<story><title>Comcast gets big tax break that was designed for Google Fiber</title><url>http://arstechnica.com/business/2016/03/oregon-lawmakers-accidentally-gave-comcast-a-big-tax-break/</url></story><parent_chain><item><author>omarforgotpwd</author><text>Why shouldn&amp;#x27;t all service providers benefit from the tax break? Is it ethical to give a tax break that unfairly gives one corporation a competitive advantage against another?</text></item></parent_chain><comment><author>finnn</author><text>The idea is that service providers that provide gigabit internet benefit, as an incentive to build out gigabit internet. So Comcast offers gigabit internet (actually 2 gbps) at an outrageous price, just so they can qualify for the tax break. While the article says it&amp;#x27;s meant for Google Fiber, it is clearly for any provider who wants to start providing fast internet to people. This would all be fine if the tax break was for companies providing gigabit internet for under a certain price.</text></comment>
<story><title>Comcast gets big tax break that was designed for Google Fiber</title><url>http://arstechnica.com/business/2016/03/oregon-lawmakers-accidentally-gave-comcast-a-big-tax-break/</url></story><parent_chain><item><author>omarforgotpwd</author><text>Why shouldn&amp;#x27;t all service providers benefit from the tax break? Is it ethical to give a tax break that unfairly gives one corporation a competitive advantage against another?</text></item></parent_chain><comment><author>mhurron</author><text>The only issue I can see with it is this part -&lt;p&gt;&amp;quot;But the rule change didn&amp;#x27;t specify that companies have to offer gigabit service at any particular price in order to qualify for the tax break&amp;quot;&lt;p&gt;The idea for the tax break was to bring affordable high speed to the state whereas Comcast is qualifying by offering anything but &amp;#x27;Comcast&amp;#x27;s 2Gbps service costs $300 per month, with $1,000 in startup fees.&amp;#x27;</text></comment>