- 25 -
C. Industry Position
Before enacting the FSC regime, the Senate Finance Committee
received written submissions and held hearings on February 3, 1984.
See Hearings on S. 1804 Before the Senate Comm. on Finance, 98th
Cong., 2d Sess., Part 2 of 2 (1984). Representatives from the
software industry testified that the DISC provisions were unclear
as to the treatment of exported computer software copyrights. In
this regard, Gerald K. Howard, vice president for taxes, Sperry
Corp. (representing several computer, business, and electronics
associations), stated:
we ask that a DISC rule that has caused us some
difficulty in the past be modified or clarified, namely
that * * * the definition of qualified export property be
revised to include software. We believe that this will
assist in eliminating the uncertainty that exists in the
tax law concerning software. * * *
We don’t believe it was intended for the high
technology industry to suffer a decrease in the tax
incentives that are provided and we ask that software be
included in the definition of export property. * * *
[Emphasis added.]
Id. at 123. The software industry’s request went unheeded.
In 1993, software industry representatives again attempted to
convince Congress to amend the FSC rules to “clarify” that exports
of software qualify for FSC benefits that are available to other
exports. Legislation to make such “clarification” was introduced.
Hearings on H.R. 63 Before Subcomm. on Select Revenue Measures,
House Ways and Means Comm., 103d Cong., 1st Sess., Part 1 of 3
Page: Previous 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 NextLast modified: May 25, 2011