Seems there are a couple angles to this taxing of VoIP, depending how "pure" the VoIP is. At one extreme you have a form of VoIP that doesn't use any PSTN elements in the signal path. At the other extreme you have the use of PSTN elements at the ends, but IP in the middle.
Which forms are taxed, and which aren't, is the first question up for debate. Different states are leaning different ways for different forms.
Which leads to the second question, which is whether this decision belongs with individual states, or instead should be a blanket decision at the federal level.
On the question of taxing relative to the "purity," some argue that not taxing the "IP in the middle" form would lead to gaming the system. In other words, avoiding the taxes by simply putting a sliver of IP somewhere in the middle of the signal path. It's similar in some ways to the question of whether RBOCs can deploy a small sliver of fiber somewhere in the last mile to declare it a "new network," thereby avoiding legacy regulation.
On the state versus federal question, the main argument seems to be that different rules in different states creates billing (and taxing) chaos.
In addition, there's the question of how or if CALEA rules apply to the different forms of VoIP, and also, how should universal service rules be changed.
These are my interpretations of the key issues anyway. If someone who follows this more closely wants to confirm or correct, please do. |
