25% Tax on Adult Website Sales says Senator

[PornstarPR]

Democrat Expected to Take Aim at Online Porn, Introduce 25% Tax on Adult Website Sales
by Connor Young

WASHINGTON, DC - A new bill that targets online adult entertainment is making its way into Congress, YNOT has learned. The Internet Safety and Child Protection Act of 2005, expected to be introduced by Senator Blanche Lincoln (D-Ark.) sometime in the next few days, would tax adult websites at a whopping 25% while placing new requirements for age verification on ?regulated? websites and billing companies. The Act appears to have been spurred by a July report from an organization called Third Way. The Third Way report, which has not yet been released, argues that adult websites do not do enough to keep children away from adult content, and that many adult webmasters specifically target children in their marketing.

In a discussion draft of the Act obtained by YNOT, the Bill uses the child protection angle to justify the new restrictions and the new tax. The draft claims that the bill is intended ?to protect children from Internet pornography and support law enforcement and other efforts to combat Internet and pornography-related crimes against children.?

A spokesperson for Senator Lincoln's office declined to comment specifically about the Act itself, since it had not yet been intorduced, but told YNOT that the Senator's motivations for supporting such measures would not be political but rather solely in the interest of child protection.

"When she does introduce this legislation, it's not going to revolve around political reasons," he said, adding that Senator Lincoln was a concerned parent herself.

The Act would have to clear Congress and be signed by President Bush before it could become law. Legal challenges to the Act, if it were passed, are also possible.

The Act begins by placing new age verification requirements on ?regulated pornographic? websites. These requirements include using Federal Trade Commission (FTC) approved age verification software packages that check the age of visitors before they are shown adult content. The Act specifically requires that this age verification process take place prior to the visitor being shown any ?pornographic material,? including materials in free areas of the website.

There would also be new restrictions placed on payment processors and IPSPs. Under the Act, companies that process payments for adult sites ?shall only process age-verified? transactions. The restrictions would apply to any ?bank, credit card company, third-party merchant, Internet Payment Service Provider, or business that performs financial transactions for a regulated pornographic Web site??

Enforcement of the Act would be handled by the FTC.

The Act?s definition of a ?regulated pornographic website,? however, is interesting in that it relies completely on 18 U.S.C. § 2257. The Act would define a ?regulated pornographic website? as ?a person required to maintain documents verifying the age of persons engaged in sexually explicit conduct pursuant to section 2257(a) of title 18, United States Code.?

Who actually falls under 2257 requirements is currently being disputed in federal court. The Free Speech Coalition has challenged 2257 and its requirements.

In addition to enacting age verification requirements, the Act also calls for a staggering 25% tax on all sales made by sites that fall under the Act. The funds collected from this tax would then be used to fund various law enforcement initiatives, mostly aimed at protecting children from harmful online activities.

Senator Lincoln, the expected lead sponsor of the Act, is an Honorary Senate Chair for ?Third Way,? an organization that, according to its website, ?develops policy and communications products to help senators and other progressive leaders better advance their values in red states and counties where progressive ideas have lost resonance.?

Third Way this month produced a ?report? on internet pornography. The report, obtained by YNOT, was titled ?The Porn Standard: Children and Pornography on the Internet,? and it claims that some adult website operators purposefully market to children, and that the industry has failed to make use of existing age verification software solutions to screen out minors.

?Parents have a responsibility to supervise their kids,? report author Shawn Barney of Third Way told YNOT, but added ?[the internet] is a particularly challenging medium for parents.?

The report?s claim that some adult sites specifically market to children seems to be based on the long-defunct per-click affiliate program model, which when used would pay affiliates based solely on the volume of traffic sent rather than sales. The Third Way report does not seem to recognize that few if any adult affiliate programs currently use a per-click payout model, and that the model was largely abandoned by the adult industry years ago.

The professional adult internet industry has long argued to lawmakers that it does not want children visiting its websites, and that it does not profit from sales of pornography to children. Sales on adult websites rely on credit cards or other online payments, which children know are easily discovered by parents. The per-click affiliate model was not profitable for professional adult website operators largely due to fraud, and was replaced by more progressive programs that would not reward marketers for sending children to adult sites.

Asked if the report?s claims of adult content being marketed to children were based on anything other than the per-click or per-impression affiliate model, Barney told YNOT that it also relied on ?common sense online, most people?s experience online.?

The language of the Third Way report at times paints a fairly sinister picture of adult website operators preying on children.

?Internet pornography has become a large and lucrative online industry, and one that is successfully reaching a child audience,? the report claims.

?Tragically, the exploitation of children by internet pornographers in search of quick profits extends beyond just the sale of their product to minors,? the report continues. ?This report details the extent to which a large and powerful internet pornography industry is influencing the lives of children today ? It also reveals some of the strategies that certain internet pornographers are using to specifically target children, as well as the disturbing prevalence with which sex crimes are committed against children in the scramble to profit from the sale of pornography images on the internet.?

YNOT asked Barney if Third Way had made any efforts to contact representatives from the adult industry while researching its report, and Barney told YNOT that it had not.

Barney also admitted that existing age verification software solutions were not perfect options for keeping kids away from porn and could be tricked by a determined child, but added that if they were used the adult industry ?could say that they didn?t have a better option.?

Connor Young is Editor-in-Chief of YNOT.

[llporter]

Yup as if 2257 wasn't bad enough

[Rinaldo]

wow long read

[After Shock Media]

more to read in the other thread about it.

[woj]

that's pretty fucked, if this passes 25% reduction in income will hurt :-/

[LasseKongos]

Sooo? Who cares. We pay like 50-60% right now

[Dalai lama]

like the 2257 didnt cost us enough money, taking 25% of our money wont keep away kids typing in sex.com

[uno]

I doubt anything like that would ever pass.

[MichaelP]

Originally Posted by Dalai lama

like the 2257 didnt cost us enough money, taking 25% of our money wont keep away kids typing in sex.com

Good Point

[xxxice]

In new orleans I hear there is 25% tax on any bar that has live bands. That means drinks are 25% more expensive. That is crazy. But this is really fucking crazy. I wonder how they would do this? Goverment makes me pay 25% of what I consider adult sales? Or would sponsor programs take that out of our pay upfront? Crazy

In the end I would imagine all prices would go up too compensate for the 25%

I hope it does not happen ...

[Roald]

Originally Posted by LasseKongos

Sooo? Who cares. We pay like 50-60% right now

lol tell me about it

[GatorB]

and that many adult webmasters specifically target children in their marketing.

Yes because after all I want to pay for traffic that has no way of PAYING for the porn they wish to view. WTF?

[HpicAnn]

Those are bad news..

[GatorB]

Gee I wonder if this passes how many American affilate programs will move offshore?

[chase]

How fucking retarded are these people?!?!
CHILDREN do not buy porn, so wtf would we market to them for? Fucking morons!

Not to mention that it is not MY job to police the experiences of everyone ELSE'S children. People are too damn lazy to be involved with their kids and supervise them themselves...as far as I'm concerned, if you can't be bothered to make damned sure you kids isn't exposed to things online or on tv that you don't approve of, then you shouldn't be a parent.

I know I'm ranting, but I am so sick of society in general shouldering the blame for kids seeing this or that, when parents these days are the problem! They are too busy or work too much, or are too tired, etc. to actually raise their kids, so they sit them in front of the tv or pc to occupy them, and then they bitch about what they see there.

That whole attitude of blaming someone else all the time gets passed on to the kids, and then you have these whiny punks who blame their own misbehavior or criminal activities on tv shows, video games, the net, not getting Fruit Loops for breakfast, not getting those Nikes for Christmas, or whatever other retarded thing they blame, lol. Someone needs to grab these people up by their collar and tell them "hey motherfucker, YOU are the asshole here...YOU need to stand up and be responsible for your OWN actions, (and your OWN children-to the parents)."

*whew* I feel better now.

[E Guru]

"that many adult webmasters specifically target children in their marketing."

WHAT A BUNCH OF FUCKING IDIOTS. WHY THE FUCK WOULD YOU TARGET CHILDREN WHO HAVE NO GOD DAMN CREDIT CARDS TO PAY FOR MOTHER FUCKING PORN.

Fucking scandalist lying bastards

[E Guru]

If there was an easy way to filter out kids without hurting adult traffic, im sure people would do it. I mean that would make hosting cost go down, conversions sky rocket. And everything would run alot smoother imo.

[tony286]

THe fsc has to challenge these things in the media, if not we are truly fucked

[Snake Doctor]

The outrage is bit premature. Senators and congressmen submit bills every day that never have a snowballs chance in hell of even having a floor debate, much less getting passed.

My opinion is that this is one of those situations.

[Snake Doctor]

I'll amend my previous statement to say that the tax has a snowballs chance in hell of passing, but not the age verification.

You can't do true age verification without requiring someone to submit personal information.
The courts have ruled again and again that requiring someone to identify themselves in order to view constitutionally protected materials is unconstitutional because of the "chilling effect" it would have on free speech.

The tax, eh, maybe they could pass it, but that in conjunction with 2257 would send all of the major players in this business offshore. Then they wouldn't be subject to the tax OR 2257 which would end in the government having even less control over the adult internet than they do now. That's probably not what they want.

PLUS even if the tax did pass there would be TONS of legal and accounting tricks in play to get around it. "Get all these porn sites for free when you sign up for our $40 a month news service"....etc etc

[GatorB]

Good thing about this retarded bitch's bill is that she is also targeting the billing companies and sorry to tell her but unlike porn Visa and others DO in fact have lobbiyst in DC that will push heavily AGAINST this bill.

[FunForOne]

Welcome to the democrat agenda. You guys wanted to vote for John Kerry. To bad John Kerry didn't tell you that he and other democrats want to inact legislation to redistribute income to make a higher barrier of entry into the social elite class.

You guys lined up to watch Michael Moore's movie. I guess the democratic politicians assumed you agreed with his politics.

Michael Moore publically proposes a 60% tax bracket.

Here is a quote that is a response to your outrage.

""""We're going to take things away from you on behalf of the common good."""""" - Hillary Clinton

[Snake Doctor]

Originally Posted by FunForOne

Welcome to the democrat agenda. You guys wanted to vote for John Kerry. To bad John Kerry didn't tell you that he and other democrats want to inact legislation to redistribute income to make a higher barrier of entry into the social elite class.

You guys lined up to watch Michael Moore's movie. I guess the democratic politicians assumed you agreed with his politics.

Michael Moore publically proposes a 60% tax bracket.

Here is a quote that is a response to your outrage.

""""We're going to take things away from you on behalf of the common good."""""" - Hillary Clinton

How does taxing rich people more raise the barrier of entry into the social elite class?

Michael Moore would be paying 60% in taxes if there were such a bracket, and you took Hillary out of context.

Besides that, you're a fucking tool. Just because someone is a democrat or a liberal doesn't mean they agree with EVERYTHING that every official in their party does or says. That's absurd.

[FunForOne]

Originally Posted by Lenny2

How does taxing rich people more raise the barrier of entry into the social elite class?

Michael Moore would be paying 60% in taxes if there were such a bracket, and you took Hillary out of context.

Besides that, you're a fucking tool. Just because someone is a democrat or a liberal doesn't mean they agree with EVERYTHING that every official in their party does or says. That's absurd.

You can try, but you can hide the liberal agenda anymore. Big taxes, big government control. They hide it from people during the elections, but I'm to stupid to lap up your bullshit.

There is a huge difference between "rich" and "social elite", if you dont know the difference, you are not qualified. It has to do with "old money".


Hillary wants more taxes, plain and simple. Her quote is not out of context, she was explaining that she would repeal the tax cuts to get more taxes out of the people.


Thats a huge part of the democratic core values, you can disagree on some things, but to the educated voter, thats pretty much a deal breaker on lever pull day.

[Hunter_ST]

fuckers... 'nuff said.

[warlock5]

Originally Posted by Lenny2

How does taxing rich people more raise the barrier of entry into the social elite class?

Because it takes saved income to get there.

[warlock5]

Originally Posted by FunForOne

You can try, but you can hide the liberal agenda anymore. Big taxes, big government control. They hide it from people during the elections, but I'm to stupid to lap up your bullshit.

That sounds exactly like the Republicans to me too.

[lickmymonster]

http://www.ipetitions.com/campaigns/Lincoln2008/

[Snake Doctor]

Originally Posted by FunForOne

You can try, but you can hide the liberal agenda anymore. Big taxes, big government control. They hide it from people during the elections, but I'm to stupid to lap up your bullshit.

There is a huge difference between "rich" and "social elite", if you dont know the difference, you are not qualified. It has to do with "old money".


Hillary wants more taxes, plain and simple. Her quote is not out of context, she was explaining that she would repeal the tax cuts to get more taxes out of the people.


Thats a huge part of the democratic core values, you can disagree on some things, but to the educated voter, thats pretty much a deal breaker on lever pull day.

Sure, some of us think that we should have balanced the budget and saved social security instead of giving a tax cut to the wealthiest 1% of people in this country. (your social elite)

However, as I said before, your argument doesn't make any sense. How does taxing rich people (the already social elite) prevent people from becoming social elites?

If Hillary's quote wasn't out of context then why didn't you post the whole thing? You can't take one sentence out of a speech and say that's what someone's position is.

[xenigo]

Re: Internet Safety and Child Protection Act of 2005

Shawn Barney,
Today I read some disturbing news that you are spreading false information about the online adult entertainment industry. One of the most disturbing parts of your report is the following. "This report details the extent to which a large and powerful internet pornography industry is influencing the lives of children today ? It also reveals some of the strategies that certain internet pornographers are using to specifically target children, as well as the disturbing prevalence with which sex crimes are committed against children in the scramble to profit from the sale of pornography images on the internet."

It is absolutely despicable that you would attempt to feed this misinformation to people that are unaware of the truth. Please understand that children do not have credit cards, and therefore children are not porn consumers. Children are not who pornographers market to.

It has been brought to my attention that you have not made any efforts to contact representatives from the adult industry while researching the subject you are reporting, and the agenda you are attempting to have passed as law. If you had, then you would understand the objective of pornographers. You would understand that sales are a top priority, as well as keeping innocent eyes away from obscenity.

It is clear to me that you are spreading lies and deception to people that are sensitive to the welfare of children. I believe it to be in bad faith that you seek to pass this legislation.

Sincerely,
Noah Couchot
Serial Media

[ajrocks]

Time to be running your company out of the good old USA. Guess they don't enjoy the tax revenue that much. Whats wrong with these people?