Follow Slashdot stories on Twitter

 


Forgot your password?
Close
typodupeerror
×
Wireless Networking The Almighty Buck Hardware

Japan to Tax All Unlicensed Wireless Devices? 75

Posted by CowboyNeal from the that's-a-lotta-tax dept.
Chicken Ranch writes "It's not just about wireless networking. This tax would apply to a range of devices from WLAN to RFID to Cordless Phones to Remote Control Cars. Basically, if it operates in an unlicensed band, the government wants a tribute. So would they still call it an 'unlicensed' band?"
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.

Japan to Tax All Unlicensed Wireless Devices? More

Japan to Tax All Unlicensed Wireless Devices?

Comments Filter:

  • Even Bluetooth? (Score:4, Insightful)

    by WrongSizeGlass ( 838941 ) on Friday July 13, 2007 @06:59AM (#19847179)

    The fee would apply to radio devices that operate in license-free spectrum, which includes Wi-Fi, Bluetooth, Zigbee, and UWB technologies.
    ...
    Japanese consumers already pay a yearly 420 Yen fee for each mobile phone.
    So they'd have to pay an additional tax for using a Bluetooth headset on the mobile phone they already pay a tax on?

    • Re:Even Bluetooth? (Score:5, Insightful)

      by KiloByte ( 825081 ) on Friday July 13, 2007 @07:03AM (#19847195)
      Since when double taxation was a problem for any kind of government?
      • Mod parent up!

        Double, triple taxation, whatever. Look at this way: they do it here in the States. You get taxed on the money you make, then you pay your mortgage. You get taxed on the value of your house (and the longer you pay your mortgage, the more your house is generally worth). You then get taxed on everything you buy. Somethings you buy you get taxed on extra because they are either luxury items (excise tax), bad for you ("sin" tax), or are otherwise taxed anyway (gas, oil, communications servic

    • Re: (Score:1, Insightful)

      by Anonymous Coward
      Why not? It's doing two separate radio transmissions in different parts of the spectrum.

    • Re: (Score:3, Funny)

      by Radicode ( 898701 )
      In other news, the government is pushing for people to buy Quad-band Smartphones with wifi, bluetooth and RFID.

    • Re: (Score:3, Interesting)

      by Isao ( 153092 )
      So they'd have to pay an additional tax for using a Bluetooth headset on the mobile phone they already pay a tax on?


      As an aside, for some reason I'm not yet aware of the Japanese basically do not use Bluetooth headsets at all. It's rather weird.

      • Probably because it's considered extremely rude to talk out loud on your phone in Japan. It's frowned upon (almost forbidden) to take or make phone calls in public transportation and, for private calls, all Japanese will exit their office and call from outside (just like you would go outside for smoking).

        As a result, they are the masters of constant "quick-typing for quick-Email-messaging" from/to friends, all the time. It's quiet, it's in line with canonic politeness, it's the current standard for communic

  • RFIDs? Submitters should RTFA (Score:5, Interesting)

    by ReallyEvilCanine ( 991886 ) on Friday July 13, 2007 @07:00AM (#19847183) Homepage
    There's no mention of RFIDs which in any case aren't transmitters in the sense of the proposal. They could possibly tax the readers, but then that would mean they'd have to also tax in-store anti-theft devices. Japanese politics being what it is, there's no way I'll risk making any sort of prediction.

  • Money? (Score:5, Insightful)

    by borizz ( 1023175 ) on Friday July 13, 2007 @07:01AM (#19847185)
    Smells like a simple money-grab to me. Those devices are low power and thus only locally change the radio spectrum significantly. Licensed radio was implemented to keep the long range spectrum usable.

    • Re: (Score:2, Interesting)

      by Anonymous Coward
      Dead right. Here in the UK we have had a continuous recent history of money-grab tax proposals. We call them 'stealth taxes' over here.

      They are good for politicians in two ways. First, they raise funds almost invisibly - tech companies are always cutting the cost of their kit, and this just means the cost goes down a little slower, so there are no complaints from the consumer.

      Second, you need a bunch of administrators to collect the tax. These people owe their living to the tax and the government, so they a
    • ***Smells like a simple money-grab to me. Those devices are low power and thus only locally change the radio spectrum significantly. Licensed radio was implemented to keep the long range spectrum usable.***

      You could be right, but Japanese cities are very densely populated compared to most Western cities -- even New York. 'Local' can involve a lot more people than in typical US or European environments. Also, the culture is loaded with alternate ways of doing things that are not necessarily illogical, ju

    • Re: (Score:3, Informative)

      by Firethorn ( 177587 )
      Yeah, the stated reason 'to control illegal broadcasts' doesn't cut it with me, as people doing illegal things tend to not worry about laws period. Not paying a tax would go right along illegally broadcasting.

      No mention in the article if it'd be a one time fee when the equipment is purchased, or an annual fee like the cell phone tax or the british TV tax.

      Even with the fee, it would take police resources of an epic proportions, armed with sophisticated equipment to track most illegal broadcasters down, defi

  • "Wants a tribute"? (Score:3, Insightful)

    by Aladrin ( 926209 ) on Friday July 13, 2007 @07:09AM (#19847209)
    I love how all Slashdot articles have massive amounts of spin on them now.

    This is a -proposal-, not a law, not even something someone has said 'I want this to happen'. They are looking into ways to control "illegal" radio stations.

    It's quite obvious to anyone that even glances at it that it not only won't stop things that are already illegal, but that it will adversely affect many people it wasn't intended to.

    BTW, that 420 yen yearly tax per mobile phone is about $3.50 US. -yawn- As if we don't already spend a hell of a lot more than that in the US. (Hint: It's on your cellphone bill every month.)

    • Re: (Score:2)

      by kypper ( 446750 )
      BTW, that 420 yen yearly tax per mobile phone is about $3.50 US. -yawn- As if we don't already spend a hell of a lot more than that in the US. (Hint: It's on your cellphone bill every month.)

      The Slide it in your Ass *ahem* System Access Fee. :)
      Network upkeep, maintenance, not a government fee, yadda yadda...

      or... a way of making the monthly rate of the plan itself look cheaper at the point of sale.

      • Re: (Score:2)

        by Tim C ( 15259 )
        Network upkeep, maintenance, not a government fee, yadda yadda...

        So it's an unelected corporation taking the money off you rather than the government (who would presumably spend it on public projects rather than shareholder dividends); you're still paying more than you'd necessarily have to otherwise.

        • Network upkeep, maintenance, not a government fee, yadda yadda...

          So it's an unelected corporation taking the money off you

          Of course the mobile phone market is elected. American GSM customers can choose AT&T or T-Mobile, just like American voters can choose the Republican Party or the Democratic Party.

          rather than the government (who would presumably spend it on public projects rather than shareholder dividends)

          "Shareholder dividends" sounds a lot like pork [wikipedia.org].

      • No,no, my favorite is the "regulatory recovery fee". Just another way to make us pay extra (since they can't raise the rate on a contract) for government requirements that they have to comply with - some of which they were always required to comply with, but never did until they lost an appeal in court.

    • Re: (Score:2)

      by Tx ( 96709 )
      I love how all Slashdot articles have massive amounts of spin on them now.

      Well, it does seem to be a good way of eliciting informative responses to the article, such as yours ;) I personally find the tabloid-style headlands rather entertaining, and any misconceptions they generate are usually cleared up in the top few comments.

    • Re: (Score:3, Insightful)

      by Anonymous Coward
      Good point, its is only $3.50 per month. I agree its okay that a mugger only takes a small amount of money off you. Who would begrudge a bully a dollar when they kindly leave you with your shoes. In effect the robber has gifted to you all the things he hasn't stolen, which must be worth something right?

      Maybe someone wouldn't see the obvious logic of the problem above and might have some doubts. But thats ok because if the majority think its okay then it must be! Thats the beauty of democracy.

      • Re:"Wants a tribute"? (Score:5, Insightful)

        by Aladrin ( 926209 ) on Friday July 13, 2007 @08:16AM (#19847483)
        Yeah, but's -not- a mugger, is it? It's the government. Maybe they don't have a -whole- lot of choice about their government in Japan, but here in the US we -do- and we end up with just as many (and probably more) bullshit taxes and regulations.

        As (rudely) noted by the other responder, it's a yearly fee, not monthly, for Japan.

        Why is it any different than any other regulated service? If we want the government to regulate something, we have to give them money to be able to do it. $3.50 a year seems awful low to regulate the cellphone industry, if you ask me. But then, maybe they aren't such assholes over there, and don't have to slapped back into line so often.

        Over here (in the US), the money for that comes from other taxes. If corner drug dealer has 5 cellphones, and I only have 1, why shouldn't he pay more taxes? And the neighbor down the road that has no cellphone... Why should he sponsor regulation of my luxury item?

        At any rate, let's be clear on this: The taxes WILL be collected. They may not specifically say 'this is a cellphone tax' but the money WILL come from the tax payer.

        Taxes for road repair come (at least partially) from gasoline.
        Taxes for helping smokers get medical care for lung cancer come from... Cigarettes, now, but there was a time they didn't. The burden was correctly moved to those who choose to smoke, knowing the risks. (If my mother can quit, anyone can.)

        Why should cellphones be any different?

        The problem here is not the tax, but the law that goes with it. It doesn't do what it's designed to, and has adverse effects on those unrelated to the problem.

        • Re: (Score:2)

          by Lumpy ( 12016 )
          but here in the US we -do- and we end up with just as many (and probably more) bullshit taxes and regulations.
          That is because here in the USA the general VOTING populace tents to vote for the silver-spoon, seperated from reality, mentially challenged and not the guy that has a level head and common sense. This pervades every public office from President down to Citiy council.

          Americans are easily swayed by soundbites and flashy commercials.

          A level headed Person has no chance, they dont cater to the voting m
          • It would be nice to have such choices at election time. However, the nature of the two-party system and the cost of getting your name out help to ensure that our choice boils down to the lesser of two silver-spoon, reality distorted evils.
        • Yeah, but's -not- a mugger, is it? It's the government. Maybe they don't have a -whole- lot of choice about their government in Japan, but here in the US we -do- and we end up with just as many (and probably more) bullshit taxes and regulations.

          Japan hasn't been Imperial since the end of WWII, they are a democracy now, though a little different than the US model, they are still a democracy.

        • Over here (in the US), the money for that comes from other taxes. If corner drug dealer has 5 cellphones, and I only have 1, why shouldn't he pay more taxes? And the neighbor down the road that has no cellphone... Why should he sponsor regulation of my luxury item?
          I'm paying school taxes, even though I have no children. I don't agree with it, but apparently the politicians do.
        • >Maybe they don't have a -whole- lot of choice about their government in Japan, but here in the US we -do- and we end up with just as many (and probably more) bullshit taxes and regulations.

          Don't have a whole lot of choice? Compared to the U.S.? Are you fucking kidding me?

          Let's compare, shall we?

          Major Japanese political parties:
          Liberal Democratic Party (right wing) - 115 elected members of the upper house, 296 elected members of the lower house
          Democratic Party (left wing) - 83 elected members of the up

          • Re: (Score:2)

            by Aladrin ( 926209 )
            Haha, well that rather proves my point about not knowing their political situation, doesn't it?

            Thanks for correcting me. (And no, I'm not being sarcastic. I don't enjoy ignorance.)

      • Re: (Score:1)

        by foobsr ( 693224 )
        But thats ok because if the majority think its okay then it must be! Thats the beauty of democracy.

        My guess is that the idea of 'democracy' is based on the presupposition that people are 'equal' (within a 'reasonable' range).

        With exponential distributions everywhere (income [arxiv.org] the most obvious) the model gets as flawed as 'communism' was in the Soviet Union.

        CC.
      • "Maybe someone wouldn't see the obvious logic of the problem above and might have some doubts. But thats ok because if the majority think its okay then it must be! Thats the beauty of democracy."

        No, the beauty of democracy is that you are not forced to use a cell phone if you do not agree with the $3.50 yearly fee. Or you could realize that the benefit of paying the fee outweighs the inconvenience of having to find pay phones all the time... Or you could raise a fleet of carrier pigeons to deliver your m
    • This is a -proposal-, not a law

      It's probably best to look into details of proposals and raise a stink before they become law. Doing so would have saved us a whole lot of trouble with things like the Patriot Act which was passed almost completely unread by the people passing it, much less their constituents.

      Waiting until something is already law to complain about it is like buying a fire extinguisher as a means of fire prevention.

      (Hint: It's on your cellphone bill every month.)

      That is true and is one of the

      • Re: (Score:2)

        by Aladrin ( 926209 )
        Indeed, and for people affected by the law, I heartily reccommend they act on the public comment period that was referenced in the article. For the rest of us...

        Like me, I doubt most of the people responding to this have little to no knowledge of Japanese law and government. Is the $3.50 the only tax they pay on their phones? The article sure makes it sound that way, but I have no idea.

        My point is that everyone is getting indignant about a proposal in a society they know nothing about that proposes a tax

    • Re: (Score:2)

      by AlHunt ( 982887 )
      >BTW, that 420 yen yearly tax per mobile phone is about $3.50 US. -yawn-

      Might want to stifle that yawn - incrementalism is how America got so screwed up.

  • Tax vs. License (Score:4, Insightful)

    by DynaSoar ( 714234 ) on Friday July 13, 2007 @07:21AM (#19847265) Journal
    You don't need a license to own property, but you have to pay property tax.
    You don't need a license to buy things, but you have to pay sales tax.

    You need a license to drive, but as long as it's not your car you don't have to pay taxes on it.
    You need a license to operate a ham radio, but you don't pay any more taxes than if you didn't.
    • In other words:
      When I do some things (own property, buy goods) I have to pay the government some money, and it's called a tax.
      When I do other things (drive, operate a radio) I have to pay the goverment some money, and it's called a license.

      Yes, I see the distinction clearly now.
      • Badfish sez:

        > When I do some things (own property, buy goods) I have to pay the government some money, and it's called a tax.
        > When I do other things (drive, operate a radio) I have to pay the goverment some money, and it's called a license.

        A license shows competence in a field and grants the holder the right to do that thing. Not all licenses are granted by government agencies. Some, as from some professional organizations, grant the license and get the money. These may or may not follow rules as set

    • Re: (Score:3, Insightful)

      by cocotoni ( 594328 )
      Exactly!

      Furthermore WiFi, Bluetooth, RC, RFID etc. are in the part of the spectrum that is not "unlicensed" on a world wide scale, as the summary would like us to believe - this part of the spectrum is just reserved for "other" purposes, meaning that the goverments will not decide to use the spectrum to issue other "licensed" services. Basically a bunch of governments has decided to wall-off part of the spectrum (which is of course a scarse natural resource belonging to a particular country) and not use it

    • Re:Tax vs. License (Score:4, Interesting)

      by NoMaster ( 142776 ) on Friday July 13, 2007 @07:55AM (#19847391) Homepage Journal
      Besides, it not an "unlicensed band" anyway - it's class licensed. Any equipment which operates in those bands has to meet certain stringent requirements with regards to maximum power, etc, in order to be operated without an operator's licence (which is why things like boosting your WiFi ERP beyond certain limits through the use of high gain antennas, etc, is illegal).

      If, to take one example, the 2.4GHz band was truly unlicensed, your local regulatory authority couldn't stop you from hooking up a waveguide and external antenna to the magnetron of your microwave oven and splattering all the WiFi in the neighbourhood. But, because all such equipment is class licenced, you'd be operating it outside the conditions of the equipment license and they'll in fact come down on you like a ton of bricks...

  • I don't understand (Score:5, Interesting)

    by aadvancedGIR ( 959466 ) on Friday July 13, 2007 @07:44AM (#19847359)
    In France, if you want to use a wireless technoology, the manufacturer (or group of them) have to pay for a license to gain the right to use a certain band of frequence in certain way up to a certain transmission power. There are a few bands where anyone can do anything without the need of a license but at very low power, but some other bands are very expensive (TV, GSM...).
    Broadcast anything without license and you risk jail sentence, in particular if you interfere with commercial or military frequencies.
  • When you have to pay someone to stop `bad things` from happening. "Yeah, you could pay for a license...or you could...you know...`show me some respect`..if you know what I mean.."

  • Wireless Sensor Networks (Score:3, Interesting)

    by dominious ( 1077089 ) on Friday July 13, 2007 @08:40AM (#19847617)
    Does this tax apply per device? What if you have a WSN consisting of hundreds of wireless sensor nodes?
  • Government hack #1: "I would sure like to create a new program to help the (insert constituency of choice here). My pollsters show I am weak with (insert demographic that thinks constituency is being mistreated)"
    Government hack #2: "That sounds fine, but how would you like to pay for it?"
    GH1: "I don't know, how about reducing one of the programs that doesn't do much good for those (insert constituency not represented by GH1)."
    GH2: "Stop right there, that underperforming program was part of my platform
    • ... Am I the only one that thought GH1 and GH2 meant Guitar Hero 1 and 2? I guess I didn't pay enough attention to the first few lines...
      • Oops, sorry. I was trying to make it read like a script. Guitar Hero is neat (but I have a real one at home).
        • I think G.Hack (or something similar) would have worked better. Although, it may just be because I'm pretty sleepy...
    • Oh wait, these are politicians we are talking about...
    • GH1: "Thanks, GH2, this should get me another 2 years of pubic sector bliss."

      Honestly, these past ten years I think we've heard more than enough about the "pubic sector" bliss of our duly elected officials.
  • Because if you are licensed, you pay a tax/fee too..
    • "Unlicensed" here means that the devices may be used without applying for a license. In essence, the entire population already has a free (limited) license for the bands in question at low power (one of the limitations). If you pay for a license, you already pay for a license.

      They are talking about raising the license fee (and incurring a whole lot of paperwork: someone's going to have to register all of those paid-for licenses.)

      Reminds me of a toll bridge near me whose toll revenue just barely paid for t
  • I'd be really pissed at this.
  • It is really well timed, the deadline is the day that the bigwigs of wireless in Japan give their talks at the Wireless Expo [ric.co.jp]. Talk about a jab! To me this is bullshit and also not aimed at phones. Look, I have a landline and a mobile phone. The mobile used to cost me $200/mo. but now I've cut back a lot and it is about $100/mo.

    But the tax or whatever it is would be a large percentage of the cost of household devices, not just radio control robots (and how do you get them to pay yearly anyway??) but also zig
  • Looks like they're desperate for $$.
  • Part of this is Japan has a much tighter control on data transmitting devices (gov't wise) than us. You have to get the government to set up your TV...and your internet...

Slashdot Top Deals

One man's constant is another man's variable. -- A.J. Perlis

Close