|
Why is the argument about one word again?
Okay maybe it isn't unfair. But it doesn't seem to make any sense.
I assume the rationale behind not taxing books is to make them accessible to the whole population. There is no distinction between paperbacks and hardcovers (which might be considered a "luxury" item), so what makes an ebook so different? I believe it's grouped with other digital media just because no one thought about it much. In an age where almost everything goes digital, it makes no sense to make distinctions between physical and digital products, when the actual use is the same. And if you do, I feel that you would have to discourage the use of extra materials, like paper in this case, instead of encouraging it at the cost of a digital product. But that's my opinion.
What would make sense is one of these:
a) tax all forms of books the same - either tax them all, or have them all tax-free
or
b) distinguish between "regular" and "luxury" versions of books. I am not entirely sure where ebooks should go, but hardcovers, leather-bound volumes etc would have VAT, while paperbacks wouldn't.
Distinguishing between books on a physical medium and digital books seems just arbitrary.
|