Deseret News | 'Nudity tax' challenged

Reader comments
'Nudity tax' challenged

101 comments | Read story

Page:
1
2
3
Next >

Rich | 12:27 a.m. June 4, 2008

If taxes should be higher for businesses that have secondary negative influences on society, then perhaps buisnesses other than strip clubs should pay a higher tax rate. Examples: Paint ball dealers, motorcycle dealers, ATV sellers, tobacco shops, beer dealers, drug dealers, roofing companies, violent video game makers, payday check lenders, etc., etc.

Seriously, I think that no legal business should pay a higher sales tax than any other business. Otherwise, what's to stop a governmental body from charging, say, a 50% tax on businesses it doesn't like, such as a Christian bookstore, a foreign book club, a Spanish newspaper, a gun or hunting club, a billiards parlor, a hang gliding company, etc.?

Fair enough!! | 2:21 a.m. June 4, 2008

I totally support a nude tax, especially if it is set high enough to ensure that my mother-in-law never, ever takes her clothes off even in private!!!

Bob G | 5:11 a.m. June 4, 2008

The intent of the law is what should have the most considerations. It's back to the old badly written laws being interperted word for word instead of the intent. Intent of a law is always a part of the law but overzealous prosecutors seem to have this inate sense that the word is the real intent. Law makers and writers need to reinfoce the intent of the law so that it is clear to any that read it. This new interpertation of a law is a clear attempt to rewrite the law to suit their financial needs. Laws should be written so that their should be no doubt to misinterpet or have other interpertations. Simplicity and concise wording in laws makes for the best laws. And laws should drop any references to vague Latin interpertation as we are an English speaking naiton and the english dictionary not the Latin dictionary should have precedence in its interpetations.

Comments continue below

Dito | 6:14 a.m. June 4, 2008

The Government is infringing more and more on the people
Can you believe the State is taking money from these places and there fore being a part of the action?

I agree Rich | 6:55 a.m. June 4, 2008

That missionary store that sells white shirts and ties, then you have those kids come and want to talk religion while I'm working in my yard.

Video stores, fast food, banks, all create negative externalities, and should be taxed.

But they are not.

This is a tax on not wearing clothes, and the right of a consenting adult watching another consenting adult taking their clothes off... No guns, no Drugs-- yet taxed, and as Former Chief Justice John Marshall once said, "The power to tax is the power to destroy."

It's a way to get those sily non-conformist riff-raff out of Utah.

They smile and invite you to church, but vary one degree, they make sure you are not welcome.

Re: Rich | 7:07 a.m. June 4, 2008

Strawmen galore, but no real argument.

IMO | 7:49 a.m. June 4, 2008

It is clear that the social benefit derived from a such miserable business that involve nudity is clearly a negative. Porn destroys families. Ask anyone who was an addict and lsot thier family, job and house. There is no such thing as safe and responsible use of porn for it is a raging addictive substance that will drag all that dabble with it.

That having been said TAX THOSE MISERABLE NUDITY ORIENTED BUSINESS OUT OF BUSINESS! If they feel the taxes are too high perhaps thier customer base should pay hiher pricer. And if thier customer base feels the prices are too high...oh well guess they'll actually have to go find some decent entertainment.

Mike | 7:52 a.m. June 4, 2008

I have to agree with "Rich" on this one. This "Tax" on a select few mentality is just one of many reasons I've decided to Move out of Utah.

In the state I'm moving too. There is no sales tax. Basically what funds the new state i'm moving too is Property Taxes, cigarette and Gasoline taxes.

Imagine this going to Wal-Mart and buying a Fifth of Jack Daniels at half the price i'd have to pay here in Utah that applies to every type of booze.

No sales tax on food and clothing either.

Although I don't drink, I do eat and buy clothes. I'm going to save a ton of money. 22 days and counting and i'm outta here.

Capt. Video | 8:17 a.m. June 4, 2008

What about companies like Comcast that offer adult channels like Playboy, or adult Video on Demand, etc.?

They offer full frontal nudity almost 7X24, including things you could never see it a "club" in Utah.

Anonymous | 8:22 a.m. June 4, 2008

Thanks Rich.

Great ideas!

Let's raise taxes on all of the mentioned entities!

Signed,

Your local legislator.

Sarah | 8:39 a.m. June 4, 2008

They knew the law before they decided to open up a strip club, but they chose to do it anyway, when they could have opened up another type of business that wasn't subjected to the law, and now they're complaining about it? Sorry, I have no sympathy.

Johny Fairplay | 8:42 a.m. June 4, 2008

That was funny Fair Enough!!

It amazes me | 9:10 a.m. June 4, 2008

Everything is always brought back to the predominate religious group in the state. Talk about narrow mindedness. People can have an opinion; its as simple as that.

State Earning Sex Profits | 9:39 a.m. June 4, 2008

Glad to see the state has a vested interest in this business and earning revenue from it. Wonder how much they earn per year from these types of businesses. Probably enough they would be opposed to ever to shut them down because they don't watn to lose the revenue. Can we say DIRTY MONEY!!

ME | 9:43 a.m. June 4, 2008

IMO seems that you have a self control problem! Please get help for your addictions. I can see how the theatrical performances can cause porn issues, NOT! Selective taxation by an out of control government.

Re:All supporters | 9:52 a.m. June 4, 2008

You all have weak arguments against these taxes, that to an intelligent person makes you look less sophisticated. Most of the arguments you offer can be applied to all taxes of any kind. Mike says he is moving to a state that only taxes ï¿½Property Taxes, cigarette and Gasoline taxes.ï¿½ and this is better because? If the tax goes to benefit the same group? There is much more to refute your arguments but not the patience or time. Your just upset because you might be taxed because your argumentation is so exposed :)

Nebraska | 9:56 a.m. June 4, 2008

Mike,
I moved from Utah to a state that didn't have sales tax on food. Many commodities were cheaper. If you think you are saving money, you will be disappointed.

Our auto insurance doubled since alcohol was easier to get and so there were more DUI accidents. Gasoline cost more since the gas taxes were higher. Property taxes are outrageous! But... at least we don't pay taxes on our food.

Vices | 10:04 a.m. June 4, 2008

Vices can and should be taxed because of their negative impact on society.

me | 10:43 a.m. June 4, 2008

re:all supporters when you become intelligent we the ignornant might listen! a typical neo-con comment.

Tax The Churches | 10:54 a.m. June 4, 2008

It's about time they start paying for the damage they do to society.

Taxation=Legal Plunder | 10:54 a.m. June 4, 2008

Though I'm completely against pornography, and the slimebags that create it or participate in it, I'm pretty sure that this is just another scam to take more of our property from us. That's pretty much what every tax is. A scam to take what we have earned and give it to somebody else who has not earned it and has no legitimate claim to it.

Also... | 10:56 a.m. June 4, 2008

The vice of the pornographic content has a negative impact on society, but the idiots who would go to see something as ridiculous as this production have a more widespread negative impact on society. They're actually out there mingling with normal people.

Anonymous | 10:57 a.m. June 4, 2008

Uh-oh!
Why do I smell a return of Gayle Ruzika in the works?

IRS | 11:04 a.m. June 4, 2008

I think it's a GREAT idea to tax businesses and corporations I don't like. We should also move to tax PEOPLE I don't like. Everything I don't like needs to be taxed HEAVILY. It's only fair. They've been very taxing on me.

RL | 11:07 a.m. June 4, 2008

If there are extra taxes on cigarettes, so what if there is on nudity? I think it's funny. If you want to contribute to negative, you can pay for it. Simple. And talking religion doesn't even compare dudes... nudity and missionaries are not even remotely in the same category. One is down right offensive to the majority of the community, while one is just simply annoying to a minority, and all you have to do to get them to leave is politely say, "no thanks." Unlike solicitors, they don't vandalize your property for saying no. So get over it.

AnyOtherState | 11:13 a.m. June 4, 2008

It's funny to read comments implying that Utah is the only state to tax these types of businesses. Anyone ever hear of the "entertainment tax" in Sin City? Same idea, same type of tax...all in the name of "what happens here stays here".

Tax Ice Cream Consumption | 11:12 a.m. June 4, 2008

Ice cream is making adults and children fatter. This is having a negative impact on our society, as it contributes to obesity and Type I and II diabetes. Something must be done quickly to protect us from ourselves.

Fredd | 11:19 a.m. June 4, 2008

What kills me on this issue is the sexual predators are your friends and neighbors. I have repeatedly read that the vast majority (90% ?) of molestors are trusted members of the molestees circle.

Flibbermajibit | 11:24 a.m. June 4, 2008

All you guys are weird. I don't get this story anyway. so they are taxing people to put nudity in their movies? somebody answer me! I don't get it so you can't even take your clothes of at home? well you can I know that cause that would be gross we would wear the same clothes every single day cause we couldn't change. And the police would take a picture of what you are wearing, and if it is different the next day that means you changed in secret, so you have to go to jail.

Don't tax my fun | 11:26 a.m. June 4, 2008

Sounds like the people who frequent this type of "entertainment" are upset about having to pay extra for their vice.

All the more reason to tax nudity. Maybe the added cost will cause a few of them to find more worthwhile entertainment to enjoy.

Something they could take their kids along to enjoy with them.

A Thought ... | 11:39 a.m. June 4, 2008

Notice how the religious majority wants everything taxed that they disagree with but want tax exemptions for "their" valued items (children, etc.). Why shouldn't all businesses pay the same rate, just as a lot of taxpayers would be happy if everyone paid the same rate also.

re:Vices | 11:41 a.m. June 4, 2008

What is getting up early on a beautiful day, putting on a white shirt and tie and sitting in a three hour block listening to someone else tell you how to think once per week anything other than a vice?

To me, it is: A defect; a fault; an error; a blemish; an imperfection.

Tax it too, and I'm happy.

And:RL

"...nudity and missionaries are not even remotely in the same category. One is down right offensive to the majority of the community, while one is just simply annoying to a minority, and all you have to do to get them to leave is politely say, "no thanks.""

Nudity is how God sent you into the world, while imposing your beliefs on others is very offensive... Try telling a missionary politely "no thanks" (Which, by the way, works at a strip club).

Re:me | 11:47 a.m. June 4, 2008

your fallicious response proved my point thanks (almost looks like I wrote to prove the point)

Anonymous | 11:47 a.m. June 4, 2008

Uh-oh!
More fodder for our neocon moralists.
The holier-than-thous will be coming out of the woodwork.

William | 12:00 p.m. June 4, 2008

Common decency is not a religious issue, it's a social necessity. Being closed minded and blaming such things as this on the "religious majority" exploits the weakness of your argument. Take the issue for what it is, an attempt by the Legislature to control the amount of socially distasteful behavior portrayed in our communities.

Jimmy | 12:01 p.m. June 4, 2008

Given that not everyone shares a common set of values, the truly fair thing to do would be to tax all entertainment businesses in the same way so a strip club and a store that rents family friendly movies get the same treatment.

Disclaimer: I am LDS. I do not believe that the Victoria's Secret catalog is pornography but choose not to spend time flipping through its pages. I believe that there are a number of missionaries doing work for the LDS church that are offensive and cross the line when talking to the public but figure part of the problem is with their maturity and experience level dealing with people. I don't go to strip clubs, use post-dated check loans, drink beer or shun my non-LDS neighbors as is the common trend here in Utah County.

neocons like to define all | 12:08 p.m. June 4, 2008

William wants to define what is "distasteful" and what is not.
This is a typical "do-as-I-say" conservative value.
Nobody wants to live under a Big Brother style of government that neocons are pushing for in the land of the free.

Curt | 12:21 p.m. June 4, 2008

Studies have never proven that strip clubs and porn are destructive. They have proven that excessive amounts of porn can be harmful. If watching these things did what some of you claim then the majority of the US population would be what you claim. Look up the percentage of Americans that have seen porn or been to a strip club it is pretty high, even here in Utah. Excessive amounts of anything is bad. Excessive eating any food is bad, excessive locking doors is bad (ocd) excessive working is bad, excessive amounts of religious activities is bad when you ignore other parts of your life. Freedom should not be taxed. I think being a mormon is destructive to our society and so does most Americans so maybe we should start taxing Mormons extra because the majority of US citizens think it is harmful to the community.

bILL | 12:23 p.m. June 4, 2008

Please add the same tax to ice cream and TV movies about high school musicals. One has the secondary consequence of making my wifes butt big and the other is making my children dumb.

Re: A Thought ... | 12:38 p.m. June 4, 2008

"Notice how the religious majority wants everything taxed that they disagree with but want tax exemptions for "their" valued items (children, etc.)."

imagine, valuing children over pornography.

There's a reason one is called a vice and one is called a blessing.

Brian | 12:44 p.m. June 4, 2008

This is just another way to tax someone from the cradle to the grave. It is hard to tax an infant, but they are born naked! This way you can tax 10% of the Dr.'s fees. Ingenious!

This is why im voting Libertarian.

Zacko | 12:46 p.m. June 4, 2008

Despite any personal feelings about the morality of what goes on at strip clubs, bars or clubs the fact remains that government is stepping in and being oppressive.

This is an age old argument in this country, where do the rights of private property owners end and the rights of the public begin?

We all are subject to these infringments on our rights with our cities and towns legislating everything from what our yards have to look like to how many dogs we can own.

It is time to stop name calling and set aside the morality of this issue and see it for what it is, an infringment on our rights as property owners.

Even though it may sound outrageous, what will be next? A special tax on fast food and hotel rooms? Wait, they have already done that.

Depraved | 12:49 p.m. June 4, 2008

Most of the arguments against taxing nudity simply reveal the depravity of the authors. In their world, there is nothing moral or good, just wanton desires to be acted upon with any restrictions.

Channeling tax revenue to programs to help them overcome their vices is the act of a caring society, although most of those caught in the vice are too blind to see that.

Anonymous | 1:02 p.m. June 4, 2008

And of course one of the "conservative values" is not wanting larger government sticking their noses into people's lives. "But THIS is different" the far-righters will whine.

M. Allred | 1:03 p.m. June 4, 2008

Somebody explain to me, without guile and heavy cynicism, what a neo-con is?

30 days | 1:14 p.m. June 4, 2008

That distinction for over/under 30 days is pretty crucial I guess. How?

@ Brian | 1:23 p.m. June 4, 2008

Yeah, vote libertarian, and then just get taxed @ 90% so big brother can take care of you. They just take a bigger slice of the pie right off the bat!

RangerGordon | 1:24 p.m. June 4, 2008

A neocon is somebody who says they love "limited government" too much to support public education, public transportation or universal health care--and yet thinks there's nothing wrong with warrantless wiretap surveillance of U.S. citizens.

In other words, a neocon is a person who uses words that sound as though they're inspired by tried-and-true conservative principles in order to deceive the Republican base, but is actually motivated by personal greed and a frightening set of evil values at the expense of the good of the country.

Too much | 1:26 p.m. June 4, 2008

The government already takes too much money and gives way too little in return. I'm not for pornography, but I'm hardly ever for the bottomless pit that is our government reaching their hands deeper into people's pockets. Wake up! The government takes more and gives less! Have a problem with their programs/services? Too bad! No customer service or control on how the act exists, they are the all mighty all knowing government. Less $ to the government = less power for the government.

Curious | 1:27 p.m. June 4, 2008

Utah and its population (all sects, sexes, & sizes) seems to be obsessed with nudity. Does this tax affect the naked woman from Sandy? How about the elderly nudist from St. George? If a show which includes nudity runs for 29.5 days does it have less secondary negative repercussions than one running for 30 days? Oh, the agony of such trivial trials.

Page:
1
2
3
Next >

Add your comment

Comments are monitored. Any comments found to be abusive, offensive, off-topic, misrepresentative, more than 200 words or containing URLs will not be posted.

Words Remaining

E-mail address: For internal use only. We may want to contact you to publish your comment (not your e-mail address) in the newspaper or for a separate story idea.