California cord cutters may have escaped cable’s annoying commercials, but in some cities, including Pasadena, they won’t escape its tax.

The city’s finance department decided Thursday to apply a 9.4 percent tax on “video services” to subscribers of streaming video providers such as Netflix, HBO Go and Hulu. The tax begins Jan. 1.

Pasadena won’t be alone either.

At least 45 other California cities have been advised they too could tax their residents’ online viewing using their city’s existing tax rate for cable providers.

Those cities include San Bernardino, Glendale, Santa Monica, Culver City and Pico Rivera among others, according to a listing from MuniServices, the company that collects taxes for those municipalities. Their tax rates on video services range from 4.5 to 11 percent.

Benicia and Indio adopted their own rulings last month, said Don Maynor, an attorney assisting the cities that use MuniServices’ utility user tax program.

“As companies begin to provide services that look more and more like cable services, those fall under taxable services,” Maynor said. “There will be a whole bunch more that will be adopting them in a couple of months.”

In Pasadena, it means a 9.4 percent tax on streaming subscriptions and online rentals. In other words, a $10 Netflix bill might jump to $11 per month next year, and HBO Go, the service viewers use to keep up with “Game of Thrones,” might increase to about $16.50.

For those with multiple subscriptions, the tax can add up quickly.

Some are questioning the legality. In California, voters are the only ones who can increase their taxes, but in this case, Pasadena and other cities are saying previous votes already included these services, though no one sought out the money until now.

“We knew these technologies would be coming out. There is just no way you can write an ordinance today and know exactly what things will look like three years down the road,” Maynor said. “The goal is to treat everyone the same, regardless of technology. Each city might have different thoughts on whether that’s a good idea or not.”

Jon Coupal, president of the Howard Jarvis Taxpayers Association, called the tax “very suspect.” The association’s legal team is currently investigating the legality of the new interpretation of the tax.

“We will be taking a very close look at this,” Coupal said. “If we determine this is an extension of an existing tax, then under the Constitution, they need voter approval. They can put as much lipstick on this pig as they want, but the pig is still a tax increase.”

Many of the cities considering this move went to their voters in the late 2000s to amend their utility user taxes, according to Maynor.

In some cases, those amendments made the language regarding video services open-ended on purpose. In Pasadena, an amendment to the UUT ordinance notes the city can tax video service suppliers “whatever their technology.”

The city repeatedly assured voters it wouldn’t tax internet access during the lead-up to the 2008 vote. Technically the city won’t tax access, just how a viewer uses it.

Pasadena’s Finance Director Matthew Hawkesworth made his determination Thursday that the tax applies to video games and streaming services similar to cable “regardless of the content of such video programming, or the technology used to deliver such services,” according to a memo to City Manager Steve Mermell.

“It’s our interpretation because of our code, these types of video services have always been eligible to be taxable,” Hawkesworth said. “The administrative ruling is instructing the various companies that offer video service that the tax includes their services as well, and it will be incumbent upon them to collect the tax and remit it to the city.”

Administrative rulings, like this new interpretation of taxing streaming services, aren’t out of the ordinary and happen periodically over the years, Hawkesworth said. The decision is made by the finance director as the city’s tax administrator, without input from the City Council.

Councilman Tyron Hampton called the decision “ridiculous” on Friday and said he hopes the council will take up the topic.

“Cable has been a hardship for many families and now we’re going to add a hardship to them,” Hampton said. “Next we’ll be taxing you for streaming music on Pandora. This is ridiculous.”

MuniServices spoke with stakeholders, researched and analyzed the topic for years before advising the cities of the option, which is why it took so long to materialize, Hawkesworth said.

“There are a lot of things that are done through the internet that are taxed,” he said. “Pasadena isn’t unique in this. There are many, many cities considering it.”

Pennsylvania became one of the first states to tax Netflix last month. Similar taxes exist in Chicago, Minnesota and Canada, according to Mashable.