[Starlink] Re: [NNagain] [Bloat] The French have decided to destroy the Internet within their own country by taxing Gigabits (Dr. Peering)

[Sascha Meinrath <sascha@thexlab.org>]

On 11/4/26 12:03 PM, Sebastian Moeller wrote:> Hi Sascha,
> 
> On November 4, 2026 5:20:01 PM GMT+01:00, Sascha Meinrath <sascha@thexlab.org> wrote:
>> Hi Sebastian,
>>
>> My point is that if I VPNed to a point outside France, then a French ISP would have no way to know that I've accessed the type of media that should be taxed.
>  
> A misunderstanding, the amendment prposes to tax every single bit independent of the source... it makes zero exemptions, not for FOSS, not for non commercially ial entities. Sure the motivation is to tax big tech primarily, but the current (half-baked) legal implementation is not differentiating...
> 
>> In essence, VPNs (and proxy services) would create extraordinary problems for even instrumenting the proposed taxing regime.
> 
> How? Like with a CDN the tax would hit the vpn provider... the ASN of the source IP....

A VPN provider (at least any that I would recommend using) would not know the 
content being VPNed. In essence, someone in France could VPN to a different 
country; neither the ISP or the VPN provider would know the specific content 
being accessed (Note: while some VPN's do track their users, none of the privacy 
protecting ones would do so); meanwhile, the media company -- even assuming some 
sort of extra-territorial leverage of French law outside of France -- may have 
no idea that the end destination of the media in question is within France.

Long story short, neither the VPN provider, the French ISP, nor the media 
company would necessarily know that a specific piece of media was destined for 
consumption within France. This is, of course, exactly the conundrum facing 
authoritarian and censorial regimes around the globe -- in this case, one is 
dodging tax surveillance, but the technical underpinnings are very much the same.

All in all, a dumb & doomed (proposed) law.

--Sascha

> 
> 
> 
>>
>> --Sascha
>>
>> On 11/4/26 10:40 AM, Sebastian Moeller wrote:
>>> Hi Sascha,
>>>
>>>
>>>> On Nov 2, 2026, at 15:30, Sascha Meinrath <sascha@thexlab.org> wrote:
>>>>
>>>> I can't wait until the French Parliament learns about VPNs... It would be absolutely *wonderful* if all the ISPs passed along the tax to their customers... and then taught all their customers that VPNed traffic would, for obvious reasons, be exempted.
>>>
>>> Not how this is supposed to work: the ISP aggregates its end-customer bound traffic volume by ASN and reports these aggregates quarterly, the tax office sends the ASNs the tax bill. VPN does not really matter, except now it is the VPN provider that is on the hook for the money. The amendment does not address VPNs but for CDNs that are in a similar picckle the idea is that CDN operators either pass on the cost or "eat" it themselves (both half-baked ideas). The only oddity VPNs add is that they typically receive no money from the actual content providers, but the end users.
>>>
>>>>
>>>> I find proposals like this to be absolutely idiotic -- and, they are yet another step in the global data obfuscation arms race.
>>>
>>> Oh, that proposal is pretty half-baked, no arggument there, but I think we differ in which of its half-baked-ness we consider worst ;)
>>>
>>>>
>>>> #encrypteverything
>>>
>>> Well, if you look what this is supposed to operate on encryption is not really an option, as this operates on source and destination IP addresses, that are somewhat prickly to encrypt if you want packets delivered...
>>>
>>>>
>>>> --Sascha
>>>>
>>>> On 11/2/26 6:23 AM, Sebastian Moeller via Nnagain wrote:
>>>>> Hi Michael,
>>>>>> On Nov 2, 2026, at 08:44, Michael Welzl <michawe@ifi.uio.no> wrote:
>>>>>>
>>>>>> The tax is 5 cents per Gigabyte. This is insane.
>>>>> Back of the envelop calculations for video streaming (assuming this to be the one category driving most of the sustained capacity usage):
>>>>> common use seems to be HD streaming (say on average at 5 Mbps), with say 2 hours per day, 7 days per week:
>>>>> (5 * 1000^2) * (60 * 60 * 2 * 30) / (8 * 1000^3) = 135 GB
>>>>> -> 135 * 0.055 = 7.425 Euro/month
>>>>> typical cost for midrange  (ad-free) video streaming in france: 8-15 Euro
>>>>> depending on the reference contract tier, the tax almost as large as the total revenue, no way this could be priced-in without significant price increases.
>>>>> The proposed tax indeed seems quite steep, however it is capped at 15% of revenue in france or 2% of world-wide revenue
>>>>> So that would get this more in like with a 15% tax... on revenue, still nothing to sneeze at, but a far cry from the numbers one gets when simply multiplying...
>>>>> Regards
>>>>> Sebastian
>>>>> P.S.: My take this is half-baked and will not make it through the further legislative process in that form.
>>>>>> It goes against how we agree to use the Internet.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> English version:
>>>>>> "France has recently approved a highly controversial "Internet Traffic
>>>>>> Tax" (or Gigabyte Tax) as part of the 2027 budget bill amendments. The
>>>>>> new levy targets digital content providers based on the volume of data
>>>>>> they transmit to French internet users, which is monitored by network
>>>>>> operators and Internet Service Providers (ISPs) heavily utilizing
>>>>>> Internet Exchange Points like France-IX."
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Google AI summary:
>>>>>> "Key Metrics & Tax Rates
>>>>>> • €0.055 per gigabyte charged to content providers.
>>>>>> • Capped at 15% of a provider's French revenue.
>>>>>> • Capped at 2% of a provider's global revenue.
>>>>>> • Measured directly by French network operators and ISPs."
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> On 2026-10-31 13:56, Frantisek Borsik wrote:
>>>>>>> Crossposting, because this garbage idea might "inspire" more countries
>>>>>>> and
>>>>>>> have a horrible impact also on bufferbloat everywhere.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> *Original post by Dr. Peering:*
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> *"The French have decided to destroy the Internet within their own
>>>>>>> country
>>>>>>> by taxing Gigabits. Here’s Octave Klaba's excellent analysis [in
>>>>>>> French,
>>>>>>> link below] showing just how insane the finance bill actually is. The
>>>>>>> IXP
>>>>>>> taxation amount is, just for starters, ridiculous!"*
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> https://x.com/drpeering/status/2116468659392807
>>>>>>> <https://x.com/drpeering/status/2116468659392807381?a=E-elnbppn-MAi-LNIrU&s=46>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> *Octave's post:*
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> https://fr.linkedin.com/posts/octave-klaba-3a0b3632_jai-lu-lamendement-i-1358-au-plf-2027-activity-7522219045576888320-uqkw
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> *Copy+paste:*
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> J'ai lu l'amendement I-1358 au PLF 2027, adopté ce vendredi à
>>>>>>> l'Assemblée :
>>>>>>> une taxe de 0,055 € par Go envoyé vers les abonnés des FAI français. Le
>>>>>>> chiffre est abstrait, alors comparons-le. Corrigez-moi si vous voyez
>>>>>>> des
>>>>>>> erreurs.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Deux comparaisons et un cas concret :
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> 1. Le transit et le peering. Un port 100 Gbps coûte environ 6 300 € par
>>>>>>> mois chez un fournisseur de transit mondial. En interconnexion directe
>>>>>>> avec
>>>>>>> un FAI européen, compter 3 à 5 fois plus, soit 20 à 30 k€ par mois. Sur
>>>>>>> ce
>>>>>>> port (a), la taxe atteint 1,02 M€ par mois, soit environ 3400 % à 16300
>>>>>>> %
>>>>>>> du prix d'une interconnexion vers les FAI français. On change donc
>>>>>>> profondément le modèle économique de la bande passante en France.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> 2. Les hyperscalers sont critiqués pour le prix de leur trafic sortant,
>>>>>>> qui
>>>>>>> va d'environ 0,08€ à 0,045€ par Go selon le volume. La taxe, 0,055 €
>>>>>>> par
>>>>>>> Go, représente 68 % à 123 % de ce prix. On parle donc de doubler, pour
>>>>>>> le
>>>>>>> trafic vers la France, un prix déjà jugé trop élevé !
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> 3. Le cas d'OVHcloud. Nous envoyons de l'ordre de 500 Gbps au 95e
>>>>>>> percentile vers les FAI français, soit environ 324 Gbps en moyenne. Sur
>>>>>>> un
>>>>>>> an, la taxe brute atteindrait 70 M€. Le texte la plafonne à 15 % du CA
>>>>>>> réalisé en France ou à 2 % du CA mondial, soit entre environ 23 et 70
>>>>>>> M€
>>>>>>> par an que nous devrions collecter pour l'État, et donc répercuter sur
>>>>>>> nos
>>>>>>> clients.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Conclusions :
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> 1. Une taxe porte en général sur une petite fraction de son assiette.
>>>>>>> Celle-ci vaut plus de 3000 % du coût du transit, et environ 100 % du
>>>>>>> prix
>>>>>>> public des hyperscalers. Rappelez-vous la loi SREN, votée pour
>>>>>>> supprimer
>>>>>>> les frais de transfert qui empêchaient les clients de quitter un
>>>>>>> fournisseur cloud. Ici, on parle de doubler le prix du trafic sortant
>>>>>>> vers
>>>>>>> les internautes français, un prix déjà très problématique.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> 2. Le garde-fou, un plafond calculé sur le chiffre d'affaires, est
>>>>>>> incohérent. Ce chiffre d'affaires couvre des serveurs, du stockage, des
>>>>>>> datacenters et des équipes sans rapport avec la bande passante. C'est
>>>>>>> comme
>>>>>>> créer une taxe calculée sur la consommation électrique des usines
>>>>>>> automobiles en France, plafonnée à 15 % du chiffre d'affaires des
>>>>>>> constructeurs. Quel rapport entre les deux ?
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> 3. Une taxe nationale de ce type frappe à coup sûr les entreprises
>>>>>>> établies
>>>>>>> en France, alors que leurs concurrents mondiaux sans présence en France
>>>>>>> livrent le même trafic aux mêmes FAI français sans payer cette taxe en
>>>>>>> pratique. Cela crée une distorsion de concurrence au détriment des
>>>>>>> acteurs
>>>>>>> nationaux et déclasse les entreprises qui embauchent en France. Une
>>>>>>> taxe
>>>>>>> qui produit l'effet inverse serait une meilleure approche.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> (a) Facturé au 95e percentile, ce port n'est pas plein en permanence :
>>>>>>> avec
>>>>>>> un profil journalier type (22 % vers 4 h, 90 % vers 21 h), il
>>>>>>> transporte en
>>>>>>> moyenne 57 % de sa capacité, soit 18,6 millions de Go par mois.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> All the best,
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Frank
>>>>>>> Frantisek (Frank) Borsik
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> In loving memory of Dave Täht: 1965-2025
>>>>>>> https://libreqos.io/2025/04/01/in-loving-memory-of-dave/
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> https://www.linkedin.com/in/frantisekborsik
>>>>>>> Signal, Telegram, WhatsApp: +421919416714 <+421%20919%20416%20714>
>>>>>>> iMessage, mobile: +420775230885 <775%20230%20885>
>>>>>>> Skype: casioa5302ca
>>>>>>> frantisek.borsik@gmail.com
>>>>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>>>>> Bloat mailing list -- bloat@lists.bufferbloat.net
>>>>>>> To unsubscribe send an email to bloat-leave@lists.bufferbloat.net
>>>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>>>> Bloat mailing list -- bloat@lists.bufferbloat.net
>>>>>> To unsubscribe send an email to bloat-leave@lists.bufferbloat.net
>>>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>>>> Bloat mailing list -- bloat@lists.bufferbloat.net
>>>>>> To unsubscribe send an email to bloat-leave@lists.bufferbloat.net
>>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>>> Nnagain mailing list -- nnagain@lists.bufferbloat.net
>>>>> To unsubscribe send an email to nnagain-leave@lists.bufferbloat.net
>>>>
>>>> -- 
>>>> Sascha Meinrath
>>>> Director, X-Lab
>>>> Palmer Chair in Telecommunications
>>>> Penn State University
>>>
>>>
>>
> 

-- 
Sascha Meinrath
Director, X-Lab
Palmer Chair in Telecommunications
Penn State University