At least that's what VLC thinks when protesting the new French law.

France's National Assembly has voted in favour of a new "internet tax" that would charge companies for every gigabyte of data they send to users in France.

The idea is to make Netflix, Google, Meta and the rest of Big Tech pay more.

That sounds like a dream come true for many of us who prefer taking ownership of data in our own hands but unfortunately things are not that simple.

The way this law is written, it doesn't stop at Big Tech. Even VLC, a free and open source media player maintained by a non-profit, could end up paying this new tax. What the new French internet tax says New French Internet Tax law

The measure is amendment I-1358 to France's 2027 finance bill, tabled by Laurent Lhardit. It creates a tax on "producers of digital data" at €0.055 (5.5 euro cents) for every gigabyte delivered to subscribers of French internet providers.

Internet providers would measure how much data each sender pushes to their customers, with the collection supervised by telecom regulator Arcep and the tax administration DGFiP. Only the volume is counted, not the content or where it goes.

The amount is capped at 15% of the company's revenue in France or 2% of its total revenue, as per the amendment. Note that it's 15% of French revenue, not of total network traffic. And the text joins the two caps with an "or" without saying which one applies when they differ. How much money are we talking about?

The amendment cites an Arcep estimate of 200 billion GB a year flowing to French internet subscribers. It expects the tax to bring in €10 billion a year. It also names Google, Meta (Facebook, Instagram), Amazon, Netflix and Akamai (cloud server provider) as the senders of about half of that traffic.

You'd think the money goes to the telecom operators who build and maintain the networks. That's the "fair share" argument European telcos have pushed for years.

But that's not the case. The revenue goes straight into the state budget, and the amendment's own justification talks about tax fairness between local businesses and digital multinationals, plus the ecological benefit of compressing data.

Why VLC is angry

A gigabyte of open source software counts the same as a gigabyte of Netflix. VideoLAN, the French non-profit behind VLC, posted on X that the tax would cost it over €1 million a year.

Lhardit replied that the cap would protect VideoLAN. He also said he didn't see how the tax could be passed on to users of Facebook, Instagram or TikTok since those services are free.

VideoLAN didn't take that well:

You have no idea what you are talking about. What you said about Facebook and Insta and other social networks are not targeted because they are free, means you don't understand the basics of economy. You don't understand the difference between Revenue and Profit.

VideoLAN (@videolan), October 30, 2026

The cap may limit what a low-revenue non-profit owes. But there is no explicit exemption for associations, free software or free content anywhere in the text. VideoLAN's €1 million is the possible figure before the cap, and right now nobody can tell the exact figure for certain because of all the ambiguity.

VLC isn't alone. OVHcloud founder Octave Klaba put his company's gross exposure at around €70 million a year, and Free's (Teleccom) Xavier Niel called the authors "ignares incompétents", roughly "incompetent ignoramuses". Those are French companies, by the way. Not exactly the US giants this internet tax bill was meant to tame. At the end, the consumer pays the bill

See, a "war on Big Tech" sounds great in a headline, and European governments are fond of laws that squeeze extra money out of American tech companies. But I don't buy the idea that Netflix will pay them out of their pocket.

Netflix will do what it always does and raise subscription prices. And Facebook is "free" only because advertisers pay for it, which is exactly the revenue versus profit point VideoLAN was making.

So the government gets extra money, Big Tech protects its margins, and you end up paying. Meanwhile, non-profit projects like VLC, which never had a price to raise in the first place, are left wondering how big their bill will be.

Let's just hope that this doesn't take the form of law. Because this will set a precedence. I wouldn't be surprised to see other European countries try their own version. No government will say no to extra tax revenue.

Like GDPR, this has all the ingredients of another mess. If a law is going to tax "internet companies", it needs to say in black and white which ones. Right now, it doesn't.

What do you think? A fair way to make Big Tech pay, or a blunt instrument that hits everyone else? Let me know in the comments.

all 81 comments

sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] 94 points 6 days ago (6 children)

For those who are too lazy to dig into this: it’s effectively a political non-starter, and does not appear to have a remotely serious chance of becoming a French law.

  • source
  • hideshow 6 child comments
  • [–] 13 points 6 days ago (2 children)

    Yeah this is never going to happen.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
  • [–] 2 points 4 days ago (1 child)

    This been said so many times, and look where we are today.

    Being arrogantly confident that a bad idea can't become a reality, in 2026, at this point is just plain ignorance.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 1 child comment
  • [–] 1 point 4 days ago*

    It's against french law, it's against eu law, the internet doesn't work that way.

    Do you need more reasons why this won't fly?

    I mean I do understand why you're saying what you do, but IMO in this case it doesn't apply in the same way as an arbitrary bad law.

  • source
  • parent
  • [–] 2 points 5 days ago*

    I've talked about this before, but the draft says that a "registered number with the IANA" would be recorded. So the ASN, likely to the hosting provider? Or the IP, with a birthday problem so it's unlikely to be implemented de facto? Why the fuck does a video player need a registered organization and an ASN? It's capped to income, there's little to none.

    Facebook and Insta and other social networks are not targeted because they are free

    The video player is also free of charge? And Facebook also has income? Hello?

    IDK, I use MPV so y'all will have to correct me if I'm wrong. I don't think software should be wrapped around petite bourgies anyway.

  • source
  • parent
  • [–] 36 points 5 days ago

    Voted by 11 vs 10, out of a total of 577 MPs. This probably won't go anywhere because of how the budget is finally done, yet it's a brilliant example of idiotic policies imagined by incompetent people in a broken system.

  • source
  • [–] 33 points 6 days ago (5 children)

    This tax idea is created by Boomers for sure. It makes no fking sense.

  • source
  • hideshow 5 child comments
  • [–] 2 points 6 days ago (4 children)

    Literal boomers invented Internet.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 4 child comments
  • [–] -2 points 5 days ago (3 children)

    Wrong. Internet was built over decades through the work of multiple scientists, engineers, and researchers. Including generation of greatest generation.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 3 child comments
  • [–] 19 points 6 days ago (3 children)

    Internet providers would measure how much data each sender pushes to their customers

    But what if my customers are pulling data rather than me sending data?

  • source
  • hideshow 3 child comments
  • [–] 3 points 6 days ago

    It's simply uploaded amount. I guess companies for product download could switch over to BitTorrent protocol, do some initial seeding then stop and let others upload, unless no seeders are available.

  • source
  • parent
  • [–] 12 points 4 days ago

    Holy shit what a retarded law. No way it passes, but it goes to show that the 150-year-olds in power really don't know how the internet works.

  • source
  • [–] 12 points 6 days ago

    Heavily 'tax' gathering of personal data instead. Send out lots and lots of fines to companies gathering it.

  • source
  • [–] 12 points 6 days ago* (5 children)

    first quad9, now this? wtf is the french government doing?

  • source
  • hideshow 5 child comments
  • [–] 2 points 5 days ago (3 children)
  • [–] 5 points 5 days ago (2 children)
  • [–] 2 points 5 days ago (1 child)

    I hate this so much. What can we even do to protect our freedoms from France?

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 1 child comment
  • [–] 5 points 5 days ago

    what the french do, revolution. guillotine is optional, but recommended.

    that aside, you can still use quad9 from VPN, they have no way differentiating between someone from france and literally anyone else using the same node. at least until the french government also bans VPNs

  • source
  • parent
  • [–] 10 points 4 days ago* (last edited 4 days ago) (3 children)

    GTA VI will cost €79.99 in France. After VAT, Valve gets €20. One download, at 210GB would cost Steam €11.55 in this tax. If you uninstall and reinstall once, Steam loses money on the sale.

    Someone please correct me if I'm wrong, but I don't see any way whatsoever that Steam won't be passing this cost off directly onto users or just outright block French IPs. How incredibly stupid.

  • source
  • hideshow 3 child comments
  • [–] 1 point 4 days ago* (last edited 4 days ago) (2 children)

    Reckon they would have to consider an access subscription on top of the game price. Otherwise they lose with every update and reinstall, and multiplayer games. Maybe a per-device charge.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
  • [–] 11 points 4 days ago* (last edited 4 days ago) (1 child)

    I was looking into it, thankfully this new tax was shut down in a vote. The French assembly originally rushed it through in an 11 to 10 vote on the 30th of last month. The parliament then shut it down with a 458 to 0 lol.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 1 child comment
  • [–] 9 points 4 days ago* (2 children)

    How the fuck do you enforce this? If I sent my few TB homework folder to a friend in France, why should I pay for that? We are both paying our ISP to do their fucking job and maintain the connection.

    Are they going to make the internet free now as clearly uploaders are the ones paying for if instead now?

    Also terrible as this encourages leeching.

  • source
  • hideshow 2 child comments
  • [–] 7 points 4 days ago

    If they want Big Tech to pay, then write the law exactly Big Tech has to pay more in tax as they are so big and have the network effect etc. Don't write it complicated like this as it is hitting so many else that probably is not intended.

  • source
  • [–] 7 points 6 days ago (1 child)

    A) it should exempt nonprofits. B) a tax on digital services seems fine - but per GB seems wrong - penalizing speeds and high bandwidth services over low ones doesn't make sense. France shouldn't care if someone is watching Netflix in SD or HD - it should be taxing based on cost of the plan. C) for free services, they should tax based on the revenue gained from advertising. That would give a cut of Facebook revenue.

  • source
  • hideshow 1 child comment
  • [–] 3 points 6 days ago

    | taxing based on cost of the plan.

    That's exactly what VAT does. Just fucking raise the VAT rate on that particular line of products and stop pretending you care about your citizens.

  • source
  • parent
  • [–] 6 points 6 days ago (1 child)

    Hopefully this doesn’t get passed because that’d be nothing to big tech. They wouldn’t even pay out of their own pockets. They would just raise subscription prices to make up for it. This would primarily just affect open source projects and regular consumers.

  • source
  • hideshow 1 child comment
  • [–] 6 points 6 days ago (2 children)

    Metered pricing for internet isn't new for Europe, its a revivale the late 20th and early 21st century. Back then fast internet was ISDN lines (topping out at 128kps) that charged per minute fees and that for some places those per minute fees changed depending on what time of day.

    This was one big difference between USA and European approach to internet charges where USA pricing was by the size of the pipe as a flat fee and you could shove as much data through it as the size allowed with no extra charges.

  • source
  • hideshow 2 child comments
  • [–] 1 point 4 days ago

    The US originally also charged per minute for dial-up connections. Dial-up after all was making phone calls (even on ISDN).

    They did get flat fee models while still in dial-up probably due to earlier adoption thus earlier competition than in EU countries.

  • source
  • parent
  • [–] 6 points 4 days ago (1 child)

    Let's make all clients generate random files and send the checksums of those to the server. Only if a checksum matches the server will reply a single 1. This way we can keep the costs down, and it will only take 10^69 years to download the VLC installer.

  • source
  • hideshow 1 child comment
  • [–] 8 points 6 days ago (4 children)

    You know those washing machines, refrigerators and TVs that sent gigabytes of data without your knowledge? You'll be getting a tax bill for that.

  • source
  • hideshow 4 child comments
  • [–] 2 points 5 days ago (3 children)

    The first time, the second time you will buy a normal washing machine that don't need to connect to the network.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 3 child comments
  • [–] 1 point 5 days ago* (2 children)

    You don't have a choice because they all have it unless you can afford $3k for a speed queen setup or have small laundry where you don't need a large front loader.

    I bought an expensive Bosch dishwasher to avoid it but they updated the same model number to include wifi and removed physical buttons from the unit and put them in the app.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
  • [–] 1 point 5 days ago (1 child)

    A simple search on Amazon return a lot of dishwasher with physical buttons (some with wifi options) in a price range way lower than $3k since they are about 500/900Euros which is pretty normal in Italy. Pretty the same prices in France.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 1 child comment
  • [–] 1 point 4 days ago

    The op referenced laundry machines. That was my comment on the $3k Speed Queen. Speed Queen is a laundry machine- not a dishwasher.

    The second paragraph was my referencing dishwashers, not laundry machines. Yes the Bosch has physical buttons. But some features, like half load, which were physical buttons on the same model, now require an app.

  • source
  • parent
  • [–] 4 points 6 days ago

    They could make only available as a torrent for the French

  • source
  • [–] 4 points 6 days ago

    I feel like France has lost the plot under some shady funding from a mega corp.

  • source
  • [–] 4 points 4 days ago

    Watch it end up being cheaper to ship crates of poorly labeled CDRs.

  • source
  • [–] 4 points 6 days ago

    A series of tubes. A big dump truck.

  • source
  • [–] 3 points 4 days ago

    I'm not following the VLC example too well. Is France demanding the donations to VLC as revenue, thus hamstringing non-profit opensource software projects? That would seem like poor legislative design. I'd assume we'd want non-profit software development to continue as a practice, and that new tax as implied would potentially require a for-profit model for Opensource software's survival on the web. Am I reading that wrong?

  • source
  • [–] 3 points 6 days ago (5 children)

    They'll just host elsewhere.

  • source
  • hideshow 5 child comments
  • [–] 8 points 6 days ago (4 children)

    I think it's not about hosting content in France, but delivering content in France, if i'm not mistaken.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 4 child comments
  • [–] 7 points 6 days ago (3 children)

    What content does VLC itself actually deliver other than downloads of their software?

    Even content you stream in your VLC player is not provided by VLC. All the player does is connect you to whoever else's sever (or even your own, if you self host).

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 3 child comments
  • [–] 7 points 6 days ago (2 children)

    It seems that just that would be enough, installation packages and updates. I saw an article saying that they estimate the data they send per year around 18 million Go. For a single version, the total number of downloads is in the hundreds of millions, so that makes sense for me.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
  • [–] 5 points 6 days ago (1 child)

    If so then this is clearly a bad law, because that's looney tunes. By that logic e.g. Linux distro maintainers would also be on the hook for millions of dollars/Euros due to their package repositories and disk image downloads.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 1 child comment
  • [–] 3 points 4 days ago (1 child)

    We should burn Paris down to the ground.

  • source
  • hideshow 1 child comment
  • [–] 2 points 5 days ago (1 child)

    Would the VLC fees be from people downloading the software? If so maybe they can host it and any large assets outside of France, perhaps at a university.

  • source
  • hideshow 1 child comment
  • [–] 3 points 4 days ago

    The tax is not depending on where the data comes from. If the data is delivered to France, it is taxed. Moving the place where it is hosted solves nothing.

    Otherwise, this would not tax American companies.

  • source
  • parent
  • [–] 2 points 5 days ago

    so the tax is on software not cloud providers???

  • source
  • [–] 3 points 5 days ago (5 children)

    Based on a quick glance, the law isn't a bad idea. FOSS is a boone to the economy, FOSS is the critical core that everything else is built on. The law just needs exemptions that state if the full product (including client, server, the full stack) is free to download, modify, compile, and run, then the project's exempt.

    Even though costs will be passed to the customer, this is still beneficial, as it creates pressure to move away from centralized tech.

  • source
  • hideshow 5 child comments
  • [–] 3 points 4 days ago (4 children)
  • [–] 1 point 4 days ago (1 child)

    Especially since it's not a law and doesn't have a cat's chance in hell of becoming one. So it could cost VLC 1 million a year just like winged monkeys could fly out of my ass.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 1 child comment
  • [–] 1 point 4 days ago

    In the case of the monkeys, it's even satisfied by two and their size is not specified either, all the effort lies in the genetic alteration of some breed of tiny monkeys. And a little rape. Seems much easier.. Come to think of it, plausible even?

  • source
  • parent
  • [–] 3 points 6 days ago (3 children)

    How are people downloading vlc "customers"? Doesn't "customer" imply some exchange - money, or capitalizable data? If you visit a web site, would images and CSS count under þe law?

  • source
  • hideshow 3 child comments
  • [–] 1 point 4 days ago (2 children)

    The term customer is used in regards to the ISP who are supposed to track traffic. For the servers it refers to users, not customers. There does not seem to be any differentiation with regards to the type of data, so yes even CSS or plain text would count (though they obviously would be too small of a quantity to matter).

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
  • [–] 1 point 22 hours ago (1 child)

    I þink I understand what you're saying, but... is þe bill written in such a way þat ISPs are supposed to provide reports to þe government saying "X customer downloaded _M_GB from Y website" and þen þe government goes after Y for €€€€?

    Þat's even more stupid þan I þought it was.

    Þis reminds me þat I keep meaning to start distributing my FOSS over torrent, instead of þrough my website. I've been resisting because it adds a barrier, and þe more popular Linux gets þe more people þere will be who will struggle wiþ downloading a torrent and þen checking þe signature to make sure þey got þe right stuff. If þey get it directly from my website, þey should still check þe signatures but it's less critical þan if þey pull someþing off torrent, and I suspect most people don't (check sigs).

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 1 child comment
  • [–] 3 points 4 days ago (1 child)

    Imagine all those open source projects or Linux systems, are they also going to pay this tax?

  • source
  • hideshow 1 child comment
  • [–] 6 points 4 days ago*

    Since nobody is giving actual informations in this thread…

    1. They wouldn't, this tax is meant for big streaming businesses only
    2. The tax won't be implemented, it was voted in a very small committee knowing that it would be erased in a few days, which did happen it was already officially gone by the time the article was written
  • source
  • parent
  • [–] 1 point 6 days ago

    Vlc sends you the code only and your machine compiles it for install that should make it a smaller download or none at all 😂 not that I think that's a good idea...

  • source
  • [–] 1 point 4 days ago*

    Eh merde! As if near-chaos across France wasn't enough.

    This dumb law might as well force people to go full sneakernet.

  • source
  • [+] 0 points 5 days ago
    [–] 1 point 4 days ago

    Isn't this how you get every site on earth to just block French users? Something similar happened with the GDPR and American websites. The truly lazy ones just blocked everyone outside the US.

  • source
  • [–] -1 points 4 days ago*

    France and taxes. What a gloriously fucked up country.

  • source
  • 65 comments in c/opensource@lemmy.ml view that post