Who can tax a satellite?

[Reese]

At 04:13 PM 7/11/01, Tim May wrote:
 >At 5:58 PM -0700 7/11/01, David Honig wrote:
 >>At 08:58 AM 7/11/01 -0700, mmotyka at lsil.com wrote:
 >>>I suppose, as with any racket, whoever has the ability to knock the
 >>>satellites down or render them inoperable could levy a "tax" on them.
 >>
 >>Heh, right on.  But some dingleberry in LA is not about to violate an
 >>international
 >>space treaty without *really* needing the publicity.  The treaty that
 >>says you don't fight in space.  (Yes, I know its toast when next the US
 >>needs to perform a little orbital cleansing.)
 >>
 >>Besides, when multiple gangs see an untaxed (but coercable) resource,
 >>they'll fight amongst themselves first for the territory.
 >
 >I'll bet good money that Washington is leaning on L.A. to drop this
 >ridiculous claim.

I doubt it, or it would already be a dead issue.

 >For several decades the U.S. (and presumably Russia/FSU) has
 >convinced the nations of the world that fees need not be paid to
 >India, Botswana, and Shakedownistan just because U.S. satellites pass
 >overhead. If L.A. is able to shake down Hughes for some tax to be
 >distributed to the welfare bums and crack hoes, then Botswana and
 >Shakedownistan will be next in line.

They aren't talking about rotating satellites though, they are talking
about geostationary ones, ones that hover over CA, or are property that
is administered from CA - not quite the same thing as passing overhead,
or every airline would end up owing to every nation and state it flies
over _for the act of flying over_ also.

Reese