Advertisement
If you have a new account but are having problems posting or verifying your account, please email us on hello@boards.ie for help. Thanks :)
Hello all! Please ensure that you are posting a new thread or question in the appropriate forum. The Feedback forum is overwhelmed with questions that are having to be moved elsewhere. If you need help to verify your account contact hello@boards.ie
Hi there,
There is an issue with role permissions that is being worked on at the moment.
If you are having trouble with access or permissions on regional forums please post here to get access: https://www.boards.ie/discussion/2058365403/you-do-not-have-permission-for-that#latest

Speed doesn't matter?

  • 16-02-2004 2:11pm
    #1
    Ripwave
    Closed Accounts Posts: 2,188 ✭✭✭


    Is it just me, or has all mention of the speed of the various DSL "products" been removed from the oreillycom websites?


Comments

  • #2
    BendiBus
    Closed Accounts Posts: 2,074 ✭✭✭BendiBus


    I think its just you.


  • #3
    spongebob
    Closed Accounts Posts: 6,143 ✭✭✭spongebob


    There are mutterings about the introduction of Income Tax Breaks for BB products, one possibility is that something will make it into the Finance Bill (the Budget in legal form ) by the committee stage next month..

    BB is to be defined as 512k and up while Eircoms 2 main RADSL packages are UP TO 512k but only guarantee 256k .

    Therefore they are not BB packages and will not qualify for Tax Breaks.

    Hence the 'rethink' while they persuade McCreevy to change the law in one week flat like they did 3 Years Back .

    M


  • #4
    Ripwave
    Closed Accounts Posts: 2,188 ✭✭✭Ripwave


    Originally posted by Muck
    BB is to be defined as 512k and up while Eircoms 2 main RADSL packages are UP TO 512k but only guarantee 256k .

    Therefore they are not BB packages and will not qualify for Tax Breaks.
    I'd have to come down on oreillycoms side in that fight, Muck. RADSL is a better technology than ADSL, simply because it will allow more people to qualify for service. If there's any justification at all for using the tax system to encourage teleworking, (it's a proposal about BIK, so it will only be relevant where your employer pays for your DSL), then it should be applied to whatever technology the business considers most cost effective.

    Forcing companies to pay for a higher priced package, even if the RADSL service meets their needs, will be counter productive, especially if it means that some of their workers can't qualify, because they are too far from the exchange.

    If Silicon Republic was accurate in their report of Simon Coveneys stance on this issue, then the guy's an idiot, and is not fit to be providing any guidance on what is or isn't broadband - "we have concluded that anything less than 512 kilobytes is not broadband, and that 124 kilobytes to 256 kilobytes is DSL", I ask ya?


  • #5
    spongebob
    Closed Accounts Posts: 6,143 ✭✭✭spongebob


    There are 2 proposals in the 'pipeline' .

    1. BIK rules, your employer pays for comms technology such as POTS, ISDN , Mobile or ADSL and you will not pay BIK on this perk. That has been acepted and is in the Finance Bill. It is comms technology agnostic and would never exclude ADSL

    2. Personal Income Tax allowance for Home Users who choose to install BB in the home. The administration of the scheme is a bit more complex and the rules (as proposed) may not entiurely satisfy the Revenue. That may be in the November budget

    There are 3 or 4 flavours to this.

    a) Relief on Installation Only
    b) Relief on running costs only
    c) Relief on Both
    d) Stepped Relief = c) in year one and b) in year two
    e) Averaged relief = c) over 2 or 3 years only

    The Revenue could see the logic of specifying a minimum Bitrate here in order to reduce the cost of the scheme (except if they go for option a) )

    M


  • #6
    Ripwave
    Closed Accounts Posts: 2,188 ✭✭✭Ripwave


    Originally posted by Muck
    The Revenue could see the logic of specifying a minimum Bitrate here in order to reduce the cost of the scheme
    The change is either cost effective, or it's not. If it's not cost effective, then they should "reduce the cost of the scheme" by not introducing it at all. If it only applies to the more expensive packages, then it effectively becomes yet another element of the oreillycom dole, taxpayers money used to prop-up Tony O'Reilly and his asset stripping buddies.

    (I'm not opposed to tax relief on installation costs in principle. But in practice, "free installation" is the best way to boost takeup, and tax relief will actually work against this, and end up being used as a sort of subsidy by the companies selling DSL services).


  • Advertisement
  • #7
    spongebob
    Closed Accounts Posts: 6,143 ✭✭✭spongebob


    Originally posted by Ripwave
    The change is either cost effective, or it's not. If it's not cost effective, then they should "reduce the cost of the scheme" by not introducing it at all.

    Fiscal incentives at the lower rate to a domestic user are pretty much cancelled out by the VAT take in the first year anyway. A one year allowance really costs the government feck all because the domestic user must spend it (including VAT) to get the relief . It cna cause revenue drag in years 2 and up but the governement has to address demand side and supply side problems at present.

    If the government was amart it would set a target of NN connections and expire the relief when that is reached and not on a date . Alternatively they could set a target of end August for a short sharp ramp up.

    M


Advertisement