California State Tax on Free Phones

Four years ago I got a new cell phone. The deal was that the new phone would be free. It was. But I paid thirty bucks for the free phone to the state of California.

What's up with that?
You've heard of these deals. Phone companies try to get and keep your business by offering a free phone for starting or renewing your service contract. They'll take a loss on the phone in exchange for your ensured business for two years. Except that the phone isn't free for you, the customer. For me, California had its hand out to collect tax on my non-purchase transaction.

I got mad at the time, but realized that I--as one person among millions--couldn't "fight City Hall." This is the helpless rationalization we tell ourselves when succumbing to the overbearing overregulation and taxation of overly progressive (read oppressive) states like California.

What right does California have butting into a business transaction between me and my phone company? I pay plenty of tax on the phone service. Why is the state taxing me on the free phone? I didn't buy the phone; they GAVE it to me!

California's view of business

Four-year-old ire returned upon reading a comment online. A Californian had the same experience as mine with tax on a free phone. The comment responded to an opinion piece discussing the scope of big government. The piece shed light on overbearing state governments like California's and how they view business.

" -- the state government would look upon any employer of a large industry not as a partner that would alleviate unemployment and lessen county expenditures, but more or less a sort of target to regulate, advise, lecture, and chastise, both to justify the expanding government regulatory work force and to achieve a fuzzy sort of social justice."

Legitimized thievery

I could say that a light bulb went on, but I really knew this before. California regards businesses operating in the state as a resource for funding government. They call it a tax. I call it thievery.

California is kin to the Mafia. It collects "fees" from store owners doing business in the neighborhoods for simply doing business in the neighborhoods. The difference is that California collects legally and customers pay. And the collecting goes well beyond neighborhoods.

Business provides jobs

California doesn't recognize business as employers creating jobs. California government sees none of the social and economic good that businesses provide.

Besides, business is the vehicle for commerce and trade, the exchanges that generate benefit for the parties involved. California brought nothing to the exchange. Why should it benefit?

Enough already?

I hope by now you've understood my point. It was only recently that I understood it myself, taking me four years to "get it." I don't like it. I'm reading comments that others don't either. Like others, I'm getting to the point of having had enough of government butting into my business with business.

There's something very wrong going on in California. Commenters are quick to name other states with a grabbing hand between business and customers. And, like a tax on a free phone, no one likes it very much, and we're starting to speak up. Some kind of action can't be far behind.

Source: http://pajamasmedia.com/victordavishanson/thoughts-on-a-surreal-depression/