Subject: [Asrg] Death, taxes and E-Postage.

From: "Hallam-Baker, Phillip" <[email-masked]>
Date: Wed, 28 Apr 2004 09:22:34 -0700

>   One way to lower the number of messages is to aggregate the costs
> per ISP over time.  e.g. Rather than accounting for each transaction,
> account for N transactions between you and ISP X over Y hours.
> 
>   The real charges can then be based on differentials, and not on
> absolute numbers.  "You're charging me $1000 for my mail, but I'm
> charging you $900 for mail you sent to me, so I've only got to pay you
> $100."

Sure we could do clearing. Any idea what it would take to set up
such a system?

The actual figures would be rather different and go through a 
clearing center:

You used $900 worth of mail services during the billing period
You provided $1000 worth of mail services during the billing period

Charge for services used         $918.00
Payment of services rendered    -$980.00
Billing Fee                       $50.00
FCC connection surcharge          $21.00
ACC intentional fee               $12.23
Common fund                       $10.00
Technology fee                    $19.00

AMOUNT DUE                        $50.23

If you think otherwise take a look at your cellphone bill or your cable
bill. 

Oh and if you are a private individual you would also owe taxes on the $980
but you could not offset the $918 you paid. The $980 is income, you can only
offset the fees that were necessarily incurred in order to earn that income.
You might arguably claim the $112.23 in charges but only if they were on the
incomming. 

So you would actually be out of pocket $343.00 + 50.23 = 393.23 assuming a
35% tax rate.

	Phill

_______________________________________________
Asrg mailing list
[email-masked]
https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/asrg

---

From: Devdas Bhagat <[email-masked]>
Date: Wed, 28 Apr 2004 23:47:55 +0530

On 28/04/04 09:22 -0700, Hallam-Baker, Phillip wrote:
<snip>
> FCC connection surcharge          $21.00
International connection taxes as well, and surcharges there.
<snip>
> So you would actually be out of pocket $343.00 + 50.23 = 393.23 assuming a
And more if you ever sent an email outside the country (taxes in both
jursidictions?).

Devdas Bhagat

---

From: "Alan DeKok" <[email-masked]>
Date: Wed, 28 Apr 2004 15:07:37 -0400

> Sure we could do clearing. Any idea what it would take to set up

  A fair bit, which is why I was concentrating on the "conceptual"
portion.  "If we did it, ignoring the costs, it would look a lot like
system FOO, so why don't we just do FOO from the start, and avoid the
costs?"

> The actual figures would be rather different and go through a 

  Not necessarily.  Clearing centers are used when independent parties
wish to exchange information through an accredited service.  On the
net, people can talk to each other directly, without using an
accreditation service for each transaction.

  e.g. I don't need to contact Verisign to check someones credentials,
if I see that their certificate is signed by Verisign.

  In a theoretical e-postage system, parties can sign messages
indicating consent to nullify mutual "costs" for e-postage.  Those
costs don't have to be real money, they can be e-postage tokens.  The
only need for a central clearing house is then to deal with the final
portions of the costs which aren't mutually negated.

  But again, if such a system is set up, the end result of e-postage
is pretty much a central accreditation service.  So why not just set
up an accreditation service, and stop the pretense that e-postage is
useful?

  Alan DeKok.