Started Jun 11, 2013 | Discussions thread
Guidenet Forum Pro • Posts: 15,748
Re: I can see a license for one purpose only.

sdribetahi wrote:

Guidenet wrote:

mobi1 wrote:

No - there should not be license for photographers Just another barrier to protect interest of only few.

Quite often, amateurs take better photos than pros (I understand this is a subjective opinion).

Did you read what I said? I'm not talking about anything based on quality, just being insured and having a business license like any other business in a locality. A free lance ought to pay normal taxes and make sure the client is protected by business insurance at a minimum.

Whether or not an amateurs pcture's are better is not relevant.

So I take it you're a big government type. Are you seriously trying to tax more things?

Of course not, that's a ludicrous assertion, and I'm not making any kind of political statement here. If you're in business like any other business, you should be paying income tax on your earnings and charging sales tax on your product. Anything else is against the law and the US is a nation of laws. The reason we have laws like this is for many reasons, including making sure we have a fair playing field. If I am a professional wedding photographer and paying my income tax, collecting state sales tax, buying business insurance and buying my business license as required by law, I should not have to compete with someone who does not obey the law. If you do not like the law, your recourse would be to use our representative government to change the law. Obeying the law does not in any way assert one believes in big government and to even suggest so looks like you're just looking for an argument. Not here, thank you.

If I carry business insurance, I do so to protect me as well as my clients and my client's guests. If a wedding guest trips over a cable my assistant laid down and sues me, I'm properly covered and that guests medical expenses should be covered. This is fair if that cable was in the wrong location and not properly laid out. I should carry business insurance to cover this. A supposed professional who ignores this might be leaving himself, his employees, his clients and his client's guests unprotected and that's not fair. We're talking professional here. We're talking a business, not an amateur shooting a wedding for their buddy to save money. I don't care about them, nor do I wish to regulate them in any way.

As far as taxing more things, what in the world are you talking about? Did you think over what you wrote prior to committing it to the forum? Don't we already tax the sales of a product? Don't people already pay income tax? Professional business people are not exempt from this just because their business is based on photography. If you have a fine art gallery and sell a print of one of your photographs, you better collect state sales tax and give it to the state. How do you expect to pay for schools and the state highway systems as a couple of examples? This isn't new nor is it conservative or progressive in nature. It's just common sense, though when I read some replies, I wonder how common actual sense really is.

So, my suggestion would be to think before typing and don't assume a whole lot about someone you don't know based on some false interpretation of something they said. Most of all, rethink or think a bit harder about the issue we're discussing without coming up with a knee jerk reaction.

Take care and have a good day

-- hide signature --

Cheers, Craig
Follow me on Twitter @craighardingsr : Equipment in Profile

 Guidenet's gear list:Guidenet's gear list
Canon PowerShot G1 X Nikon D300 Nikon D700 Nikon D3S Nikon D800 +31 more
Post (hide subjects) Posted by
(unknown member)
(unknown member)
(unknown member)
Keyboard shortcuts:
FForum PPrevious NNext WNext unread UUpvote SSubscribe RReply QQuote BBookmark MMy threads
Color scheme? Blue / Yellow