3 ms·

You (and every other responder) miss larger the point of my comment. Let's use Google as an example. Your clicks throughout the internet, like sand, don't amoun

by fny 9y ago

You (and every other responder) miss larger the point of my comment. Let's use Google as an example. Your clicks throughout the internet, like sand, don't amount to much of value. It's a very unrefined, raw material, with limited quantity. Even if Google were forced to value that raw material, they can argue they're trading it in equal exchange for whatever service they offer you, so there would still be no tax. In any situation, potentially derived value is not taxable. A car is worth whatever a car was bought/sold for, not including some hypothetical such as whatever I could make by driving it for Uber/Lyft. What matter's here is what will actually occur in the transaction. If Equifax chooses to sell its data, that income will be taxed at whatever price Equifax chooses to sell the data. Note this doesn't change that your "gift" of peanuts of data is not taxable because (a) your data alone isn't worth squat, (b) even if it was, you got something in exchange for it.

darkerside 9y ago
Like data in general, user data is essentially worthless until aggregated en masse and refined into insights. But when you consider how much data companies are hoarding, it doesn't take much of an assessed value to create a nontrivial taxable asset. Also, it doesn't matter that there's an exchange happening. Sales tax and income tax are assessed on fair exchanges of goods, services, and currency.
- fny 9y ago
  Sales tax isn't paid on trades. When you trade in a car for $2k off a $10k car, you only pay taxes on the difference: $8k. And if you grow oranges on your property that you never sell, you never pay taxes on those oranges.
  - panarky 9y ago
    Not in California. If you accept a trade-in on the sale of a vehicle, the allowance for the trade-in cannot be excluded from the amount on which tax is based. For example, if you sell a car for $20,000 and accept a trade-in valued at $4,000 as partial payment, tax is based on the $20,000 selling price. Source: http://www.boe.ca.gov/pdf/pub34.pdf http://www.boe.ca.gov/pdf/pub34.pdf
    - deleted 9y ago
      [deleted]
    - fny 9y ago
      I shouldn't have used vehicles since they are a special case in some states. At the federal level, taxes on barter income match my description. [0] Taxes are still zero if the company can claim the fair market value of the services they offer you equal the value of your clicks. [0]: https://www.irs.gov/taxtopics/tc400/tc420 https://www.irs.gov/taxtopics/tc400/tc420
  - mkhalil 9y ago
    Never heard of this, probably because in my state it doesn't apply. In 42 out of the 50 states (excluding California, Hawaii, Kentucky, Maryland, Michigan, Montana and Virginia [Oregon has no sales Tax]) however, this does apply. Still though, the example is a good one. You're trading your data for a service. There isn't anything to tax.
notjoemama 9y ago
I'll go one step further in saying the discussion framed around clicks being interpreted as a product is incorrect altogether. I think user metadata is part of a users identity and the friction we run up against is whether it ought to be legally protected. It's currently not illegal to sit outside a restaurant and records information about all of its patrons. You'd certainly be in hot water if you tried to do that at any federal building. At some level we know collecting that data is wrong because it can be used against us. Even the judicial branch knows this and requires the storage of user data to be encrypted by security agencies. That's not conclusive proof but evidence of our general outlook on the legality of tracking people. If we agree in a truly free society then collecting and monetizing metadata should be illegal. If we don't mind giving up that freedom then there's nothing wrong with companies creating a profile on you and tracking you no matter where you go and what you do. But the internet has spoken and we're gladly, albeit unknowingly, giving up any right of protection. I find it worrisome to think of what society will be like in another 50 years if nothing is done to curtail the fleecing of user data.
- rhizome 9y ago
  Aren't you describing the market research industry? Intent is the value, predicting intent is the goal.

by fny 9y ago

darkerside 9y ago

Like data in general, user data is essentially worthless until aggregated en masse and refined into insights. But when you consider how much data companies are hoarding, it doesn't take much of an assessed value to create a nontrivial taxable asset. Also, it doesn't matter that there's an exchange happening. Sales tax and income tax are assessed on fair exchanges of goods, services, and currency.

fny 9y ago
Sales tax isn't paid on trades. When you trade in a car for $2k off a $10k car, you only pay taxes on the difference: $8k. And if you grow oranges on your property that you never sell, you never pay taxes on those oranges.
- panarky 9y ago
  Not in California. If you accept a trade-in on the sale of a vehicle, the allowance for the trade-in cannot be excluded from the amount on which tax is based. For example, if you sell a car for $20,000 and accept a trade-in valued at $4,000 as partial payment, tax is based on the $20,000 selling price. Source: http://www.boe.ca.gov/pdf/pub34.pdf http://www.boe.ca.gov/pdf/pub34.pdf
  - deleted 9y ago
    [deleted]
  - fny 9y ago
    I shouldn't have used vehicles since they are a special case in some states. At the federal level, taxes on barter income match my description. [0] Taxes are still zero if the company can claim the fair market value of the services they offer you equal the value of your clicks. [0]: https://www.irs.gov/taxtopics/tc400/tc420 https://www.irs.gov/taxtopics/tc400/tc420
- mkhalil 9y ago
  Never heard of this, probably because in my state it doesn't apply. In 42 out of the 50 states (excluding California, Hawaii, Kentucky, Maryland, Michigan, Montana and Virginia [Oregon has no sales Tax]) however, this does apply. Still though, the example is a good one. You're trading your data for a service. There isn't anything to tax.

notjoemama 9y ago

I'll go one step further in saying the discussion framed around clicks being interpreted as a product is incorrect altogether. I think user metadata is part of a users identity and the friction we run up against is whether it ought to be legally protected. It's currently not illegal to sit outside a restaurant and records information about all of its patrons. You'd certainly be in hot water if you tried to do that at any federal building. At some level we know collecting that data is wrong because it can be used against us. Even the judicial branch knows this and requires the storage of user data to be encrypted by security agencies. That's not conclusive proof but evidence of our general outlook on the legality of tracking people. If we agree in a truly free society then collecting and monetizing metadata should be illegal. If we don't mind giving up that freedom then there's nothing wrong with companies creating a profile on you and tracking you no matter where you go and what you do. But the internet has spoken and we're gladly, albeit unknowingly, giving up any right of protection. I find it worrisome to think of what society will be like in another 50 years if nothing is done to curtail the fleecing of user data.

rhizome 9y ago
Aren't you describing the market research industry? Intent is the value, predicting intent is the goal.