Print

Please login or register.
1 Hour 1 Day 1 Week 1 Month Forever
Login with username, password and session length

[The Rook]

What do you mean, 'what else'.
It's all about group income. You don't really want anyone to elaborate why a group may require money separate from individual people's wallets/assets?
If a corp taxes the living crap out of its players without offering enough in return it's bound to fail anyways.

[Ria Nieyli]

What else as in paying for logistics expenses, putting up staging towers where needed, et cetera, et cetera. I think people are under the impression that you, as an EVE player, desperately need to be in a corporation. It's the other way around, corporations desperately need more players. People should have standards. Otherwise you get things like TEST.

[Utari Onzo]

The fact people join TEST should show there's a wide variety of opinions on corporations and standards out there. Personally Nieyli, it feels like you're against taxation of any kind, but unwilling to accept some people are ok with it and that there are many things groups can achieve with taxation. From funding events like corp tournaments, srp, holding sov (corp/alliance needs isk to pay for bills) fuel, loans towards expensive ships for players, paying for the plexes of FCs and other content generators, rewards.

Could go on, as the limitations really are just imagination and the amount players are ok being taxed on. LP tax is long overdue to bring parity back. Outside the personal issue you have with taxation itself, could you demonstrate why taxation would be bad and harmfull to the game?

[Morwen Lagann]

In TYRIN, tax is typically around 4-5%, and between the three people actively doing stuff in EVE that gets taxed, it manages to pay pretty consistently for corp offices while still leaving some wiggle-room - even with offices sometimes costing upwards of 250m/month total. Currently it's at zero, though, because there's enough in the corp wallets to deal with what expenses the corp-as-a-corp has for a few months even if rent for our offices stays high.

I'm not sure if I'd use an LP tax, but if I did I'd probably want to restrict it to only the corps for which the LP is useful for my corp and Rote as an alliance, and atm only two are coming to mind.

[The Rook]

What else as in paying for logistics expenses, putting up staging towers where needed, et cetera, et cetera. I think people are under the impression that you, as an EVE player, desperately need to be in a corporation. It's the other way around, corporations desperately need more players. People should have standards. Otherwise you get things like TEST.

I don't know if you are in a corp or what your corp offers, but this highly depends on the group in question. Different sizes have different requirements and possibilities for income (such as a moon empire), different activities have different requirements.

SRP and redundancy is the biggest aspect why you need money. Easily 75% of PY-RE's non-capsule losses are corp assets financed through loot off 0% tax. The more money in the wallet, the more we can offer. If we could tax LP earned from one of the prime FW activities it would be fed directly back into the hangars for people to use.

The alternative is people buying their ships entirely on their own terms which is problematic with availability and cohesion. Another possibility is making heavy use of the contract system which makes it more complicated, a lot slower both in setting up and requesting and not necessarily fairer.

[Ria Nieyli]

The fact people join TEST should show there's a wide variety of opinions on corporations and standards out there. Personally Nieyli, it feels like you're against taxation of any kind, but unwilling to accept some people are ok with it and that there are many things groups can achieve with taxation. From funding events like corp tournaments, srp, holding sov (corp/alliance needs isk to pay for bills) fuel, loans towards expensive ships for players, paying for the plexes of FCs and other content generators, rewards.

Could go on, as the limitations really are just imagination and the amount players are ok being taxed on. LP tax is long overdue to bring parity back. Outside the personal issue you have with taxation itself, could you demonstrate why taxation would be bad and harmfull to the game?

I'm not against taxation of any kind, as you claim. I've also never claimed that it would be bad for the game. Just for the corporation. What I'm against is the corp putting its hand in my wallet then wasting the money.

[Utari Onzo]

The fact people join TEST should show there's a wide variety of opinions on corporations and standards out there. Personally Nieyli, it feels like you're against taxation of any kind, but unwilling to accept some people are ok with it and that there are many things groups can achieve with taxation. From funding events like corp tournaments, srp, holding sov (corp/alliance needs isk to pay for bills) fuel, loans towards expensive ships for players, paying for the plexes of FCs and other content generators, rewards.

Could go on, as the limitations really are just imagination and the amount players are ok being taxed on. LP tax is long overdue to bring parity back. Outside the personal issue you have with taxation itself, could you demonstrate why taxation would be bad and harmfull to the game?

I'm not against taxation of any kind, as you claim. I've also never claimed that it would be bad for the game. Just for the corporation. What I'm against is the corp putting its hand in my wallet then wasting the money.

Well this has nothing to do with taxation itself then. What corps do with taxation is down to them, and the bad ones are normally pretty obvious and don't grow well.

[Ria Nieyli]

It just gives another venue to get squeezed on. Now, I know that people enjoy Space Communism, hence why TEST hasn't imploded catastrophically yet. I don't. I'm your Scrooge McCapitalist Duck. Along with a lot of other people. Getting taxed for infrastructure is fine and good. Getting taxed for the hell of it is not.

Basically, what I'm saying is that corp income should be a reward for having a really cool and strong corp, rather than a requirement for it to function.

[ValentinaDLM]

But Nieyli none of that has anything to do with the ability to levy a tax to begin with, which is what this thread is about. What corportations do or don't do with taxes is well beyond the scope of the csm or even the desire of CCP to police. If you don't like space communism then don't join space communists no one is forcing anyone here, you can always make a corp with 0 tax and sit in it of you want.

As for me I am a proud space communist and giving out thrashers and talwars to each according need and getting PVP from each according to ability has made my Eve career much better.

[Ria Nieyli]

Actually it does. The ability to tax LP is just an element of the overall desire to shift the game into bottoms-up corp funding model, which I personally find suboptimal. Let me reiterate: having corp income should be a reward for running your corp well, not a requirement for it to function.

[Morwen Lagann]

I'm struggling to pick up on your logic, Ria, and I'm sorta coming up empty handed. Are you just arguing against this for the sake of arguing against it, or do you actually have a point you're trying to arrive at?

Because unlike some other things CCP is wanting to do, an LP tax that is optional - just like the ISK tax! - doesn't affect you in the slightest if you're not in a corporation that enables that entirely optional feature. Some of us would use it. Some of us wouldn't. Whether you find it suboptimal or not is irrelevant: at least try to find an argument that suggests it would be objectively bad for the game as a whole as opposed to your personal sense of ~optimal~, because you seem to be the only person objecting to the idea and you are doing a pretty poor job of making your argument cohesive or even coherent.

[Ria Nieyli]

OP's saying that bottom-up funding is required for a corp to work. I'm saying that it shouldn't be.

[The Rook]

How would you address the issue of raising money?

[Ria Nieyli]

Raising money for what?

[Utari Onzo]

You say taxation isn't inherently bad for the game. Then, you say a taxation mechanic shouldn't be introduced because space commies might steal from your wallet for no good reason and it encourages bottom up funding which you're against (but not giving a clear argument why it's bad for the game). Which is it? Are you ok with taxation mechanics or not? Can you actually make a stand here because you seem to be flip flopping a lot and not making a coherent case.

Infact I'll straight up ask you. Are you literally dancing round this issue just to annoy people? Because it kind of feels like it when this thread is stock full of examples of what corps want to spend taxation money on, and you ask "raising money for what?"