"Have you ever been to American wedding? Where is the vodka, where's marinated herring?" - GB
"And do the cats give a shit? No, they do not. Why? Because they're cats."-from The Onion
Originally Posted by Mia M




...yep, this tax will partially fund these programs and the same money they were getting from the "general fund" will be diverted elsewhere. Sounds like a political shell game. And who will be accountable, what funding mechanism will pay out this money for us to see, and who will measure its effects?
As far as the door tax, it's just as easy to raise the price of a few drinks 25 cents, keep the entry fee the same and the club pays the door tax based on head count. Its just a way of passing on a type of club cost to the customer.
"Peter, did you take Stewie to a strip-club? He smells like sweat and fear." - Lois and Stewie (Family Guy) ... "Through early morning fog I see, Visions of the things to be, The pains that are withheld for me, I realize and I can see..."





quite a number of issues behind the Texas 'SIN Tax' ... with the most important being that several other states are also considering imposing a new tax on adult entertainment.
this is one of the larger objectives actually ... by making an official connection between strip clubs and 'sex crimes' via the SIN tax, it will go a long way towards allowing cities / states to offer easy evidence of 'negative secondary effects' as the basis for future anti-strip club laws. Just like the supposed harm from 'secondary smoke' exposure, which has never been proven conclusively but which the general public considers to be true and negative, strip club 'sin' will be successfully used as the basis for passage of new laws restricting dancer-customer contact, restricting cash transactions between dancer-customer, restricting 'private' areas within clubs, restricting club locations / operating hours etc.WTF? They assume that the adult industry is directly related to sexual assault
in truth, you'll probably never know. However the Texas SIN tax will serve one very important purpose i.e. legal challenges as to the constitutionality of selectively taxing adult businesses. While the Texas tax as enacted is simply an extra 'cover charge' at strip clubs, other states are looking at enacting taxes as a percentage of every transaction which takes place not only in strip clubs but also in adult bookstores, peepshows, escort agencies etc. If this comes to pass it will firmly mark an official gov't determination that strip clubs are in the 'sex' business.Tell me exactly how the revenue will be used, which programs and initiatives will it fund?
that's actually one of the basic underlying objectives of this tax ... to allow the tentacles of gov't to slither into the midst of strip club cash flows. The Texas SIN tax 'extra cover charge' is making the IRS unhappy since the only thing that can be deduced from the club's monthly SIN tax payments is the number of customers who entered the club. However, under the percentage tax proposals being floated in other states, the club' monthly tax payments would allow the IRS and state tax agencies to easily deduce just how much money customers are spending in the club ... which when combined with club reported incomes via club tax returns would also allow the IRS and state tax agencies to easily deduce just how much money that dancers have earned in total. In other words, the club being forced to do accounting in order to collect and pay out a percentage based tax will also force the club to account for dancer earnings....but then who's going to do the counting of dances bought to make sure the club gets their "cut" to pay this tax?
There is somewhat of a constitutionality question regarding gov'ts enacting a selective percentage based tax on a personal service without also taxing other personal services in a similar manner. This is the reason that Texas chose to go the 'extra cover charge' route taxing only the 'admission ticket' to the club (which in and of itself is not a personal service). Some proposals from other states take this side-stepping one step farther ...
First they mandate that all club transactions (other than dancer tips which are not taxable as long as the dancer is an independent contractor) must only take place between customers and the club's cash register in order to properly collect and account for the tax. Next they interpret that customers handing their money to the club's cash register are actually paying their money to buy 'tickets' from the club that can be exchanged for private dances or VIP's. Since 'tickets' are not a personal service in and of themselves, it is legal to selectively tax them. Of course by 'pure coincidence' this 'ticket' system also forces the club to keep an accurate record of how many private dances and/or VIP's have been performed by each dancer, and how much money the club has paid out to each dancer at the end of each night in exchange for turning her 'tickets' back in to the club in exchange for cash, etc.
~
Last edited by Melonie; 12-23-2007 at 03:11 PM.





i don't think the clubs would be rushing to court on this if they could just raise drink prices. also, nude clubs and other byob stripclubs don't have that option. i think the 'per-customer' levy implies they have to get it via cover charge, or perhaps via a cut of dance prices.
i mainly want to see a club go bikini to avoid the tax and then, if still pressured to pay, ask the gov't why hooters doesn't have to pay the tax when their staff is just as semi-naked.
It seems like this might be unconstitutional. Something along the lines of cruel and unusual punishment for uncommitted crimes even. Why should strip clubs be forced to pay what amounts to reparations to rape victims?
Whether they WILL do anything with the money or not (which I've already admitted, I was skeptical about--of course they won't), you made it sound as though there's nothing to be done for rape victims simply because they didn't help you.
That's just not the case. There are rape crisis centers all over the place just crying out for money--places that provide free counseling for survivors trying to pick up the pieces and move on--rape test kits to be distributed at a TON of hospitals that are currently sorely lacking.
I'm not saying the SIN Tax is a good thing...believe me. I just think it sounded like you were saying there's no way to help rape victims with that funding and there IS.
Now if only that money would *ever* actually get to them.





If there's an unfairness about this law, it would be the following:
From the article:
"I've been told the fees to get into these places can be $10, $15. I don't think another $5 is going to prevent someone from going," said Cohen, who is also president of a women's center that could get funding from the new law...
...Texas' topless spots range from dimly lit dives with pickup trucks lined up outside to gentlemen's clubs that resemble plush hunting lodges and attract men in business suits. The pole tax is unlikely to have much effect on your finer establishments...
...The owners of Players, a small topless bar in Amarillo, are among those suing the state. They said that adding a $5 tax to the $4 cover could drive away customers and force the club out of business.
I love how the use the example of the ritzier big city clubs to set a flat fee for the entire state. Things in places like Amarillo and Killeen don't work on quite the same wavelength as in DFW or Houston.
That's just the thing though. A lot of blue collar clubs have guys who show up, pay the cover, nurse their two beer minimum and go home. They don't buy any dances. If the club applied the tax to the door cover, these guys won't show up and hence, no cover or alcohol revenue. They expect those of us who do buy dances to subsidize the tax for those who don't, and I'm sure pocket a little extra for themselves in the process. Utterly typical.Originally Posted by aggieed
Former SCJ now in rehab.





The 'ticket' system proposed by other states avoids this problem, and similar problems that could potentially arise re live theater performances containing nudity etc. - arguably even a Britney Spears concert ! Actually, the Texas 'extra cover charge' tax will directly run afoul of 'equal treatment' constitutionality, since it's just as arguable that an 'extra cover charge' should be leveed on every customer entering a Hooters restaurant or entering a theater. The state of Texas has indeed opened the door for SIN taxes, but like most other 'first attempts' it is going to be used to for legal clarifications ... in this case, exactly what the gov't is allowed to tax, and exactly how the gov't must go about collecting the new tax in order to avoid 'equal treatment' issues vs somewhat similar businesses. So far the 'ticket' system seems to be the answer to all of these 'equal treatment' issues, since Hooters doesn't sell private dance tickets.i mainly want to see a club go bikini to avoid the tax and then, if still pressured to pay, ask the gov't why hooters doesn't have to pay the tax when their staff is just as semi-naked.
which explains why the clubowners will support a 'ticket' system over an extra cover charge tax. This also allows the club to leave private dance prices the same. For example, if the going rate for a private dance is $20, instead of a customer paying the dancer $20 he how pays the club's cash register $20 in exchange for a private dance 'ticket'. He gives the 'ticket' to the dancer and gets his dance. Then at the end of the night, the dancer turns in all of her 'tickets' ... from which the club must keep a 10% tax or $2 from each ticket. The club then pays the dancer $18 per ticket in cash, makes an accounting entry that the club owes $2 times 20 dances or $40 in SIN taxes that must be reported and paid at the end of the month, and makes a corresponding entry that dancer XYZ was paid $18 times 20 dances or $360 that must be reported via an IRS 1099-misc income form at the end of the year.If the club applied the tax to the door cover, these guys won't show up and hence, no cover or alcohol revenue. They expect those of us who do buy dances to subsidize the tax for those who don't, and I'm sure pocket a little extra for themselves in the process. Utterly typical.
some of the controversy from strip club tax proposals in other states ...
- proposes a 10% tax in Nevada
- proposes a 10% tax in Utah
~
Last edited by Melonie; 12-23-2007 at 03:47 PM.




The base contest on all of this is: if taxing each customer $5 at the door is okay, then taxing them each $5000 at the door is also okay. So, if you don't want strip clubs in your town, then you still allow for them in the zoning but put a massive entry tax on it to make it impossible to operate a club.
ED E’ SUBITO SERA
Ognuno sta solo sul cuor della terra
trafitto da un raggio di sole:
ed è subito sera
--Salvatore Quasimodo--
=============================
Sounds like way more work than TX clubowners are willing to do. Seriously, Mel, if yoi knew how little work the clubowners and management have to do to keep their shipping running...
There are no official "bouncers" patrolling dances, just random goons in suits walking around. Credit card sales stuff is handled by the watiress, and dancers cash in their funny money to the receptionist.
It would be easier for them to increase cover charges, or dancer tipout. I will bet you it will come out of the dancer's pockets.
"Have you ever been to American wedding? Where is the vodka, where's marinated herring?" - GB
"And do the cats give a shit? No, they do not. Why? Because they're cats."-from The Onion
Originally Posted by Mia M
^^Of course it'll come out of the dancer's pockets.
God forbid the clubs themselves lose a cent...
Like I said, you've gotta love Texas... *grumbles*
I think the concept of a tax isn't so bad, actually. I mean, going to a strip club IS a luxury. However, I think it should be a certain manageable percentage of entry fees, and that the money should just be put to use on miscellaneous projects statewide, like roads, education (lord knows TX needs a better edu. system), etc.
Targeting the business for what it is and putting the money [supposedly] toward helping rape victimes is def. unconstitutional... or at least it reeks of unconstitutionality. (Is that a word?)
With $ being so hard to come by in most clubs w/o doing extras I see no good coming of this bs. It is going to be complete mismanagement of funds by the govt as always and an excuse to continue upsetting the stripping apple cart.





Well, that was my point in drawing an analogy to cigarette taxes. Once a way is found to selectively tax any particular thing, if that thing is viewed as being 'bad' by society it is then a much easier step to tweak the tax rate upwards. Let's see ... cigarette taxes went from 25 cents a pack to something like $2.50. Similarly, the $5 SIN tax surcharge could easily go to $50 in the near future.if taxing each customer $5 at the door is okay, then taxing them each $5000 at the door is also okay.
However, I'm still of the opinion that the fixed $5 surcharge is going to mutate into a percentage tax before too long. Yes there are a lot of lazy clubowners in Texas, but there are also a lot of 'corporate' clubs and independent clubowners with business sense. There are also a lot of greedy politicians. Both of these groups would vastly prefer a tax that they can essentially throw onto dancers, as well as a tax that collects more money from 'rich' club customers than from 'poor' ones.




This conversation has become quite informative and interesting. Bottom line as I see it is that taxation (constitutionally speaking) was for the purpose of raising funds for the operation of government, common defense, etc. I seem to have missed the section where "taxation for social engineering" was allowed.
Now, the issue at question here may not be applicable to the U.S. Constitution and is most likely a state's rights issue. I am not familiar with the Texas constitution, so I really cannot address the laws regaring taxation in Texas.
Regardless of what Texas law may be it is still one further erosion of our freedom to choose. It is yet one more example of one goup in society determining the morality for all others. It is one more example of government stealing from one segment of society to finance another (favored) segment. It is against all that I personally believe.




"Peter, did you take Stewie to a strip-club? He smells like sweat and fear." - Lois and Stewie (Family Guy) ... "Through early morning fog I see, Visions of the things to be, The pains that are withheld for me, I realize and I can see..."




ED E’ SUBITO SERA
Ognuno sta solo sul cuor della terra
trafitto da un raggio di sole:
ed è subito sera
--Salvatore Quasimodo--
=============================
stellaforstars , the rape centers that are crying out for help have aready been appropriated funds when they were opened. the problem , like any other aready existing social program, is that the taxes raised for them all has been funneled into some other liberal feel good program designed to help out those less fortunate like the homelss, or veterans, or pregnate teens, or you fill in the blank. All these social plans have a ways and means for funding when they are implimented, or they would not pass. But like every other social program, they get abused and people who do need them cannot get them, and the programs never have a way to get off of them because liberals always want to take care of us because we can't do it ourselves. So now you have underfunded and abused programs that cant help the truely needy, kids don't get health care , and rape victims get victimized again by the system and are made to feel like they asked for it. And on another note the relation between rape and strip clubs is obsurd. Last I heard Rape, and sxual assault happens everywhere in every small town, city, and every family reunion in Arkansas. There should be a family reunion permit fee that goes to rape center programs and prevention because you know that most rapes and sexual assaults are by people the victims know already.
ho's before bros'








A base level of taxation to provide services that should benefit all citizens equally is not social engineering in my estimation. For instance, to provide a defense, a police force, etc.
Taxation against one segment of society with the goal of eliminating a certain behavior is social engineering. Much like the excessive tobacco taxes. The main purpose of the tax was not to raise revenue but rather to eliminate smoking.





well, this is exactly what the constitution originally called for. If the 'cost' of fighting the war of 1812 for example divided by the total US population boiled down to $300 per citizen, the federal gov't apportioned a tax to the states and the states collected $300 from every citizen ... IRREGARDLESS of the fact that one person might be a poor farmer and another might be a 'middle class' coppersmith and yet another might be a rich business owner. That way everybody did indeed pay their fair share of the cost of defending the country !A base level of taxation to provide services that should benefit all citizens equally is not social engineering in my estimation. For instance, to provide a defense, a police force, etc.
This was precisely my point in drawing the tobacco tax analogy in the first place. The new taxes on 'strip clubs', by definition, officially assume that 'strip clubs' and the people working in them are causing negative results on society in general - and the new 'strip club' taxes are supposedly meant to remediate the damage stemming from those negative results on society. And like 'second hand smoke', and Carbon Dioxide emissions, actual scientific proof of negative effects isn't required for the passage of new laws and taxes - only the mainstream media guided opinions of a majority of legislators / voters / judges.Taxation against one segment of society with the goal of eliminating a certain behavior is social engineering. Much like the excessive tobacco taxes. The main purpose of the tax was not to raise revenue but rather to eliminate smoking.
Furthermore (and this actually pisses me off more than anything), both the Nevada tax proposal and the Utah tax, and the proposed taxes in states other than Texas, do not confine the tax just to 'strip clubs'. Instead they lump together strip clubs with adult bookstores, peep shows, escort services, massage parlors etc. under an official heading of 'sexually oriented businesses / adult businesses'. I suspect that Texas will do the same after the first 'equal treatment' appeal hits a Texas court. As such, this corresponds to the official death of any pretense that strip clubs involve 'show business' i.e. performing arts - since live theater and other performing arts aren't subject to the tax even if the performance happens to contain nudity.
~
Last edited by Melonie; 12-24-2007 at 12:22 PM.




Melonie... I do enjoy reading your posts. I agree with about 90% of you write (not just in this thread). Thank you for all your information and keep up the good fight.
Bookmarks