Tax-Free IT Repairs Proposed For the UK

judgecorp writes "Removing tax from computer repairs could have a real impact on the IT industry's carbon footprint, according to a petition of the UK government. Old computer equipment often ends up in landfill, or in toxic illegal re-cycling centers in developing countries, because users think it is not cost-effective to repair it. Making repairs tax free could be a simple bit of financial engineering to encourage skilled jobs and keep electronics out of the waste stream, says the author of the campaign."

Sorry but

[Datamonstar]

I don't think so. The reason people don't get their PCs serviced when they get infested with cybervermin is that they see the overall cost as too high an investment when they could just go buy a new system that will work 100% guaranteed as opposed to playing whack-a-mole with screwy software. Unless they're in the know that a wipe and reinstall can re-create that like new PC experience pain-free, then people will most likely always go for something new as opposed to shelling out more and more to fix their old systems. A tax break isn't going to change that.

Re:Sorry but

[nacturation]

It's the same story with used cars. At the first sign of a problem they want to buy a new one.

When the cost of a new car that just rolled out of the factory is less than a day's charges for a mechanic and you get a fresh, new, faster vehicle... you bet the same thing will happen.

cars too? Oh wait: scrappage scheme

[RMH101]

Why not apply it to cars, too? Removing tax from car repairs would make a big difference to the environment (less new cars wasting resources, older cars kept in good condition and polluting less, less stuff going to landfill) and also encourage skilled workers.
Oh wait. Last year the UK government brought in the scrappage scheme that incentivised you to scrap your car for up to £2000 off the price of a brand new one, which has led to a huge number of perfectly adequate, working and environmental-impact-ammortised cars getting crushed, and loads of energy wasted in building, shipping and selling new cars - on the grounds that it'd help the economy.

Re:Abused

[fuzzyfuzzyfungus]

The trouble occurs specifically in the PC context. A substantial percentage of PCs that are "broken" are physically perfect in every way, except for a touch of dust and the fact that the magnetic fields on their HDD platters include 3,624 assorted viruses, trojans, pop-up spawners, and the like, along with the OS and user data.

Even if untaxed(as, de facto, a lot of this stuff is, because they end up paying someone's nephew who "knows computers" in cash under the table to fix the problem) cleaning these systems up can eat a lot of tech time. The user never has their restore media, and they always have some programs that they've either lost the CDs for, lost the licence keys for, or "got from work", so you can't just wipe and go, done in 30 minutes. And, of course, no backups.

It is at this point where you say(I've been the "someones nephew who 'knows computers"), "Ok, look: There is nothing wrong with your computer besides software. However, you don't have any of the disks you need, and properly disinfecting your machine will take hours and hours(even if you know what you are doing, and don't fuck around, there'll be so much malware doing disk access by the time they call you that even a basic scan will take ages to complete). I can either do that, and bill you for my time, at a very reasonable rate; but some hours of it, or we can just give Dell $300 and you'll have a computer that is faster and shinier than your present one, and running perfectly, and I'll copy over your documents when it comes. Since you got that copy of Office "from a friend", we'll throw in an extra $50 to have Dell install the OEM version."

And lo, a new computer is ordered.

Re:Abused

[commodore64_love]

>>>just give Dell $300 and you'll have a computer that is faster and shinier than your present one

Precisely. The article summary about tax-free repairs making people more likely to fix their machines still ignores the basics of the computer industry - technology moves fast. I have a good reliable industry-grade laptop that I considered upgrading to Windows 7. And then I thought, "Why? For the cost of Win7 plus an extra $100 I can get a Win7 for free on a shiny new laptop with twice the speed, double the processors, and 3-4 times as much memory."

It makes little sense to upgrade or repair computers, unless you're a museum or nostalgist. It makes more sense to sell the old one on Ebay for ~$100 and then apply that cash to getting the current model.

Re:Abused

[commodore64_love]

>>>2. The requirement that a restore .iso be one of the offerings on the OEM's driver support page for the models they sell/have sold.

The HP desktop I bought for my brother doesn't even come with a restore disc. How stupid is that? They tell you to "burn your own restore CD" which sounds good in principle, but I've seen burned-CDs lose their dye (fade) and self-erase. This is not a solution.

The other option is to buy the CD for about $20. Lame. When you buy a computer, I don't think it would kill HP to include a 25 cent disc with Win7 on it so you can do annual "restore computer to like new" maintenance.

Re:But it isn't cost effective!

[khallow]

There are multiple views of what things are worth. My view though is that we find out what things are worth by looking at what choices people make. For example, if you decide to work a little late one day, then you've made a decision that a little more work was worth more than a little more time doing something else (leisure, sleep, etc, whatever got cut to make room). These things are, of course, non-linear. Loosing half an hour of leisure in a week time is not 1/80th the value of losing 40 hours of leisure time. From this point of view, choices are inherently optimal unless an external force is used to make you choose differently.

There's also regret analysis. If you regret making a choice, then that could used as an indication that the choice was suboptimal. The issue though is that you probably wouldn't have chosen differently (unless there's some sort of random element involved), so it's not a useful guide to what you think is valuable at the time you make the choices.