ectobuilder
Veteran
Re: Tax equality - Cinema vs Stills
I was reading an article on EOSHD about the possibility for a paid upgrade to make the 1DX into a 1DC and the article said:
"The tax issue is that the 1D C is classed as a video camera, at a much higher import tax tarrif to the 1D X. Any firmware update that would turn a 1D X into a 1D C would not go down well with the tax people."
This is horrible, this tax rule should be abolished and reconstructed so that there is equality among the arts. Why would an art that expresses itself through moving images be taxed more than an art that expresses itself through still images?
The tax rule feels discriminatory.
I'm surprised there isn't a movement to promote equality and more accessibility.
I was reading an article on EOSHD about the possibility for a paid upgrade to make the 1DX into a 1DC and the article said:
"The tax issue is that the 1D C is classed as a video camera, at a much higher import tax tarrif to the 1D X. Any firmware update that would turn a 1D X into a 1D C would not go down well with the tax people."
This is horrible, this tax rule should be abolished and reconstructed so that there is equality among the arts. Why would an art that expresses itself through moving images be taxed more than an art that expresses itself through still images?
The tax rule feels discriminatory.
I'm surprised there isn't a movement to promote equality and more accessibility.
