3 ms·

Rather than an off shoring tax, I think we need to look at the flow of assets covered under intellectual property across borders. I'm just putting this idea out

Rather than an off shoring tax, I think we need to look at the flow of assets covered under intellectual property across borders. I'm just putting this idea out there; I'm not sure how I feel about it personally. But businesses want to treat intellectual property like real property. However, unlike real property, they want the benefits of being able to ship it over borders without restriction (e.g., an off shoring company sending the latest code on a nightly basis). Real property is subject to import tariffs, duties, rules, etc. Countries wouldn't just accept truck loads of goods crossing into their borders without restriction unless some sort of free trade deal was in place. But this is essentially what is happening with intellectual property. Every night, a huge amount of intellectual property gets transferred via the net from one country to another (e.g., an off shoring company's nightly build). Unless I'm mistaken (which I very well may be), it's hardly accounted for. I'm not sure that we can continue to have it both ways with intellectual property. It probably should either consistently be treated like property, or not.

ewanmcteagle 17y ago
Free trade is the default. It has to deliberately made otherwise. Restricted trade serves only special interests and since the world is gradually trying to move towards undoing trade restrictions I don't see why this is a good argument.
- 9oliYQjP 17y ago
  I'm not disagreeing with you, however free trade is most certainly not a default as far as the law is concerned. As such, intellectual property is for all practical purposes being treated entirely inconsistent with real property in this manner. EDIT: FYI here is the U.S. Harmonized Tariff Schedule in delimited format (2.0 MB) http://www.usitc.gov/publications/docs/tata/hts/bychapter/0910_HTS_delimited.txt http://www.usitc.gov/publications/docs/tata/hts/bychapter/09... to give a sense of the sort of wire-ranging tariffs that exist on real goods imported to the U.S.
  - 9oliYQjP 17y ago
    I wouldn't normally whine, but why is this comment being downmodded? It's largely a factual observation. In fact, the parent of the comment above is arguably incorrect in that countries have recently been imposing protectionist measures. Notably, the "Buy American" clause of the stimulus package has resulted in terribly protectionist measures. Countries that do trade with the U.S. have responded in kind with protectionist measures of their own. While it's true that the world was moving toward freer trade, I don't think you can say that this is the case today in the presence of so much evidence to the contrary.

ewanmcteagle 17y ago

Free trade is the default. It has to deliberately made otherwise. Restricted trade serves only special interests and since the world is gradually trying to move towards undoing trade restrictions I don't see why this is a good argument.

9oliYQjP 17y ago
I'm not disagreeing with you, however free trade is most certainly not a default as far as the law is concerned. As such, intellectual property is for all practical purposes being treated entirely inconsistent with real property in this manner. EDIT: FYI here is the U.S. Harmonized Tariff Schedule in delimited format (2.0 MB) http://www.usitc.gov/publications/docs/tata/hts/bychapter/0910_HTS_delimited.txt http://www.usitc.gov/publications/docs/tata/hts/bychapter/09... to give a sense of the sort of wire-ranging tariffs that exist on real goods imported to the U.S.
- 9oliYQjP 17y ago
  I wouldn't normally whine, but why is this comment being downmodded? It's largely a factual observation. In fact, the parent of the comment above is arguably incorrect in that countries have recently been imposing protectionist measures. Notably, the "Buy American" clause of the stimulus package has resulted in terribly protectionist measures. Countries that do trade with the U.S. have responded in kind with protectionist measures of their own. While it's true that the world was moving toward freer trade, I don't think you can say that this is the case today in the presence of so much evidence to the contrary.