[arin-ppml] Fw: Accusation of fundamental, conflictofinterest/IPaddresspolicy pitched directly to ICANN

Martin Hannigan hannigan at gmail.com
Tue May 3 15:14:40 EDT 2011

This is much more complicated than you are letting on. Perhaps *buying
addresses on Amazon would be a non tax event. The *seller would
realize a profit and that would be considered income.  Again, "too
good to be true". Collecting tax is different than paying tax. Recent
trends suggest that the days of not collecting tax on goods sold via
the Internet are fast coming to a close, FWIW.



On Tue, May 3, 2011 at 2:46 PM, Mike Burns <mike at nationwideinc.com> wrote:
> Taxation of the Internet is a local government matter. In the States
> political pressure has resulted in little to no taxation.
> The same forces will act on these new assets.
> Taxes are bad, but their existence is no reason to avoid a market.
> Regards,
> Mike
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: Ray Hunter
> To: arin-ppml at arin.net ; Mike Burns
> Sent: Tuesday, May 03, 2011 1:56 PM
> Subject: Re: [arin-ppml] Fw: Accusation of fundamental,
> conflictofinterest/IPaddresspolicy pitched directly to ICANN
> Whilst I don't necessarily agree than an IPv4 address has any "value", and
> it's your idea to create an (artificial) market where address allocations
> attract a hard dollar value (which they traditionally haven't had), I would
> note the following concern: Any legal entity that transfers an intangible
> asset across an (international) border for a payment is almost certainly
> going to attract the attention of more than one government entity regarding
> accounting and taxation, not least for Value Added Tax, international
> transfer pricing, avoidance of income tax ......
> See for example
> http://www.kluwerlaw.com/Catalogue/titleinfo.htm?ProdID=904119925X
> The ARIN service region includes Canada, many Caribbean and North Atlantic
> islands, and the United States. The Internet is even bigger.
> So would your market free of government restrictions and taxes be
> international, limited to national boundaries? NAFTA? state boundaries? or
> what?
> Would corporations and not for profit entities now have to enter an asset
> value in their annual accounts for the value of an IPv4 allocation?
> If something has a value, and can therefore be taxed, it's much more likely
> to attract more government control, not less. Just look at the wireless
> spectrum allocation auctions. Is this what you want for the Internet?
> Be careful what you wish for.
> regards,
> RayH
> My interest is in having a market for the buying and selling of IP addresses
> free from government and psuedo-government restrictions like taxes and
> justification requirements.
> Regards,
> Mike Burns
> _______________________________________________
> You are receiving this message because you are subscribed to
> the ARIN Public Policy Mailing List (ARIN-PPML at arin.net).
> Unsubscribe or manage your mailing list subscription at:
> http://lists.arin.net/mailman/listinfo/arin-ppml
> Please contact info at arin.net if you experience any issues.

More information about the ARIN-PPML mailing list