Doesn’t matter who or how its recovered. Its still a state mandated cost, aka indirect tax.
Every single piece of legislation costs the population. They all add a million cuts to the costs of living. In times of economic crisis these costs need to come down not up.
Edit: addressing the ad revenue stream. Again irrelevant. The ad revenue stream is reduced, some platforms are talking about charging UK users the outcome is the same. Maybe some pull out of the UK or force more ads into the freemium services costing time.
The requirement to file accounts is not a tax. Call things what they are, not whatever you’ve decided they’re similar to in your mind. To do is either confusing or dishonest, depending on whether people ultimately see through what you’re doing or not.
Opposition to this on the basis of finances requires you to actually have some idea of the fiscal outcome. If the number of British children who end up bypassing the rules and viewing genuinely harmful material is small then it will result in lower costs from children traumatised, mentally ill or killing themselves.
I oppose the act because of incalculable costs to privacy, not because it might mean Facebook has to display 10 more ads to someone to maintain their profit margins.
It very much is.
Doesn’t matter who or how its recovered. Its still a state mandated cost, aka indirect tax.
Every single piece of legislation costs the population. They all add a million cuts to the costs of living. In times of economic crisis these costs need to come down not up.
Edit: addressing the ad revenue stream. Again irrelevant. The ad revenue stream is reduced, some platforms are talking about charging UK users the outcome is the same. Maybe some pull out of the UK or force more ads into the freemium services costing time.
The requirement to file accounts is not a tax. Call things what they are, not whatever you’ve decided they’re similar to in your mind. To do is either confusing or dishonest, depending on whether people ultimately see through what you’re doing or not.
Opposition to this on the basis of finances requires you to actually have some idea of the fiscal outcome. If the number of British children who end up bypassing the rules and viewing genuinely harmful material is small then it will result in lower costs from children traumatised, mentally ill or killing themselves.
I oppose the act because of incalculable costs to privacy, not because it might mean Facebook has to display 10 more ads to someone to maintain their profit margins.