| ▲ | B1FF_PSUVM 11 hours ago |
| It's rather incongruous that you register intellectual property for very little - and have states enforcing your rights for free - while a piece of land pays property taxes. |
|
| ▲ | tacticalturtle 8 hours ago | parent | next [-] |
| The state isn’t enforcing your rights for free - you still have to hire a lawyer and pay legal expenses yourself. The state is just providing the infrastructure where you are allowed to make a claim, if you choose to do so. This is like complaining that businesses get to use roads for free - ignoring that we all pay taxes already and built this infrastructure for enabling exactly that purpose. |
| |
| ▲ | cestith 7 hours ago | parent [-] | | Copyright infringement in the United States has both civil and criminal elements at law. | | |
| ▲ | tacticalturtle 7 hours ago | parent [-] | | Touché. This will arouse the ire of the “copyright infringement isn’t theft” people - but we also have the government enforce shoplifting and larceny from retail businesses. I believe the legal cost to recoup the loss of either IP revenue or physical property will be born by the victim though. | | |
| ▲ | kstrauser 7 hours ago | parent | next [-] | | Retail businesses pay property taxes to support that. I fully support copyright enforcement being funded by intellectual property taxes: * You declare your property’s worth. * You pay IP taxes on that worth. * You cannot sure for recovery of more than that worth, total. If you have a song worth $1M, and sue 2 people for $500K, then consider it sold. If someone steals a car from you, you can’t collect its full worth each from multiple thieves. And if you have a $1B film, you can’t sue for $1B if you’re only paying taxes on $1M. Why are your and my taxes subsidizing theft from the public domain? Let them pay for it, just like our property taxes pay for roads and schools and fire departments and police. | | |
| ▲ | tacticalturtle 6 hours ago | parent | next [-] | | > Retail businesses pay property taxes to support that. But they don’t? Copyright infringement is a federal crime - your property taxes don’t fund that. The income tax that we all pay, including the IP holders, do the funding. Additionally retail theft, at least in my jurisdiction of Massachusetts is prosecuted by the state - my income taxes fund that, not property taxes. | |
| ▲ | kube-system 6 hours ago | parent | prev | next [-] | | Criminal cases aren't a substitute for civil suits, not for copyright... or for any other type of loss. People generally do have to pay their own way to bring a civil case to recover for damages in a copyright infringement case... or any kind of case. The fines/jail time typically ascribed by a criminal case do not go into a victims bank account. A criminal case is between the government prosecutor and the defendant. The copyright holder wouldn't even be a party to the case. | | |
| ▲ | toast0 5 hours ago | parent [-] | | Many states do collect restitution funds from revenues generated by the work of encarcerated people, and those funds do go to victims. I don't know that that applies to copyright infringement, but it is possible to get some recovery from criminal proceedings. | | |
| ▲ | kube-system 5 hours ago | parent [-] | | If a criminal case ever happens, it is a possibility that restitution can be awarded. But generally, if somebody's infringing your copyright and you want to seek damages, you need to bring a civil case yourself. Well over 99% of copyright cases are civil. |
|
| |
| ▲ | 6 hours ago | parent | prev [-] | | [deleted] |
| |
| ▲ | cestith 7 hours ago | parent | prev [-] | | Sometimes for physical property the police take it and the owner can get it back from them. That much is sometimes free. My motorcycle got returned, but if I wanted compensation for the substantial damage done to it I would have had to get it from the thief. Often the property is never found and returned. |
|
|
|
|
| ▲ | kube-system 6 hours ago | parent | prev | next [-] |
| > It's rather incongruous that you register intellectual property for very little It's even more incongruous that you'd have to "register" for your rights. Intellectual property are recognized as an inherent right that doesn't require any registration at all, under the 1886 Berne Convention. Although the US was not a signatory until 1989. |
| |
| ▲ | dghlsakjg 5 hours ago | parent | next [-] | | In the US, you do not need to register your copyright. It is entirely optional, and you can still enforce an unregistered copyright. | | | |
| ▲ | 5 hours ago | parent | prev [-] | | [deleted] |
|
|
| ▲ | simonh 10 hours ago | parent | prev | next [-] |
| Creators pay tax on their income. We all get legal protections for our property. |
| |
| ▲ | boomlinde 9 hours ago | parent | next [-] | | Real property owners also pay tax on their income. Income is taxed. Real property is taxed. Intellectual property is not. | | |
| ▲ | dghlsakjg 5 hours ago | parent | next [-] | | Taxing copyright ownership is effectively impossible. Unless you want to figure out how to receive a tax bill for the comment you have written. Just about any written or artistic artifact you create is subject to copyright protection. How do you begin to decide how a tweet should be taxed | |
| ▲ | simonh 8 hours ago | parent | prev | next [-] | | I'm in the UK. Simply owning land does not incur taxes here, we don't have land value taxes. You pay capital gains tax on profits selling land. There are annual taxes on buildings such as council taxes on houses, specifically to pay for municipal services, but not generally on land. If I make goods I'm not taxed for owning them, only if I earn income from the sale or use of those goods. | | |
| ▲ | closewith 8 hours ago | parent [-] | | There are some analogues of a land tax in the UK. Council tax for residential property, rates for businesses, and the upcoming mansion tax. |
| |
| ▲ | bryanrasmussen 6 hours ago | parent | prev | next [-] | | Real property is taxed, but often you do not pay capital gains on sold real property (this "often" of course varies by jurisdiction, so yes in lots of places you may pay some if the conditions are right), when selling intellectual property you often (same proviso as before, only inverted) pay capital gains. | |
| ▲ | brookst 9 hours ago | parent | prev | next [-] | | IP is next to impossible to appraise, unlike land. It’s pretty easy to ballpark what a lot of house or office building is worth based on comparables that sold recently. IP doesn’t sell that much and comparisons are harder. | | |
| ▲ | toast0 5 hours ago | parent | next [-] | | Copyright is easy to appraise. Estimate the stream of payments it will generate; take the net present value using an appropriate estimate of a safe interest rate. Will it always match the actual value? No, of course not. Sometimes popularity changes a lot, or interest rates change a lot. I'm not sure you really need a proprerty tax on copyrights though. They generate taxable income until they expire. It seems more fair to tax the actual income rather than appraised value, to avoid problems from cases where the appraisal is too high or too low. | |
| ▲ | closewith 8 hours ago | parent | prev [-] | | This is actually a solved problem. It is self-assessed valuation with compulsory sale at declared value, known as the Harberger Tax. | | |
| ▲ | boomlinde 7 hours ago | parent | next [-] | | The effect of a Harberger tax on intellectual property would probably be an upwards transfer of ownership of intellectual property, from people who can't afford to pay taxes on whatever those 100,000x more wealthy are willing to pay. A Harberger tax might work well in economist-land, where any discrepancy between what wealth I could extract from my property and what wealth I actually extract from it represents an inefficiency that can be addressed by a transfer of ownership at market value at no inconvenience to the original owner. In reality, there are many other reasons than market value that I might hold onto intellectual property. | |
| ▲ | ralferoo 8 hours ago | parent | prev | next [-] | | This is only a solution if you think it's fair to have a regular ownership tax on top of the tax paid when purchasing / selling something. | | |
| ▲ | closewith 7 hours ago | parent [-] | | It's a solution to the problem raised by the GP - how to fairly value IP. This whole thread is about how many countries with land taxes don't similarly tax other assets like IP. Whether you think it's fair or not is another question - the blocker isn't fair valuation. | | |
| ▲ | bryanrasmussen 6 hours ago | parent [-] | | the solution to how to fairly value IP was provided by the owner, capital gains tax happens on sale of IP https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=47220210 capital gains does not happen on sale of land generally.
These two things are obviously taxed differently because it is to the value of the government to do so, and the value of the government is supposed in many countries to somehow translate into a value for society. | | |
| ▲ | closewith 4 hours ago | parent [-] | | Profits from property sales are often tax as CGT. It's only a select few jurisdictions that don't tax property sales, often with both CGTs and stamp duties. The difference in how their taxed in the US is certainly not standard globally, nor is it likely to be optimal. |
|
|
| |
| ▲ | wang_li 5 hours ago | parent | prev [-] | | That's a dumb system as it doesn't account for the fact that a piece of property's value can change over time. You write a book, you have to declare its value prior to knowing it's value to consumers. If you aren't independently wealthy already you will never be able to become wealthy by writing books, paintings, songs, etc. as you will have to declare their value quite low in order to pay taxes on them. If it becomes popular the publishing company comes along and forcibly buys it from you for the low value you had to put on it because you couldn't pay the tax, then raises it's value far beyond what the author could afford and profits from the movies rights and etc. |
|
| |
| ▲ | kube-system 6 hours ago | parent | prev [-] | | Real property is sometimes taxed. Certain uses/users are partially exempt from taxation, and some uses/users are entirely exempt. It is not legal to rob these properties, nor should it be. |
| |
| ▲ | 10 hours ago | parent | prev [-] | | [deleted] |
|
|
| ▲ | freejazz an hour ago | parent | prev | next [-] |
| How often do you see the US enforcing copyrights? |
|
| ▲ | ivell 11 hours ago | parent | prev | next [-] |
| IPR is a form of incentive for creators in service of betterment of the society (it also could be detrimental like Mein Kempf though). On the other hand real estate does not need such extra incentives. Need or greed is enough. |
| |
| ▲ | GuestFAUniverse 10 hours ago | parent [-] | | The book title is "Mein K_a_mpf". It's related to the latin "c_a_mpus" / battle field -- like most European languages, there are close relationships to the neighbors. While there were shifts in sounds: in this case not. |
|
|
| ▲ | stevekemp 10 hours ago | parent | prev | next [-] |
| > while a piece of land pays property taxes. In some countries taxes are annual. In the UK you pay taxes when you buy/sell property, or land. You don't need to pay land/property taxes every year. |
| |
| ▲ | lanceflt 9 hours ago | parent [-] | | Council taxes are property taxes and are monthly. | | |
| ▲ | stevekemp 6 hours ago | parent | next [-] | | Council taxes could be considered propertie taxes, I guess, though I've always thought of them as paying for rubbish collection & etc. However council taxes are paid by the residents of a property rather than the owner of a property. Granted these are often the same, but consider the case of a landlord with five properties the tenants would be paying those. In the sense that Americans talk about property taxes as an annual thing I believe that distinction makes it a slightly different thing.. (And council tax is only a thing for property, if you buy a chunk of land with no houses upon it you pay nothing.) | |
| ▲ | mvc 5 hours ago | parent | prev | next [-] | | They're not exactly proportional to the value of the property though are they? There's folks in London with multi-million pound mansions who pay the same or less in council tax than a family home in the suburbs. | |
| ▲ | dghf 9 hours ago | parent | prev [-] | | Well, technically they're annual, but you're allowed to pay them in arrears over 10 or 12 months. |
|
|
|
| ▲ | piaste 10 hours ago | parent | prev | next [-] |
| The enforcement isn't the issue, it's the scarcity. |
|
| ▲ | SolarNet 7 hours ago | parent | prev [-] |
| Land is scarce. Also, generally, property taxes are paid to the city/county that makes that land desirable to live in. |