https://legiscan.com/NJ/bill/S4908/2024?guid=jor82XOUJQo7sFNoZNG8Q

A "commercial data collector" tax to be paid on each NJ consumer you have/collect data on as a business….

What?!?!?

How would they even enforce that?

AggieKatie2 said:

---

https://legiscan.com/NJ/bill/S4908/2024?guid=jor82XOUJQo7sFNoZNG8Q

A "commercial data collector" tax to be paid on each NJ consumer you have/collect data on as a business….

What?!?!?

How would they even enforce that?

---

Easily. Part of what companies like Facebook and Google do is build a profile on users in order to sell ads targeted at them. Part of that collection is location so ads can be locally targeted. If that location is estimated or confirmed as New Jersey, they pay a head tax for that profile.

AggieKatie2 said:

---

https://legiscan.com/NJ/bill/S4908/2024?guid=jor82XOUJQo7sFNoZNG8Q

A "commercial data collector" tax to be paid on each NJ consumer you have/collect data on as a business….

What?!?!?

How would they even enforce that?

---

It is a cash grab trying to raise money for state coffers. Tiered - so more NJ consumers they keep info on means they pay more. Anticipate raising the most from companies like Google - which might pay ~$4M/yr.

Consumer info includes stuff like IP address, so essentially everything on the internet.

Dems are positioning this as a contribution to privacy, but are really just focused on generating income.

IMO, likely result would mean consumers would start paying for currently "free" services, which are subsidized by the ability to make money on our personal info.

IOWs - consumers will end up paying, but indirectly so a "secret" tax. As I understand it,

Over_ed said:

---

AggieKatie2 said:

---

https://legiscan.com/NJ/bill/S4908/2024?guid=jor82XOUJQo7sFNoZNG8Q

A "commercial data collector" tax to be paid on each NJ consumer you have/collect data on as a business….

What?!?!?

How would they even enforce that?

---

It is a cash grab trying to raise money for state coffers. Tiered - so more NJ consumers they keep info on means they pay more. Anticipate raising the most from companies like Google - which might pay ~$4M/yr.

Consumer info includes stuff like IP address, so essentially everything on the internet.

Dems are positioning this as a contribution to privacy, but are really just focused on generating income.

IMO, likely result would mean consumers would start paying for currently "free" services, which are subsidized by the ability to make money on our personal info.

IOWs - consumers will end up paying, but indirectly so a "secret" tax. As I understand it,

---

This can't be true. I have it on good left-leaning authority that taxing, fining or charging fees to companies is free to the consumer.

It's a drop in the bucket. Google, Facebook, et al are not going to start charging for free services because of it. They might increase ad fees, but that's it. Their entire business model is built on free engagement.

Good subject for a two-button meme.

ABATTBQ11 said:

---

It's a drop in the bucket. Google, Facebook, et al are not going to start charging for free services because of it. They might increase ad fees, but that's it. Their entire business model is built on free engagement.

---

And who pays ad fees in the end? Consumers. TANSTAAFL
Money to the state will come from their consumers, one way or another. Unless they can spread it to other states, which IS possible if other states don't imitate them. But they will.

It is called redistribution of wealth…it's a Marxist thing

If we could only tax politicians and lawyers per word they speak, we would solve all of our deficit problems.

Part of me really wants to see Google or somebody else to finally stand up to this type of bs and just say "ok, we'll just block all of our services in your state - your move".

Not unlike what PornHub did in Texas.

The key is to move fast before other states try the same thing.

TexAgs would be taxed into Bolivian because it knows stuff.

A LOT of stuff.

Put me in the camp that doesnt think it should be legal for companies to sell my personal data they collect. If people really knew how much information a company can buy about them I think it would shock people.

I heard someone casually mention experion had 150 data fields on customers. Another company offered 50 other.

Im sorry but I dont see how companies own the right to sell that information. The spy state is bad if it is government; it isnt much better when it is big business...

Do I think this is the best way to combat it, maybe not.

texagbeliever said:

---

Put me in the camp that doesnt think it should be legal for companies to sell my personal data they collect. If people really knew how much information a company can buy about them I think it would shock people.

I heard someone casually mention experion had 150 data fields on customers. Another company offered 50 other.

Im sorry but I dont see how companies own the right to sell that information. The spy state is bad if it is government; it isnt much better when it is big business...

Do I think this is the best way to combat it, maybe not.

---

While I don't disagree with you this doesn't sound like it is about selling data.

Buying the data is less appealing if it comes with an additional cost. But yes this is more of an attack on the data collector originators.

Why i think it is a bad idea is the compliance regulation will be expensive and tedious.

texagbeliever said:

---

Put me in the camp that doesnt think it should be legal for companies to sell my personal data they collect. If people really knew how much information a company can buy about them I think it would shock people.

I heard someone casually mention experion had 150 data fields on customers. Another company offered 50 other.

Im sorry but I dont see how companies own the right to sell that information. The spy state is bad if it is government; it isnt much better when it is big business...

Do I think this is the best way to combat it, maybe not.

---

I think everyone in their heart understands that: if the businesses have, it the government can/will get it. Not much most businesses will do when asked for the data but roll over. And that assumes the businesses' data is secure from government intrusion - in the cloud era, that is probably a very bad assumption.

Quote:

---

This can't be true. I have it on good left-leaning authority that taxing, fining or charging fees to companies is free to the consumer.

---

Now do tariffs

texagbeliever said:

---

Put me in the camp that doesnt think it should be legal for companies to sell my personal data they collect. If people really knew how much information a company can buy about them I think it would shock people.

I heard someone casually mention experion had 150 data fields on customers. Another company offered 50 other.

Im sorry but I dont see how companies own the right to sell that information. The spy state is bad if it is government; it isnt much better when it is big business...

Do I think this is the best way to combat it, maybe not.

---

If you don't want companies collecting your data, quit giving it to them.

AggieKatie2 said:

---

NJ wants to tax…..knowledge?

---

Finally......
















.......a tax I won't have to pay!