[To be clear: I've never used Uber nor would I generally consider it over my local 'trolley' in the ~35K population town in which I live.]
In economics and particularly in industrial organization, market power is the ability of a firm to profitably raise the market price of a good or service over marginal cost. In perfectly competitive markets, market participants have no market power.
I'm pretty sure I don't have the exact facts on what Uber's operating agreement with drivers is, but I always thought a given driver could choose to only drive during surge pricing, no? We always tried to manage our drivers for an elastic supply of capacity (much like an ad exchange). Otherwise, we'd be overwhelmed like the under-covered transport problem in Austin during SXSW (I believe a result of the lack of Uber availability). Uber's radio adverts explicitly state that it's "drive when you want for extra money," and if that is not what they actually offer then Lyft has a huge opportunity to acquire/retain more/better drivers and maintain a rapid ability to scale for capacity.
I am of the belief that Uber presents a unique opportunity to rethink the whole structure of unions in the US (I don't actually care if Canada bans Uber altogether, for example, I am more interested in the concepts themselves), and maybe a total rethink about how to organize labor.
I would have interest in building a commercial platform to help labor organize and coordinate themselves better (that they own) in the modern world. I think it would look like a gated digital community with microblogging, discussion, and voting functions.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dial-a-truck
These systems morphed into what is called a 'load board,' and Landstar operated what was more of a network of independent trucking brokers with their own shared/ private load board.
There are a certain number of criteria for employees vs contractors, based on whether training/equipment is provided, price setting, ability to turn down jobs, etc etc.
If you're classified as an employee, there are a bunch of things you have to do, such as collect GST, deal with health care, sick days, paternity leave, taxes, etc.
Uber is making the case that its drivers are contractors, since they set their own hours and purchase and maintain all their own equipment. It's a plausible argument, and that's something for the courts to sort out.
Just saying that they need to collect GST because the drivers are employees is begging the question.
If Uber drivers are classified as employees, what's next? Upwork and eLance workers classified as employees?
If the good or service is being provided by a non-taxi contractor who makes less than 30k a year, then you don't have to collect the GST and the tax doesn't cover that.
If the good or service is being provided by Uber, a non-contractor who makes over 30k a year, then you have to pay the tax.
What we're debating here is who provides the service and their legal status.
I find that kind of argumentation silly. They brought to the taxi industry, what is common in other industries, like construction, tech, etc. Stated differently, Uber has been able to provide a competitive service by legally structuring themselves in a way maximizes return for the themselves, for the driver, but still keeps costs low client due to say structuring.
Is your argument that you wish they had structured it differently so they were forced to pay more taxes? If that was the case then the drivers would be making a less, and the passengers would pay a more to cover the costs of the GST, and I don't see the point in that.
If taxi companies want to level the playing field, why don't structure themselves in more innovative ways like Uber did instead of forcing others to pay more taxes?
In fact, they haven't. They're taking a huge loss on subsidies to the fares.
No. A loophole is when a given law is exploited in a way that was not intended by the people who wrote it, usually by resorting to small technicalities in the law itself, or by referring to other, related laws.
In this particular case, a law that was intended to benefit small businesses is being exploited by a mega corp. Hence, loophole.
