Copyright surtax squeezes cassette ministry
Christians concerned over surtax on blank recording material
By
Kevin Heinrichs
ChristianWeek staff
"We will be paying a penalty for something we have nothing to do with."
That’s the reaction of Brian Dawkins, business manager of Peoples Church in Toronto, to a new surtax on blank recording material being implemented in January 1999. The new tax is spelled out in Bill C-32, a bill passed in spring, 1997 that is intended to compensate musical artists whose material is copied illegally.
But ministry groups say they are being caught in the crossfire.
Under the current levy proposal, the tax would pump up the cost of a blank 92 minute audio cassette from 52 cents to $2.28, and a 62 minute cassette from 51 cents to $1.76.
Dawkins says the tax would effectively double the production costs of their cassette duplication ministry. Peoples Church purchases about 7,000 blank cassettes per year to record sermons to distribute to missionaries, shut-ins and others. Some cassettes are given away, such as in the church’s welcome package to first-time visitors; others are sold for $5, which covers the cost of in-house reproduction.
Dawkins is concerned the church may need to limit free distribution or modify the cassette ministry by outsourcing the duplication process. While Peoples Church will likely continue its recording ministry, "there will likely be ministries that will discontinue [cassette] ministry," says Dawkins.
"It would be devastating to our ministry," says Allan McGuirl, director of GALCOM International, a Hamilton-based non-profit ministry that records and distributes teaching cassettes for radio broadcasts in third world countries. McGuirl fears the price hike will make cassettes unaffordable to reproduce and says his plan to distribute about 2,000 cassettes a year may have to be shelved.
Dave Zeglinski, manager of SignPost Music, the recording studio in Winnipeg that records Juno-award winning artist Steve Bell’s albums, is unsure how the professional recording industry will be affected.
"I haven’t heard much rumbling from the recording industry about it," says Zeglinski. "The spirit of the thing is to prevent copyright infringement, so I’m assuming that because we’re recording original copyright material, we won’t be affected," he says.
Definitions key
Mario Bouchard, general counsel for the Canadian Copyright Board in Ottawa, agrees, saying the bill targets individuals, not the recording industry.
Bouchard says any discussion about who is affected must revolve around the definition contained in Bill C-32 that describes which recording media is affected by the levy: audio recording material ordinarily used by individuals to record music.
The CCB acts as a mediator between those pushing for the levy, like the Canadian Musical Reproduction Rights Agency, and those who oppose the tax, including ministries and consumer groups. The CCB has the power to lower the levy amount, but not to issue exemptions to certain groups, such as churches.
That will likely come as a disappointment to the 2,800 people (800 of them from ministries) who sent in protest letters, 90 percent of whom were asking for exemptions.
Bouchard stresses that Bill C-32 is already law, so the only way a group could avoid the tax is to prove that its use of cassettes, for example, does not fit under the bill’s definition. "There cannot not be a tariff. The law says there will be a tarriff," he says.
"We have already heard that one of the arguments presented will be that the type of cassettes used to record a speaker’s voice is of a quality not used to record music," therefore it should not be taxed, says Bouchard.
He says the current levy schedule goes into effect January 1, but the levy cannot be collected until the board decides whether to lower the levies. He also stresses that the money collected from the levy goes to artists, not the government.
The CCB will hear arguments from all sides through the fall.
