[prickledpear]

One intriguing proposal to limit domain name squatting is "Harberger Taxation"[1]

Under this scheme, every owner of a domain would declare a value for the domains they own, and pay a percentage of that value as a tax (replacing the current annual registration fees).

Owners are incentivized to post an accurate value for their domain because they must sell their domain for the price they list if anyone offers to buy at that price.

While it makes sense in theory, I think there are some practical problems that would have to be addressed before such a system could be put into use. For example, what stops a company with a large bankroll from squashing competitors by purchasing their domain?

[1] - https://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=2818494

[lolsal]

That seems totally bonkers for the case of an entity like Google or Apple. Would they really list their domains worth $1,000,000,000,000 dollars? and pay some percent of that a year?

[andmarios]

Once you do this, squatters will just find an easy way to make a domain seem active: email traffic, basic websites, etc.

Also sometimes there are legit uses, like squatting names in order to protect your brand. For example I could see google squatting google-search.com

[prickledpear]

This scheme has the advantage of it not mattering if something is active. Instead you pay fees based on what it's worth to you.

If someone is squatting on a high-value domain, they will have to pay high fees or sell the domain to someone who can make better use of it.

This prevents someone else from squatting on google-search.com and allows it to go to the highest value use -- protecting Google's brand.

[andmarios]

So, I'm an average person hosting my email on my domain. I use it for both personal and professional reasons. I'm by no means wealthy, so even though my email address has huge value to me (from clients, to friends, to banks and digital services) I can't pay a huge price for it.

With your suggestion, someone with enough money would be able to force me to sell it. Identity thieves would have a field day with this!

[giancarlostoro]

> While it makes sense in theory, I think there are some practical problems that would have to be addressed before such a system could be put into use. For example, what stops a company with a large bankroll from squashing competitors by purchasing their domain?

They don't have to sell if the offer sucks.

[prickledpear]

The idea is that if I'm a startup that owns google-disruptor.com, I have to declare a value for that domain name (let's say $100,000), and pay a percentage of that value as a tax. I'm then obligated to sell the domain to anyone who is willing to pay $100,000. This prevents me from undervaluing the domain.

Since Google has a much larger bankroll than me, they can purchase the domain for $100,000, and revalue the domain at $500,000 -- out of my price range.

[GilbertErik]

Since Google has a much larger bankroll than you, if they decided that they wanted prickledpear.com, wouldn't you have to sell it to them, or any other party with deep enough pockets?

[prickledpear]

Yes, that is the problem I mentioned in the original comment that I'm not sure how to solve :)

[lolsal]

So as a competitor to Google with $1000 in my pocket, Google could domain-snipe me out of existence, legally, for $1001 dollars?

[bo1024]

To clarify, under the scheme being proposed, they actually do have to sell. Otherwise you would just declare your domain has zero value, you'd pay no tax, and then if anyone offered to buy it, you'd say the offer sucks and refuse to sell. So declaring a value is a commitment to sell and pay the tax.

[giancarlostoro]

> To clarify, under the scheme being proposed, they actually do have to sell.

That just sounds broken to me. If I buy a domain, I should own it. Someone who wants it should offer what they are willing to pay for it, if I don't like their offer, they can find another domain.

[bo1024]

It's definitely a strange idea especially the first time you hear it. I don't know if I like it for domain names.