DIRECTV and DISH Network Applaud Kentucky Supreme Court Ruling Striking Down Tax Law

[dfergie]

EL SEGUNDO, Calif. & ENGLEWOOD, Colo., Jun 26, 2009 (BUSINESS WIRE) -- DIRECTV (NASDAQ: DTV) and DISH Network (NASDAQ: DISH) released the following statement today:
"DIRECTV and DISH Network applaud the Kentucky Supreme Court's unanimous decision today to strike down the Kentucky law allowing local governments to tax satellite TV.
"The decision is a resounding affirmation of federal law that was designed to promote competition by preventing local governments from imposing unfair taxes on satellite TV service. In addition to promoting competition, Congress imposed the prohibition because it believed it was inappropriate to impose burdensome taxes on national TV services that beam their signals directly to homes from satellites and, unlike cable TV services, do not use or impact public property.
"The Kentucky Supreme Court faithfully obeyed Congress's will and we believe this ruling is a great win for DIRECTV and DISH Network, and for consumers."

SOURCE: DIRECTV, Inc. and DISH Network
DIRECTV, Inc.
Robert Mercer,

or
DISH Network
Kathie Gonzalez,

Source: DIRECTV

 

[meldar_b]

its about time Kentucky does something right!

 

[durl]

I wonder if this could lead to challenges of "satellite taxes" in other states.

 

[Laddyboy]

I'd like to get the 13% plus tax on DBS axed in Florida.

 

[Ramy]

So does this mean I get all my tax money back that I have had to pay?

 

[riffjim4069]

I fully agree with the courts decision...however, if AT&T's IPTV delivered U-Verse can be taxed then so to can satellite IPTV (VOD) and other subscription video services such as NetFlix, etc.

 

[photog72]

No taxes in New York - though everything else is taxed.

 

[ronjohn]

I fully agree with the courts decision...however, if AT&T's IPTV delivered U-Verse can be taxed then so to can satellite IPTV (VOD) and other subscription video services such as NetFlix, etc.

I don't think it is related to content. U-Verse does use public property to deliver the content to the home. Satellite does not.

 

[AdamGott]

I suppose that this 'public property' thing depends on your definition of public property and whether you wish to include actual physical property or something more esoterical like bandwidth, something which I have always considered to be public property.

 

[daverp]

I suppose that this 'public property' thing depends on your definition of public property and whether you wish to include actual physical property or something more esoterical like bandwidth, something which I have always considered to be public property.

U-Verse use cables and equipment installed in or on public easements which subjects them to state and local taxes. Satellite does not.

BTW... the badwidth used by U-Verse Tv does not go over the internet. It is segmented totally within AT&T's network.

 

[JosephB]

U-Verse use cables and equipment installed in or on public easements which subjects them to state and local taxes. Satellite does not.

BTW... the badwidth used by U-Verse Tv does not go over the internet. It is segmented totally within AT&T's network.

That's not the bandwidth he was referring to. Satellite signals take bandwidth too. More appropriately it should be referred to as airwaves/spectrum. However, that is licensed exclusively by the FCC and is not subject to state regulation. If they are going to stick a tax on, they need some other justification.