open question:
In europe, personal tax can easily approach 50% once fuel and sales taxes and income taxes and business taxes are taken into account.
If a business fails the entrepreneurs loses all his money, if it succeeds he get's to keep only half of the "winnings".
Combined with all the red-tape and regulation and legal risks of running a business, is the risk and tax so finely balanced that many entrepreneurs don't bother to commercially exploit their software with trade-secrets, tight user agreements and the heavy marketing and company-support-ecosystem that must go with such approaches, but instead to work on free software providing limited and low-key services and support?
Or, in other words if regulation and tax were lower, how many free software authors would never have taken an interest in free software?
Has high taxation and regulation been a big stimulus for free software?
And has it therefore reduced taxable revenue as potential commercial opportunities are not exploited in the traditional "commercial software" sense (whatever that means)?
Sam
On Tuesday 15 March 2011 11:14:20 Sam Liddicott wrote:
Has high taxation and regulation been a big stimulus for free software?
Interesting question.
You could write a blog post on this subject. Whether short or long, I'm sure it would be interesting to read.
If you're a fellow you could use your account on blogs.fsfe.org.
Thanks,
Sam.
* Sam Liddicott sam@liddicott.com [110315 12:15]:
If a business fails the entrepreneurs loses all his money, if it succeeds he get's to keep only half of the "winnings".
That's a very simplicistic view. It is most likely at least as wrong as saying that when a entreprenour loses, they only lose a bit of invested money while the society has to pay all the time (for infrastructure and other things) which noone paid for while when they win the get to keep all the winnings (and only pay for the infrastructure they use in this case, and sometimes not even for that).
Or, in other words if regulation and tax were lower, how many free software authors would never have taken an interest in free software?
That's hard to say. I can also imagine that with lower taxes and thus less of an social savety net, less people are willing to risk anything thus more salaried employes thus more people with time to do something in their free time or with employers big enough to let some employees work on free software.
Bernhard R. Link
company-support-ecosystem that must go with such approaches, but instead to work on free software providing limited and low-key services and support?
If your tax estimate is correct then an entrepreneur would have to pay the same 50% even if she offers low-key services and support.
On 15/03/11 20:44, Novica Nakov wrote:
company-support-ecosystem that must go with such approaches, but instead to work on free software providing limited and low-key services and support?
If your tax estimate is correct then an entrepreneur would have to pay the same 50% even if she offers low-key services and support.
Yes, but with a much lower initial investment. Take free-software, re-use, re-develop, and charge for hourly/weekly/monthly services.
As nothing is proprietary there is no advantage to having a big sales team, admin side, marketing strategy - I mean all these things are not as neccessary as they might be for proprietary softare.
Of course what is saved in that side is also shown in lower prices.
There are exceptions - sernet is perhaps one of them.
Sam