Oklahoma Senator Proposes Tax Incentive For Family-Friendly Games

GamePolitics reports on legislation proposed by Senator Anthony Sykes (R-OK) which would make video games eligible for the same tax breaks that apply to TV and film. The catch is that games with a mature rating would not be eligible for those breaks. Quoting: "While games are restricted to projects appropriate for those under 17, the only eligibility requirement placed on film content is that it be neither child pornography nor obscene. By that standard, R-rated films and MA-17 television programs would easily qualify for the tax break. ... '[Sen. Sykes]... would rather not include the ratings restriction. Unfortunately, as he went around to his fellow senators asking for their support, the first question out of their mouths was whether there would be ratings restrictions.'"

Consitutional?

[DoofusOfDeath]

Does it violate the First Amendment for the government to tax one kind of content at a higher rate than another kind of content?

Good! Maybe devs will make more kid's games!

[Benfea]

Don't get me wrong, I'm not an angry parent or some anti-gaming crusader, but the industry as a whole would be healthier if they made more games for kids. Link [youtube.com]

Other way around

[Alsee]

I agree we should "make video games eligible for the same tax breaks that apply to TV and film", but do it the other way around.

Why the hell is the government telling TV and film that they don't have to pay the standard taxes everyone else has to pay?

A lot of people have this candyland fantasy that "tax cuts" and "tax breaks" and "tax relief" are a good thing. You can change SPENDING, but aside from that it is impossible to change the total money in taxes you have to collect. If you give some people a "tax break" independent of a spending change, then the bill on that spending still comes due and still needs to be paid for. Any "tax cut" or "tax break" or "tax relief" without a matching spending adjustment enforces an equal and opposite tax hike on others when the spending bills come due. If you give TV and film a tax break, then government expenses and government taxes simply get shifted into a tax hike on everyone else. The Bush tax-cut-for-millionaires did the same thing. If you cut government revenue collection from millionaires and maintain or increase government spending, that means you are in fact dumping and equal-and-opposite delayed tax hike on the poor and middle class. You can temporarily hide from reality - you can have the government temporarily put the bill on their credit card - but then you just have to pay the bill PLUS INTEREST. Creditcard financing just means a bigger tax hike later to cover the interest.

If someone wants to propose slashing $X dollars from the military budget, or slashing $X dollars from education, or slashing $X dollars from senior's Social Security and Medicade, if someone wants to slash $X in food aid for children in poverty, or any other specific spending cut, then fine. THAT is the only possible actual tax cut when the bills come due. Anyone else talking about tax-cuts is full of shit. They are engaging in candyland fantasy economics, and they are in fact proposing TAX REDISTRIBUTION, not a "tax cut", not a "tax break", not "tax relief". Discussing tax distribution can be legitimate, but calling it a cut or a break or relief is false and delusional.

I don't see why TV film or software industries should be getting a special government hand-out to cover their taxes at the standard rate that applies to every other industry. I don't see why the TV film or software industry tax bills should be redistributed as tax hike ultimately dumped onto everyone else.

-