234
Canada is imposing a 15% tax on streaming services to support local content (www.techspot.com)
submitted 3 months ago* (last edited 3 months ago) by to c/world@lemmy.world
37 comments fedilink hide all child comments
 

The 15% "TAX" headline is COMPLETE LIE. A misrepresentation - READ THE ARTICLE. It is NOT a TAX but a requirement that streamers spend 15% of Canadian revenue to PURCHASE or CREATE CANADIAN CONTENT. This is a Canadian content law. NOT A TAX.

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] [S] 23 points 3 months ago (4 children)

Rest of the world needs to do this too.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • hideshow 8 child comments
    •
  • [–] 17 points 3 months ago

    One thing I like is that the revenue from these taxes go explicitly to the threatened industries. So the more that Canadians stream US works, the more money there is for Canadian tv, movies and radio to compete. Too often, income like this is directed into a general revenue stream, leaving the threatened industries with the same or even less resources to compete with.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • [–] 5 points 3 months ago (2 children)

    Not really. France did the same and we were flooded with the lowest tier crap ever because of that law: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Toubon_Law

    There is no solution to that problem though.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 4 child comments
    •
  • [–] [S] 8 points 3 months ago (3 children)

    Canada has had good local content laws for a few decades now. Because of the local content law in radio and television, we got Celion Dion and Bieber and Drake. Prior to that all the music was American or British. We have a lot of local shows now. It's always cheaper for broadcasters/streamers to buy a license than ask someone to make/produce shows and buy them. This forces them to source locally and give local talent a chance.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 6 child comments
    •
  • [–] 5 points 3 months ago (1 child)

    Because of the local content law in radio and television, we got Celion Dion and Bieber and Drake.

    Is this a selling point or..?

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
    •
  • [–] 6 points 3 months ago (1 child)

    We also got Rush, Reboot, and Kim's Convenience?

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
    •
  • [–] 1 point 3 months ago

    I can't comment on Celine Dion (not my kind of music at all, I literally know only one song and I bet you know which one), but Bieber took like a decade to start putting out music that didn't actively make people want to kill themselves and Drake is both a pedophile and more importantly, not really that good. Kendrick dissed him and he tried to sue the label instead of dissing him back. Not necessarily great examples IMO, even if numerically successful. I mean the latter two because, again, the first is just not my genre whatsoever.

    Canada has some actually great TV shows though. Trailer Park Boys, Letterkenny come to mind first. I've heard a lot of good about Schitt's creek but haven't seen it yet.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • [–] -2 points 3 months ago

    Yes, but no. Maybe we shouldn't have streaming cartels at all. Just focusing on enabling content creators wherever they may be, for the sake of the content. You'd be hard pressed to find less deserving less capable stewards of content, than the ones currently stewarding it.

    Honestly I wouldn't care if content I make was shown for free to everyone in the world. As long as I had housing/health/food security and self determination. As would most creative people.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent