kucharsk@dancer.Solbourne.COM (William Kucharski) (09/22/90)
This is an important plea to phone/write your Congressman and tell him how you feel. According to a report in this morning's Denver Rocky Mountain News, one of the taxes being talked about by Congress (like the increased beer tax) is a 10% luxury tax on the cost of electronic items over $1000. For example, this means if you bought a $2700 pair of speakers, you'd have to pay an additional $170 luxury tax. Considering that high-end audio is one of the only areas of consumer electronics which consists of only American products, that fact alone should, at least theoretically, give the folks in Washington food for thought. -- =============================================================================== | Internet: kucharsk@Solbourne.COM | William Kucharski | | uucp: ...!{boulder,sun,uunet}!stan!kucharsk | Solbourne Computer, Inc. | === The sentiments expressed above are MY opinions, NOT those of Solbourne. ===
howard@lage.lysator.liu.se (MindWalker) (09/24/90)
kucharsk@dancer.Solbourne.COM (William Kucharski) writes: >This is an important plea to phone/write your Congressman and tell him how you >feel. According to a report in this morning's Denver Rocky Mountain News, one >of the taxes being talked about by Congress (like the increased beer tax) is a >10% luxury tax on the cost of electronic items over $1000. For example, this >means if you bought a $2700 pair of speakers, you'd have to pay an additional >$170 luxury tax. Ah, this one almost makes me smile. Living in Sweden, I'm used to 25% tax on almost EVERYTHING, making a $2700 pair of speakers cost $3375. Add to this the fact that the speakers are probably imported for $2700, a 6% customs charge, the Swedish dealers 20% mark up and 25% sales tax = $4293. So go ahead, write to your Congressman before it's too late... /MHd -- Programming isn't a science, | Foo: howard@lysator.liu.se it's an art. | Bar: d89marho@odalix.ida.liu.se Why is it called common sense, | Fubar: Martin_Howard:d89:lith@xns.liu.se when so few possess it ? | Voice: Int +46 (0)13 261 283 (GMT + 1h)
stiv@stat5.rice.edu (david n stivers) (09/25/90)
In article <6541@uwm.edu> kucharsk@dancer.Solbourne.COM (William Kucharski) writes: >This is an important plea to phone/write your Congressman and tell him how you >feel. According to a report in this morning's Denver Rocky Mountain News, one >of the taxes being talked about by Congress (like the increased beer tax) is a >10% luxury tax on the cost of electronic items over $1000. For example, this >means if you bought a $2700 pair of speakers, you'd have to pay an additional >$170 luxury tax. > Is a speaker really an electronic device? I guess you could consider it so if you counted the crossover-then maybe it could be could be sold separately as an accessory? >Considering that high-end audio is one of the only areas of consumer electronics >which consists of only American products, that fact alone should, at least ^^^^^^^^ you mean US made?(sorry, just being nit-picky) >theoretically, give the folks in Washington food for thought. While a luxury tax is arguably (though not in this forum) a good idea, it does seem somewhat ironic that a tax that is almost certainly aimed at the Japanese would have serious effects on the few remaining US consumer electronics manufacturers. However, don't forget that there are a large number of high-end electronic products that are not made in the US, eg. Bryston, Linn (if by your definition of high-end you mean items that cost >$1000). If they truly are attempting to aim at the Japanese, than $1000 is a ridiculously high figure. If they're not, I would argue that there are better places to start implementing a luxury tax than consumer audio equipment, and its effect on US manufacturers would be only one point (self interest? moi?). david n stivers stiv@rice.edu