Qu??bec Sales tax
ahebert at pubnix.net
Wed Mar 28 21:45:26 UTC 2018
Same deal as Paypal and EBay.
Netflix dropping their services in CDN/QC only serve <Yuo know who>
attempt at making yet another market grab.
At the end Netflix may just charge the Tax and funnel it to the
govt. They'll still be making a bundle.
( And with all the hardware already deployed locally at the
many exchanges ... )
Now if we can only break that damn 1930's licensing scheme so that
we can gain access to more content... Kinda annoyed that <You know who>
is hogging all the content with their vertical licensing agreements.
Alain Hebert ahebert at pubnix.net
50 boul. St-Charles
P.O. Box 26770 Beaconsfield, Quebec H9W 6G7
Tel: 514-990-5911 http://www.pubnix.net Fax: 514-990-9443
On 03/27/18 18:21, Ken Chase wrote:
> If Netflix has no physical presence in Quebec, what the lever are they going
> to use to force this? A lawsuit in <state of netflix incorporation> in the
> US? What court is going to entertain a foreign jurisdiction's tax claim in
> their court? And how would that be then enforced?
> Canada has tried this before:
> Court file: https://scc-csc.lexum.com/scc-csc/scc-csc/en/item/16701/index.do
> Im a big fan of Canada standing up for its sovereignty (I live here), but nice
> On Tue, Mar 27, 2018 at 06:10:51PM -0400, Jean-Francois Mezei said:
> >Not quite networking but probably relevant.
> >The Canadian province of Qu??bec just introduced a new budget with
> >basically the intent to force foreign digital companies who sell
> >services to Qu??bekers to collect the local value added sales tax and
> >remit those to the QC government.
> >The goal is to capture tax from Netflix who has so far escaped taxation
> >in Canada by having no legal/physical presence in Canada, no cache
> >servers of its own etc. Netflix does not currently collect province
> >information from customers (or any address info for that matter).
> >They based many of their arguments on an OECD study (which ironically
> >the Canadian federal government says is not completed yet (as excuse for
> >not proceeding with similar tax).
> >So foreign digital services will be required to require subscibers enter
> >AND VALIDATE their address so that they have an accurate province field
> >(validation remains to be finalized), and IF they sell more than $30,000
> >to Qu??bec residents, will be required to self register with QC
> >government to collect local sales tax (and remit to QC government).
> >The Qu??bec budget expects that validation of address will be based on IP
> >address geolocation or custoemrs send paper bills to prove place of
> >(Although requiring full address/phone number and sendint this to credit
> >card network for authorization might constitute a better means to
> >validate address).
> >I suspect the big winners will be VPN services in the USA :-)
> >Because many ISPs span multiple provinces, IP geolocation generally
> >points to their HQ address, not necessarily the province of the
> >subscriber. (This is especially true for DSL in bell Canada wholesale
> >where currently a single point of connection between Bell and ISP allows
> >full reach of all of its DSL territory in QC/ON. For Cable, ISPs require
> >different IP pools for Rogers in Ontario and Vid??otron in Ontario (with
> >a couple of exceptions where Vid??otron has service in a couple fo
> >Ontario towns). In Western Canada, things are harder as Shaw serves BC,
> >AB, SASK and MB.
> Ken Chase - math at sizone.org Guelph Canada
More information about the NANOG