Slashdot Mirror

Of course you are sure there has been some US law kicked around that exempts internet purchase tax. http://www.ecommercecommission.org/ITFA.htm + I'm drunk

Kerry: ..."multiple or discriminatory" taxes on electronic commerce...

I have to assume Kerry did not really answer the question asked about sales taxes on internet sales,

I think that would be an incorrect assumption, the prohibition on "multiple aor discriminatory" taxes is there to prevent multiple sales taxes. The oroginal act is a tad poor at explaining how that should be done, but it does prevent multiple sales tax from different states being applied (it still allies state/county/municipal sales tax, but prohibits taxes from multiple states).

In other words, Kerry thinks it's OK to have sales tax, but we need to make sure you aren't taxed by multiple states.

Source: section 1104, #6 of the IFTA as published by the Advisory Commission on Electronic Commerce.

Kerry: ..."multiple or discriminatory" taxes on electronic commerce...

I have to assume Kerry did not really answer the question asked about sales taxes on internet sales,

I think that would be an incorrect assumption, the prohibition on "multiple aor discriminatory" taxes is there to prevent multiple sales taxes. The oroginal act is a tad poor at explaining how that should be done, but it does prevent multiple sales tax from different states being applied (it still allies state/county/municipal sales tax, but prohibits taxes from multiple states).

In other words, Kerry thinks it's OK to have sales tax, but we need to make sure you aren't taxed by multiple states.

Source: section 1104, #6 of the IFTA as published by the Advisory Commission on Electronic Commerce.

a) Moratorium.--No State or political subdivision thereof shall impose any of the following taxes during the period beginning on October 1, 1998, and ending 3 years after the date of the enactment of this Act--

(1) taxes on Internet access, unless such tax was generally imposed and actually enforced prior to October 1, 1998; and

(2) multiple or discriminatory taxes on electronic commerce.

I've said a couple of times before that the federal tax that we pay for landline and cellphones was originally a temporary measure in 1898 to finance the Spanish-American War.

VOIP is an opportunity to get out from under all of this stupid infrastructure. Even without 911 service, I am all for it.

Then why is it taxed as such?. It isn't really free speech then as I am paying for it, right?

That's a non-sequitur. The link has nothing to do with your phone number being treated as your private property, and the "free" in "free speech" has nothing to do with paying to use the medium in which it is expressed.

Bottom line, a person has the right to ignore, turn off, or otherwise for himself squelch free speech that he does not want to hear.

Actually, no. The US Supreme Court does not in general support your "right" to shut out the speech of others unless they are on or using your private property or unless they are threatening you. They cannot force you to listen, but usually with the exception of commercial entities (like telemarketers) and people who present a risk to you (stalkers), you cannot force them not to try to talk to you. It would be really nice if you were right in my opinion, but case law on the books suggests that suppressing political cold-calls and charity fundraising would most likely be overturned.

Then why is it taxed as such?. It isn't really free speech then as I am paying for it, right?

Bottom line, a person has the right to ignore, turn off, or otherwise for himself squelch free speech that he does not want to hear. You can say what you want, but I have the right to not listen. The DNC beautifully expresses my desire to not listen.

The real problem with these taxes is that even if someone uses them to buy a clue about the issues they are trying to solve, once a tax is in place no one wants to get rid of it any time soon. Take as an example the "temporary" telephone tax from the Spanish-American War we Americans pay each month. These are the reasons we have to work now to stop these foolish laws and regulations before they hit the books.

excerpt from E-Commerce Advisory Commission Report Gaining Bipartisan Support in Congress.

Shows of support include an introduction of legislation that permanently extends the current moratorium on Internet-related taxes and repeals the telephone tax.

Personally, I think Wal-Mart is trying to blow smoke up everyone's @$$ because they know that they are about to lose this one... These are the same people who want to fill out the long form census and tell exactly how much money you make and how many lightbulbs you have in your house because it's "...a potential threat to billions of dollars in state and local sales tax collections that pay for schools, roads, police and fire protection."

Come on, am I supposed to beleive that big Business WalMart and Circuit City could give a damn about the condition of my streets and city fire trucks? All they want to do is shut out competition by throttling the only avenue small business have... the Internet. I think we all know what happens when monopolies try to cut their competitors at the knees...