beyond belief... :rolleyes:

As Will Carling once said "A good captain simply creates the environment in which his people can succeed".

Thanks

{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[2511022].message }}

ChickenMan

14 years ago

Originally Posted by Michael Oksa

I'm not a lawyer, but either my view is so far off base, or a lot of people here need to actually educate themselves before they start throwing certain terms around.

~Michael

Let me guess, you'd be one of the ones to slap a fee onto two little girls running a lemonade stand?

People are throwing business around here too loosely. If you ask me, the term business is too vaguely targeted here.

Thanks
1 reply

Signature

If money grew on trees, we'd all die from a lack of oxygen.

{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[2510536].message }}

Michael Oksa

14 years ago

Originally Posted by ChickenMan

Let me guess, you'd be one of the ones to slap a fee onto two little girls running a lemonade stand?

People are throwing business around here too loosely. If you ask me, the term business is too vaguely targeted here.

Um...no.

Nowhere did I say I AGREED with the city's policy.

I was only arguing YOUR definition of what's constitutional. I truly hope you pay attention in school.

You made the exact assumptions I warned against in an earlier post. Just because I disagree with your loose interpretation of what terms like "constitutional" mean, doesn't mean I agree with the laws on the city's books.

However, they ARE the law, and have not been struck down (yet), so it is constitutional.

Be careful about putting words in my mouth, you had no clue as to what I thought about the actual issue.

All the best,
Michael

Thanks
1 reply

Signature

"Ich bin en fuego!"

{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[2510561].message }}

ChickenMan

14 years ago

Originally Posted by Michael Oksa

Um...no.

Nowhere did I say I AGREED with the city's policy.

I was only arguing YOUR definition of what's constitutional. I truly hope you pay attention in school.

You made the exact assumptions I warned against in an earlier post. Just because I disagree with your loose interpretation of what terms like "constitutional" mean, doesn't mean I agree with the laws on the city's books.

However, they ARE the law, and have not been struck down (yet), so it is constitutional.

Be careful about putting words in my mouth, you had no clue as to what I thought about the actual issue.

All the best,
Michael

No, I had thought that's what you were implying based on how I was reading your posts.

I do...sometimes. But this does seem a bit too unconstitutional. But it's just my opinion.

Indeed, but it's just how you were responding which is why I asked. Not trying to put any words in your mouth or anything.

[ 1 ] Thanks

Signature

If money grew on trees, we'd all die from a lack of oxygen.

{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[2510605].message }}

Michael Stuart Kelly

14 years ago

If push comes to shove and this person wants to take it to court, the only way I see this business license for running a blog requirement standing is if the servers where the blog is hosted are in the city of Philadelphia. The venue of the establishment that earns the money is wherever the server hosting the site is.

That's my layman's opinion, anyway. It is based on how copyright is enforced through the courts on the Internet.

Thanks
1 reply

Signature

Know thyself...

{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[2511664].message }}

Michael Stuart Kelly

14 years ago

Originally Posted by Michael Stuart Kelly

If push comes to shove and this person wants to take it to court, the only way I see this business license for running a blog requirement standing is if the servers where the blog is hosted are in the city of Philadelphia. The venue of the establishment that earns the money is wherever the server hosting the site is.

That's my layman's opinion, anyway. It is based on how copyright is enforced through the courts on the Internet.

Sorry for repeating this, folks, but this is a perfect example of horrible boring sucky crappy passive-voice writing.

Let me try it again...

If push comes to shove and this person wants to take the issue to court, there is only one way I see the city's case will stand.

As I understand it, Philadelphia now requires a business license if a city resident operates a blog that generates income.

A problem enters with venue. The blog is the money-making establishment and this blog exists physically somewhere--on servers. So if the servers are in the city of Philadelphia, the city has a case. If not, I believe the city's case will fall.

That's my layman's opinion. It is based on how copyright is enforced through the courts on the Internet.

Aahhhh... That's better...

(Once again, sorry for the repeteco... I certainly can write crap, can't I? But at least I can fix it...)

Michael

Thanks
1 reply

Signature

Know thyself...

{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[2512155].message }}

Steven Carl Kelly 14 years ago

Originally Posted by Michael Stuart Kelly

That's my layman's opinion. It is based on how copyright is enforced through the courts on the Internet

But federal copyright laws and enforcement have nothing whatever to do with local jurisdictional business licensing. The two are in no way connected.
- Thanks
Signature

Read this SURPRISING REPORT Before You Buy ANY WSO! Click Here
FREE REPORT: Split Test Your Landing Pages the Easy Way
{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[2512176].message }}

E. Brian Rose

14 years ago

If you make money, then you are a business and businesses are bound by local laws on taxes and licensing. This has nothing to do with freedom of speech. You are free to write or say what you want, but if you intend on making money, then you should plan to pay taxes. How the heck do you think roads are built?

Thanks

Signature

Founder of JVZoo. All around good guy :)

{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[2511784].message }}

HeySal

14 years ago

What this woman is running is a "cottage enterprise" ...which does not even require reporting until it crosses the 500 dollars a year line - 501 and you have to consider it a business. Philly is very unusual if they have cracked down on cottage enterprises, and I find it is unsettling that they have done so. Cottage enterprises are pretty much a way for people to have a chance to test the waters and see if what they are doing is worth pursuing as an actually business or whether they should be engaging in just a hobby.

I find it desperate and revolting that those making huge salaries off our taxes will turn around and pick on something this small. It is the woman's fault though - she didn't have to claim that small amount so shouldn't have risked the entanglement she got into.

Thanks
2 replies

Signature

Sal
When the Roads and Paths end, learn to guide yourself through the wilderness
Beyond the Path

{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[2511879].message }}

Michael Oksa

14 years ago

Originally Posted by HeySal

What this woman is running is a "cottage enterprise" ...which does not even require reporting until it crosses the 500 dollars a year line - 501 and you have to consider it a business. Philly is very unusual if they have cracked down on cottage enterprises, and I find it is unsettling that they have done so. Cottage enterprises are pretty much a way for people to have a chance to test the waters and see if what they are doing is worth pursuing as an actually business or whether they should be engaging in just a hobby.

I find it desperate and revolting that those making huge salaries off our taxes will turn around and pick on something this small. It is the woman's fault though - she didn't have to claim that small amount so shouldn't have risked the entanglement she got into.

I'm not sure, but I don't think that's true, Sal. Not saying you're wrong or that I'm roght.

Just a reminder to people to please consult a qualified tax professional before assuming statements like this are true or false.

All the best,
Michael

Thanks

Signature

"Ich bin en fuego!"

{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[2512086].message }}

Steven Carl Kelly

14 years ago

Originally Posted by HeySal

What this woman is running is a "cottage enterprise" ...which does not even require reporting until it crosses the 500 dollars a year line - 501 and you have to consider it a business. Philly is very unusual if they have cracked down on cottage enterprises, and I find it is unsettling that they have done so. Cottage enterprises are pretty much a way for people to have a chance to test the waters and see if what they are doing is worth pursuing as an actually business or whether they should be engaging in just a hobby.

I find it desperate and revolting that those making huge salaries off our taxes will turn around and pick on something this small. It is the woman's fault though - she didn't have to claim that small amount so shouldn't have risked the entanglement she got into.

Sal, when you say "claim" and "reporting" to what are you referring?

Thanks
1 reply

Signature

Read this SURPRISING REPORT Before You Buy ANY WSO! Click Here
FREE REPORT: Split Test Your Landing Pages the Easy Way

{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[2512166].message }}

HeySal 14 years ago

Originally Posted by Steven Carl Kelly

Sal, when you say "claim" and "reporting" to what are you referring?

Okay - I thought what I was saying was federal but this might be state. By claim and report I meant to the IRS. And I'm not sure at this point if cottage enterprise is still supported in all states or just a few.
- Thanks
Signature

Sal
When the Roads and Paths end, learn to guide yourself through the wilderness
Beyond the Path
{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[2512714].message }}

Michael Oksa

14 years ago

Danny, with all due respect, you are either agreeing with me or contradicting yourself.

I said...

They are NOT being charged for having a blog. Their WORDS do NOT require a licensing fee. IF they were being charged to simply express themselves (which they are NOT being charged for) then THAT would be unconstitutional.

Then you said...

That is EXACTLY what they are doing. If a business license is required to have a blog that makes money, you'd need the license BEFORE you made a profit. Making a profit without the license would be a crime. Therefor it would be impossible for them to "only charge for blogs that make money".

...or a blog that is set up to make money.

THEY ARE REQUIRED TO GET A LICENSE FOR OPERATING A BUSINESS.

NOT, NOT, NOT FOR PUBLISHING WORDS.

If you don't get that you are either a troll, willfully ignorant, or (and this is the most likely) seeing it from a different point of view. It happens, no big deal.

The problem with arguing about this aspect of it is dumb anyway. It is NOT unconstitutional. I'd love that to be the last word on it, but I'm somebody will disagree. Anyway, I would much rather discuss the merits of such a rule, or ways of writing it that makes more sense in the modern era.

All the best,
Michael

Thanks

Signature

"Ich bin en fuego!"

{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[2512060].message }}

dannyadams

Banned 14 years ago

[DELETED]

{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[2512174].message }}

Steven Carl Kelly

14 years ago

Originally Posted by dannyadams

A business license is issued for the privilege of doing what your business does. Believe it or not, a BLOG usually provides content of some sort...video, audio or text. That content is protected by the first amendment of the Constitution. A government does not give you the privilege of speaking freely.

You simply aren't getting that the business and the speech are not one in the same. The city is NOT restricting her right to free speech. They are requiring that she be LICENSED to EARN MONEY from her speech, whether she earns any or not.

Thanks

Signature

Read this SURPRISING REPORT Before You Buy ANY WSO! Click Here
FREE REPORT: Split Test Your Landing Pages the Easy Way

{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[2512201].message }}

Michael Oksa

14 years ago

Originally Posted by dannyadams

Haha. There's nothing better than when a discussion turns in to name calling. That's so Olbermann of you. I'm proud.

A business license is issued for the privilege of doing what your business does. Believe it or not, a BLOG usually provides content of some sort...video, audio or text. That content is protected by the first amendment of the Constitution. A government does not give you the privilege of speaking freely.

The issue of her having the privilege to put ads on her site (even though she don't have any...the link is above) means nothing. The reason is because she would have to get the license BEFORE PUTTING THE ADS UP.

A business license grants the privilege to do business. It has nothing to do with someone making a profit.

No more Olbermanning please. I don't do the name calling thing.

Where did I call you a name?

Then YOU call me one of the worst names in the book?

There is a word for that...

Anyway, you seem to think we disagree on some of the issues, and that's not true.

I'm only trying to point out that this is NOT a constitutional issue. YOU are the one assuming I somehow lean to the left, or support the municipal code of Philadelphia as it stands.

Like I said, we're getting sidetracked from what could be a worthwhile discussion. But I don't mind all that much, I believe that's the nature of firums, conversations take unexpected twists and turns.

All the best,
Michael

Thanks

Signature

"Ich bin en fuego!"

{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[2512204].message }}

dannyadams

Banned 14 years ago

[DELETED]

{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[2512415].message }}

Michael Oksa

14 years ago

Originally Posted by dannyadams

I never said you leaned left. I just said the "Ignorant" and the "troll" stuff is Olbermann-like.

Ok, no problem. Still name calling, at least to the same extent I didn't call you names. Fair enough?

Just because it is a local issue does not mean the constitution doesn't come into play. There are fights about constitutionality with school boards almost on a weekly basis.

Did I EVER say anything to the contrary? No, I didn't. I didn't say the Constitution doesn't apply to local or state law. Seriously, get a grip.

believe it or not, the city of Philadelphia is limited by the first amendment just like every other state, city, local or federal government.

Hur....dur....Ah yeap. Again, I never said anything to the contrary.

Since some of you are claiming that she is only required to pay if she has ads on her site...CAN ANY OF YOU SHOW ME THE ADS ON HER SITE? The link is on page 3.

Gee, I don't know, is it possible that she could have, oh I don't know, just possibly TAKEN THE ADS DOWN?

All the best,
Michael

Thanks

Signature

"Ich bin en fuego!"

{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[2512445].message }}

dannyadams

Banned 14 years ago

[DELETED]

{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[2512467].message }}

Michael Oksa 14 years ago

Originally Posted by dannyadams

You said that it's not a constitutional issue quite in your last post.

You are confusing my statements. That's understandable, because I'm sort of carrying on three separate lines of reasoning.

Here's what I'm trying to say, I hope it helps clarify things.

1. This municipal code, as it stands, is not unconstitutional.

2. The Constitution applies to local, state and federal government.

3. This particular issue is not a constitutional issue, but it still can't break the rules set forth in the Constitution. Just because it has to fit within constitutional bounds doesn't make it a constitutional issue.

4. Saying "it's not a constitutional issue" is not the same as saying "the Constitution doesn't apply to local government" (which I never said).

5. I don't agree with the licensing fee in these cases, but until the code is changed, they have to be enforced as they are written.

All the best,
Michael
- Thanks
Signature

"Ich bin en fuego!"
{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[2512504].message }}

Michael Oksa

14 years ago

Originally Posted by dannyadams

The article was about the license she got for her blog. So yes, it's possible that she paid the $300 fee then took the ads down after she paid her fee. Just like it's possible to sit in a church for 20 years and not know what the pastor is talking about.

Or maybe she was sick of all the hassle and decided to make it a true "hobby"?

Or maybe it was the advice of an attorney?

Or maybe the advertiser requested the ads be pulled?

Or maybe if it was AdSense, a lot of well-meaning people thought they would help her and clicked on the ads; only to have Google see that as click fraud?

Those all seem like valid possibilities to me. Four logical explanations; none of which require one to be in the state of drunkeness you suggest.

All the best,
Michael

Thanks

Signature

"Ich bin en fuego!"

{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[2512518].message }}

dannyadams

Banned 14 years ago

[DELETED]

{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[2512873].message }}

Michael Oksa

14 years ago

Originally Posted by dannyadams

So I guess you admit that she paid the fee WITHOUT advertisements on the site?

If she paid the fee with no ads on the site are you going to admit that it is a violation of the 1st or are you going to change what you said earlier in the thread?

After 2 years of blogging, all of a sudden a few days after this report comes out her ads are gone?

It's another one of those "really hard to believe" statements that we've been hearing the past few years around issues like this.

Nope, you guess wrong. Again.

~M~

Thanks

Signature

"Ich bin en fuego!"

{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[2512961].message }}

CDarklock 14 years ago

Originally Posted by dannyadams

It's another one of those "really hard to believe" statements that we've been hearing the past few years around issues like this.

Sort of like all the alarmist garbage around how the government is trying to screw IMers.

Which is usually the sudden realisation of an IMer that they're in blatant and severe violation of laws that are over a hundred years old, because they never bothered to check those laws, and now they're in trouble for it.

If you are making money online, you have a business. That business is subject to certain laws, and you had damn well better go find out what the hell they are. They are honestly not that bad (I mean, seriously, my $60 a year for licensing is all of $5 a month), and if you just make some kind of effort to follow them you will generally be okay.

But if you've been making a full-time living online for three years and the government just randomly discovers that you're running something on the order of fifty web sites which all ought to be licensed, they do the math and see "$15,000" which is more than enough to start coming after your arse.

See, people keep trying to get cute and stay anonymous with statements that say "bezoomny.com is a trademark of Bezoomny, copyright 2010 the Bezoomny Company" on every domain name they own, and that means new business licence for every site. Congratulations. Those 350 autoblogs you put up - that make you an average of $5 a month - are now a six-figure expense backed up with a multi-million dollar fine and possibly criminal charges.

All because you couldn't be arsed to do a little research.

Hmm... bezoomny.com - that's a cool domain name. I wonder if it's available.

Heh. Not anymore.
- Thanks
Signature

"The Golden Town is the Golden Town no longer. They have sold their pillars for brass and their temples for money, they have made coins out of their golden doors. It is become a dark town full of trouble, there is no ease in its streets, beauty has left it and the old songs are gone." - Lord Dunsany, The Messengers
{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[2513076].message }}
- dannyadams Banned 14 years ago
  
  [DELETED]
  
  {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[2513091].message }}
  
  CDarklock 14 years ago
  
  Originally Posted by dannyadams
  
  I don't need anything from you, don't take anything from me.
  
  Hey, you know that Constitution you were railing about?
  
  All that protection of your rights?
  
  That's gonna cost you.
  
  Don't like it?
  
  Leave.
  
  Thanks
  
  Signature
  
  "The Golden Town is the Golden Town no longer. They have sold their pillars for brass and their temples for money, they have made coins out of their golden doors. It is become a dark town full of trouble, there is no ease in its streets, beauty has left it and the old songs are gone." - Lord Dunsany, The Messengers
  
  {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[2513276].message }}
  
  dannyadams Banned 14 years ago
  
  [DELETED]
  
  {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[2513302].message }}
  
  CDarklock 14 years ago
  
  Originally Posted by dannyadams
  
  The constitution is about protecting GOD GIVEN rights to mankind.
  
  And who's protecting them, exactly?
  
  Thanks
  
  3 replies
  
  Signature
  
  "The Golden Town is the Golden Town no longer. They have sold their pillars for brass and their temples for money, they have made coins out of their golden doors. It is become a dark town full of trouble, there is no ease in its streets, beauty has left it and the old songs are gone." - Lord Dunsany, The Messengers
  
  {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[2513337].message }}
  
  Ken Strong 14 years ago
  
  Originally Posted by CDarklock
  
  And who's protecting them, exactly?
  
  I get the feeling you're fishing for a specific answer.
  
  Each person has to protect him- or herself, in whatever way they see fit.
  
  If you're dependent on someone or something else to protect your rights, then do you really have any?
  
  [ 1 ] Thanks
  
  1 reply
  
  Signature
  
  The RETURN of OBI:
  Learn IM From the Experts Who Are Already Doing It!
  
  "Sammy-approved, baby!" -- Offline Brat Pack
  
  {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[2513349].message }}
  
  CDarklock 14 years ago
  
  Originally Posted by KenStrong
  
  I get the feeling you're fishing for a specific answer.
  
  The Constitution certainly doesn't bind me to the protection of someone else's rights.
  
  I have every right to walk right past someone whose rights are being violated, without saying or doing a damn thing.
  
  In fact, that right is constitutionally protected.
  
  So if you're that person, and your rights are being violated, who's protecting you?
  
  Who will stop that person from violating your rights?
  
  Who will punish that person for violating them, if they don't stop?
  
  Because I don't have to. So if you can't, for whatever reason, where is your protection?
  
  Thanks
  
  Signature
  
  "The Golden Town is the Golden Town no longer. They have sold their pillars for brass and their temples for money, they have made coins out of their golden doors. It is become a dark town full of trouble, there is no ease in its streets, beauty has left it and the old songs are gone." - Lord Dunsany, The Messengers
  
  {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[2513585].message }}
  
  rts2271 14 years ago
  
  Originally Posted by CDarklock
  
  And who's protecting them, exactly?
  
  The guy with the biggest gun and the willingness and ability to use it.
  
  Thanks
  
  Signature
  
  Ralph Smith
  Mercenary development and deployment.
  
  {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[2513579].message }}
  
  Greg guitar 14 years ago
  
  Originally Posted by CDarklock
  
  And who's protecting them, exactly?
  
  Well, the ACLU for one; the lawyers' guild, for another, thousands of lawyers individually too.
  
  More to the point, the government is supposed to protect the rights of it's citizens. The president is under an oath that obliges him to protect the constitution. One of the primary function of the judicial branch is to uphold the constitution. I think all military personnel take a similar oath-can't say I know it though.
  
  Obviously, concerned citizens of any country must be vigilant and fight for their own and each others' rights as well, and decency requires that we do what we can for the rights of people everywhere, not just in our own country. In the case of the US, we have exercised so much power and influence globally, that we really are obligated to speak up for people in our client states that might be jailed or killed for speaking their own minds, quite often under brutal regimes who could not have come to power, or stayed in power without our help.
  
  Often, we materially benefit from the rotten conditions in countries within our sphere of influence, in ways few of us care to recognize. How often do we buy bananas at the bargain rate of $1 a pound or less, never questioning why we get such great bargains from south of the border? We should question it though, since throughout Central America, and South America we directly supported or instigated coups and despotic "leaders" that resulted in hundreds of thousands murdered, and a hopelessly miserable, impoverished population, their weak bargaining position a direct result of our disasterous (for them-sweet deal for us), policies.
  
  Thanks
  
  {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[2513624].message }}
  
  CDarklock 14 years ago
  
  Originally Posted by dannyadams
  
  All of a sudden, because I say a law is unconstitutional and provide case law to back up my claim, I'm anti gas lines, electricity and water?
  
  No, it's because you say this:
  
  Originally Posted by dannyadams
  
  I don't need anything from you, don't take anything from me.
  
  And when I say "You" I don't mean you personally...I mean the government.
  
  So if you don't need anything from the government, you don't need the public utilities regulated to prevent abuses of monopoly power, right?
  
  You don't need police officers, the fire department, 911 emergency service, antitrust legislation, building codes, workplace safety regulations, civil and criminal courts, prisons, or anything like that... right?
  
  You think you can protect yourself, because you have no damn clue what it means not to have those things.
  
  Read the constitution.
  
  Pay particular attention to Article I Section 8.
  
  From what I remember, this thread is about a law requiring business licenses for bloggers.
  
  Actually, it's about a law requiring business licences for businesses.
  
  Did you even read the article OR the cases I brought up?
  
  I didn't read the cases, no, because you clearly don't understand the article.
  
  So she never said "I'm running a business" as you claim. She actually said just the opposite.
  
  Actually, she swore and affirmed to the Federal government that to the best of her knowledge this $50 in revenue from the ads on her blog was in fact a business profit.
  
  Because that's why the city sent her the letter.
  
  Thanks
  
  Signature
  
  "The Golden Town is the Golden Town no longer. They have sold their pillars for brass and their temples for money, they have made coins out of their golden doors. It is become a dark town full of trouble, there is no ease in its streets, beauty has left it and the old songs are gone." - Lord Dunsany, The Messengers
  
  {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[2514137].message }}
  
  dannyadams Banned 14 years ago
  
  [DELETED]
  
  {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[2514360].message }}
  
  CDarklock 14 years ago
  
  Originally Posted by dannyadams
  
  Title Of Thread - "Philadelphia charges bloggers $300 licensing fee!"
  
  Actual reality: "Philadelphia charges businesses licensing fees of either $50 a year or $300 for life!"
  
  The point is that if a blog with ads on it is required to have a license, so is a blog without ads on it.
  
  The blog isn't required to have a licence. The blogger is.
  
  Thanks
  
  Signature
  
  "The Golden Town is the Golden Town no longer. They have sold their pillars for brass and their temples for money, they have made coins out of their golden doors. It is become a dark town full of trouble, there is no ease in its streets, beauty has left it and the old songs are gone." - Lord Dunsany, The Messengers
  
  {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[2562365].message }}

CDarklock 14 years ago

Originally Posted by dannyadams

Just because it is a local issue does not mean the constitution doesn't come into play.

Danny, the Constitution does come into play.

There is no Congressional authority to interfere in this matter under the enumerated powers of Article I Section 8.

And as a result, the Constitution comes into play long enough to say "there is no Constitutional matter to be discussed here" and then you STFU and find a new line of argument.
- [ 1 ] Thanks
Signature

"The Golden Town is the Golden Town no longer. They have sold their pillars for brass and their temples for money, they have made coins out of their golden doors. It is become a dark town full of trouble, there is no ease in its streets, beauty has left it and the old songs are gone." - Lord Dunsany, The Messengers
{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[2512513].message }}

Dan C. Rinnert

14 years ago

Originally Posted by CDarklock

The basic one is $50 a year. This is similar to the $60 I have paid here in Washington state for the past 12 years. Do the math: my business, no matter how much or how little it made, was required to pay $60 annually for a business licence.

Holy cow. And I thought Ohio was unfriendly to businesses.

Originally Posted by dannyadams

The issue of her having the privilege to put ads on her site (even though she don't have any...the link is above) means nothing. The reason is because she would have to get the license BEFORE PUTTING THE ADS UP.

And if she didn't intend to put any ads up, she wouldn't need to get a license.

Thanks
1 reply

Signature

Dan's content is irregularly read by handfuls of people. Join the elite few by reading his blog: dcrBlogs.com, following him on Twitter: dcrTweets.com or reading his fiction: dcrWrites.com but NOT by Clicking Here!

Dan also writes content for hire, but you can't afford him anyway.

{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[2512255].message }}

CDarklock 14 years ago

Originally Posted by Dan C. Rinnert

Holy cow. And I thought Ohio was unfriendly to businesses.

There are three levels of licensing I have to buy: state ($25), county ($20), and city ($15). I also need to have my address approved for "home occupation" as a business, which means I have to file additional paperwork.

On the other hand, we have no state income tax. There are tradeoffs everywhere. Most of the time, the kind of business we do in IM is very different from the kind of business the government was trying to license, so you just have to sigh and accept that the fees are a little out of control.

When I was still doing network and telecom installation, I pretty much did a little dance about the licensing here in Washington. In Virginia, I needed an electrician's licence, which cost over $100.
- Thanks
Signature

"The Golden Town is the Golden Town no longer. They have sold their pillars for brass and their temples for money, they have made coins out of their golden doors. It is become a dark town full of trouble, there is no ease in its streets, beauty has left it and the old songs are gone." - Lord Dunsany, The Messengers
{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[2512297].message }}

David McKee

14 years ago

Originally Posted by dannyadams

A business license is issued for the privilege of doing what your business does. Believe it or not, a BLOG usually provides content of some sort...video, audio or text. That content is protected by the first amendment of the Constitution. A government does not give you the privilege of speaking freely.

Not sure where you live DannyAdams... but in the USA the original documents from when our government gets its power specifically denies that our rights come from the government - they do not, but from a higher power (whatever you may want to call that) - our right to think and say what we want does NOT descend from government, they are not "privileges" given to us by the government. Sure, the idiots in our bureaucracies, schools and universities would like you to think that - but the Bill of rights specifically state otherwise.

I can set up a blog anywhere, any way, and say anything I want on that blog - others have the right not to read it.

Now - to the point of specifically selling content, that is a different issue that I'll not address here - but to the point of saying what you want on your blog, beyond the specific requirements of the provider, if any, there is no right for a local, state or federal government to deny that. Our constitution is unique in that it states what our government CANNOT do.

-DTM

Thanks

Signature

Are you an affiliate marketer? My site has tons of free stuff and 14,000 pages of Clickbank research. www.affiliatesledgehammer.com
Buy a Freedom Bulb! Don't let the government tell you what kind of light bulb you can use!

{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[2536032].message }}

CDarklock

14 years ago

Another point here that seems to be overlooked.

Philadelphia offers two business licence options.

The basic one is $50 a year. This is similar to the $60 I have paid here in Washington state for the past 12 years. Do the math: my business, no matter how much or how little it made, was required to pay $60 annually for a business licence.

The one they make all the noise about in this article, however, is the $300 lifetime licence. You pay $300 once, and your business never has to pay the licence fee again. Ever. No matter how much money it makes.

They offer this option because if you pay annually, you are probably going out of business within 5 years, and they will get less than six years of payments from you. So it's a moneymaker for them, and I'm guessing they've done the math to show that it outweighs the licensing revenue from businesses which stay open more than six years.

If I had an option like that here in my state, I would be all over it in a heartbeat.

And if I were a typical offline entrepreneur, I would start off with a $50 annual licence, then upgrade to the $300 licence once the business became profitable and established. Probably at the five-year mark, producing a total of $500 in licence revenue.

Which sure as hell beats the $720 I've paid during my time in Washington state.

[ 1 ] Thanks

Signature

"The Golden Town is the Golden Town no longer. They have sold their pillars for brass and their temples for money, they have made coins out of their golden doors. It is become a dark town full of trouble, there is no ease in its streets, beauty has left it and the old songs are gone." - Lord Dunsany, The Messengers

{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[2512117].message }}

ChickenMan

14 years ago

let's start by defining what a "business" is -

business
n 1: a commercial or industrial enterprise and the people who
constitute it; "he bought his brother's business"; "a
small mom-and-pop business"; "a racially integrated
business concern" [syn: {concern}, {business concern}, {business
organization}, {business organisation}]
2: the activity of providing goods and services involving
financial and commercial and industrial aspects;
"computers are now widely used in business" [syn: {commercial
enterprise}, {business enterprise}]
3: business concerns collectively; "Government and business
could not agree" [syn: {business sector}]
4: the volume of business activity; "business is good today";
"show me where the business was today"
5: a rightful concern or responsibility; "it's none of your
business"; "mind your own business"
6: the principal activity in your life that you do to earn
money; "he's not in my line of business" [syn: {occupation},
{job}, {line of work}, {line}]
7: an immediate objective; "gossip was the main business of the
evening"
8: incidental activity performed by an actor for dramatic
effect; "his business with the cane was hilarious" [syn: {stage
business}, {byplay}]
9: customers collectively; "they have an upper class clientele"
[syn: {clientele}, {patronage}]
Source: WordNet® 2.0
again, no one is saying you don't have to pay taxes on income earned. But there's a certain limit you have to cross before it becomes taxable. This incident with the Philly woman is ridiculous because her income is not even enough to justify being slapped with that fee.

And when you put ad sense onto your blogs it becomes a business? Do some of you even know wtf a business is?

Are you saying that people who sell lemonade or sandwiches on the sidewalk are business as well that require this "fee" of sorts? What about people who sell odds and ends at a flea market.

You know, it's amazing how people are saying if it "earns" income, then it's a business. That's got to be the most idiotic thing I've ever heard.

Like I said before, legal doesn't mean ethical

Thanks
2 replies

Signature

If money grew on trees, we'd all die from a lack of oxygen.

{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[2512144].message }}

John Henderson 14 years ago

Originally Posted by ChickenMan

Do some of you even know wtf a business is?

How to win friends and influence people... :rolleyes:
- Thanks
{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[2512162].message }}
Steven Carl Kelly 14 years ago

Originally Posted by ChickenMan

What about people who sell odds and ends at a flea market.

It depends on where you live. In some places, yes, you have to have a license or a permit to sell odds and ends at a flea market. NYC happens to be one of those places:

311 Online Flea Market License

Interestingly, in NYC you need a license to sell used goods at a flea market, but you don't need one to sell NEW stuff.
- Thanks
Signature

Read this SURPRISING REPORT Before You Buy ANY WSO! Click Here
FREE REPORT: Split Test Your Landing Pages the Easy Way
{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[2512243].message }}

Michael Oksa

14 years ago

While I appreciate your attempt, Chicken, the only definition that really matters is the one contained within the city code of Philadelphia. Many municipal codes add definitions of certain words. Ultimately, it doesn't matter what ANY dictionary says, only what the city says it means.

Semantics? Maybe.

But understanding those semantics is important when it's your money at stake.

All the best,
Michael

Thanks

Signature

"Ich bin en fuego!"

{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[2512161].message }}

ChickenMan

14 years ago

Originally Posted by John Henderson

How to win friends and influence people... :rolleyes:

Well let's just say as a business(accounting) student I feel a little offended when someone uses business just because money's involved

While I appreciate your attempt, Chicken, the only definition that really matters is the one contained within the city code of Philadelphia. Many municipal codes add definitions of certain words. Ultimately, it doesn't matter what ANY dictionary says, only what the city says it means.

Semantics? Maybe.

But understanding those semantics is important when it's your money at stake.

All the best,
Michael

True, but I'm referring to people's definition here on what a business is.

Believe me, I'd be fighting hard if I was in this woman's shoes. it's a ridiculous and highly unethnical law, so yes again I am going to say it's unconstitutional.

Thanks

Signature

If money grew on trees, we'd all die from a lack of oxygen.

{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[2512184].message }}

Michael Stuart Kelly

14 years ago

Originally Posted by Steven Carl Kelly

But federal copyright laws and enforcement have nothing whatever to do with local jurisdictional business licensing. The two are in no way connected.

Steve,

Like I said, that is my opinion.

The Internet is a place where legal definitions are still being made. I believe that lawyers and judges will go this route if a case comes to court--simply because legal precedent exists, even if it is federal.

Michael

Thanks

Signature

Know thyself...

{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[2512202].message }}

ChickenMan

14 years ago

Michael, not everything has to be so "analytical" for a lack of a better word. I guess what I am trying to say is that you don't have to be so "analyze the logic" of it all the time. Just my $.02

Thanks
1 reply

Signature

If money grew on trees, we'd all die from a lack of oxygen.

{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[2512556].message }}

Michael Oksa

14 years ago

Originally Posted by ChickenMan

Michael, not everything has to be so "analytical" for a lack of a better word. I guess what I am trying to say is that you don't have to be so "analyze the logic" of it all the time. Just my $.02

I hate to do this, but...

When we are discussing facts, then logic has it's place. When people have the facts flat-out wrong, then logic is vital.

If I need to use logic to counter the mischaracterization of my comments, then so be it. Besides, I'm sure with you being a student who would talk to your professors to learn more about the current topic, you can appreciate logic.

At the same time, I'm not some cold, emotionless automaton.

All the best,
Michael

Thanks

Signature

"Ich bin en fuego!"

{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[2512575].message }}

Bluewater

14 years ago

A website is either a business or it isnt, the amount of income is immaterial really.

The one thing everyone seems to have missed is that the bill is aimed at encouraging enterpreneurship and small business:

If their bill passes, bloggers will still have to get a privilege license if their sites are designed to make money, but they would no longer have to pay taxes on their first $100,000 in profit.

Cash-strapped Philly: Bloggers must pay for business license

I wish I could pay $300 to not pay any tax on the first $100K

Thanks

Signature

{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[2512558].message }}

jgand

14 years ago

Yeah, I'm sure how they can actually collect on this unless the blog generates money and files taxes. You'd figure this would put a lot of bloggers out of business, I'm not sure that many bloggers make $300 a month.

Thanks
1 reply

Signature

ink ink cartridge toys printer ink

{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[2512644].message }}

Michael Oksa

14 years ago

Originally Posted by jgand

Yeah, I'm sure how they can actually collect on this unless the blog generates money and files taxes. You'd figure this would put a lot of bloggers out of business, I'm not sure that many bloggers make $300 a month.

Yes, the blog generated money.

Yes, they filed taxes.

No, it is NOT $300 a month. It's $300 lifetime.

All the best,
Michael

Thanks

Signature

"Ich bin en fuego!"

{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[2512656].message }}

dannyadams

Banned 14 years ago

[DELETED]

{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[2512912].message }}

Michael Oksa

14 years ago

Originally Posted by dannyadams

According to your statements earlier in the thread, if she was charged without ads on the site, that would be Unconstitutional. I've proved that there are no ads on the site. Sure, if we have a "20 years in the church...no idea what the guy was saying" moment, we might be able to figure out a reason why the ads aren't there, but none of them make any sense at all.

Actually, you have only proved there are no ads on the site right now.

Here is your quote from earlier so that I don't get accused of mixing things up of being "ignorant" or taking you out of context.

Correct. NOWHERE does it say she was made to pay simply for writing. She was made to obey the law (not fined) for collecting ad revenues.

There is no reason why after years of blogging she would pull her ads down days after she paid the fee.

To say there is NO reason is wrong. I gave FOUR very valid possibilities, one of which was the ADVERTISERS pulling the ads.

You said what you said, and I said what I said.

True, but I sure as heck didn't say what YOU said I said.

All the best,
Michael

Thanks

Signature

"Ich bin en fuego!"

{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[2512957].message }}

Tim Franklin

14 years ago

Ladies and Gentlemen,

all others are excluded from this conversation.

This is just not going to happen, because then every city in the united states could demand that anyone with a website pay for a license too, because you did electronic business in that city.

So if you sell an ebook in a city, they could try to charge you with a business license.

Because you did business in that city, how stupid is that?

But you see all that is just not accurate, because there are laws that regulate commerce.

So every city in the US is subject to the state laws which govern their actions.

Just because a city decides to start trying to regulate the use of the internet does not mean it is legal.

also In turn states are also subject to Federal laws when they do not conflict with the Constitution.

States are empowered to regulate commerce, inside a state, this is just a media hyped story and it is going no where no matter how long everyone here argues about it, if the FCC cannot regulate internet activity, then the city of Philadelphia cannot do it either, simple as that.

The Federal Government, regulates, Interstate business.

This just does not rise to the level of regulation, the City is incorrect in its opinion that they can in fact enforce this because they have no authority to do so.

If you have the time just read the UCC, Uniform Commercial Code of the United States, which regulates many different types of Commercial activity.

It might take you two or three days to read it and understand it, but after that you will understand why this is just an attempt at regulating the internet, in a local jurisdiction they have no legal grounds to regulate the internet nor can they tax it.

They can Try, but it will fail because it is not legal.

This will be put down like a rabid dog, mark my words.

Thanks
1 reply

Signature

Bitcoin | Crypto | Blockchain Secrets |

{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[2513243].message }}

CDarklock

14 years ago

Originally Posted by Tim Franklin

This is just not going to happen, because then every city in the united states could demand that anyone with a website pay for a license too, because you did electronic business in that city.

Tim, all of these issues are already well-established in precedents related to the mail-order industry and corporate entities.

The internet really isn't any different. You're in one place, the web site is in another, your customer is in still another. It's no different than a guy in California whose Delaware corporation mails a catalog to New Jersey where someone orders a product drop-shipped from Texas. The problems, on a theoretical level, are not new and the rules are already pretty well established at just about every jurisdictional level.

Thanks

Signature

"The Golden Town is the Golden Town no longer. They have sold their pillars for brass and their temples for money, they have made coins out of their golden doors. It is become a dark town full of trouble, there is no ease in its streets, beauty has left it and the old songs are gone." - Lord Dunsany, The Messengers

{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[2513331].message }}

Steven Carl Kelly

14 years ago

Businesses that operate exclusively online are NOT exempt from local regulations and taxing authority. If your local municipality requires a license, you are required to obtain such a license or you could be subject to fine.

From Business.gov:

Check your local government office, such as your city clerk's office, to see if you need a permit or business license. Most online merchants work from the comfort of their home. However, many city and county zoning and planning agencies require all home-based businesses to get a Home Occupation Permit. New e-tailers often overlook this requirement since all the work is done online. However, because you operate your business exclusively at home and over the Internet does not necessarily mean you are exempt from complying with local zoning regulations.

Currently, in Philadelphia, a license is required for this sort of business. Currently, she would be required to license her business. Whether or not her business crosses state lines isn't material. Will this license law stand if challenged? I think it is likely NOT to stand. However, currently the legal requirement exists, until a court rules that it should not.

[ 2 ] Thanks

Signature

Read this SURPRISING REPORT Before You Buy ANY WSO! Click Here
FREE REPORT: Split Test Your Landing Pages the Easy Way

{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[2513357].message }}

TheSalesTechnician

14 years ago

Stop taxing the small businesses and start taxing the giant corporations! GOD This makes me angry!

Philly shame on you, you big bully!! Leave the little lady alone and let her make a few bucks.

God forbid shes not working in some underground sweat shop or flipping burgers!

This really is scrapping the bottom of the barrel

Thanks

Signature

{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[2513594].message }}

ChickenMan

14 years ago

Yes, while it's true you can say and do anything you want, but that doesn't stop someone from facing the consequences. Sure, I can walk outside and strip but naked. Freedom of speech. But I can still be arrested for disturbing the peace or offensive gesture, etc.

Just thought I'd add in my $.02.

Thanks
2 replies

Signature

If money grew on trees, we'd all die from a lack of oxygen.

{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[2536048].message }}

mcmahanusa 14 years ago

There sure is a lot of this going on here: "I know that you believe you understand what you think I said, but I'm not sure you realize that what you heard is not what I meant."

Having said that, Caliban, I just love to watch your thought processes.
- Thanks
- 1 reply
Signature

Success is not to be pursued; it is to be attracted by the person you become - Jim Rohn

Visit our beautiful gardens
{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[2536575].message }}
- Ken Strong 14 years ago
  
  Originally Posted by mcmahanusa
  
  Having said that, Caliban, I just love to watch your thought processes.
  
  What, does he have a brainwave-cam online?
  
  Thanks
  
  Signature
  
  The RETURN of OBI:
  Learn IM From the Experts Who Are Already Doing It!
  
  "Sammy-approved, baby!" -- Offline Brat Pack
  
  {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[2537780].message }}

David McKee

14 years ago

Originally Posted by ChickenMan

Yes, while it's true you can say and do anything you want, but that doesn't stop someone from facing the consequences. Sure, I can walk outside and strip but naked. Freedom of speech. But I can still be arrested for disturbing the peace or offensive gesture, etc.

I agree...but that was not my point, which was specifically to address the incorrect supposition that "rights" descend from government.

-DTM

Thanks

Signature

Are you an affiliate marketer? My site has tons of free stuff and 14,000 pages of Clickbank research. www.affiliatesledgehammer.com
Buy a Freedom Bulb! Don't let the government tell you what kind of light bulb you can use!

{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[2537560].message }}

Super Affiliate

14 years ago

Wow, if that's the case, business license for each blog will be a worldwide trend soon enough, don't you think? That means we make sure we make at least 10 times more than $300 on each blog. lol

Thanks

{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[2537672].message }}

Philadelphia charges bloggers $300 licensing fee!

Trending Topics

Best AI for spell checking & grammar (2024)?

Google Ads, landing pages, and Clickbank links

Carry out better target audience research

A Very Strange Internet Problem

Melb, Interat, Flower Show 2024