Slashdot Mirror
Ban on Internet Access Tax Dies in Senate
Justen writes "The Associated Press is reporting (via Yahoo! News) that the bill to permanently ban federal and state taxes on the Internet, via the Internet Tax Freedom Act, has died in the Senate. 'The problem arose over the definition of 'Internet access' -- services that connect consumers to the Internet. The strongest proponents for a permanent ban want to make sure that all access technologies -- from phone lines to DSL to cable modems -- get equal freedom from taxation.'"
They should pass this, seriously. You dont even have to be a rocket scientist to figure this out.
Don't worry, they -will- find a way to tax internet commerce. There is too much money to be made.
The government is running scared, with the popularity of VoIP. With traditional switched phone systems, the government has all sorts of regulation (read: revenue). With VoIP; however, the regulation has gone away, simply because it is difficult, if not impossible to distinguish voice packets from data packets. Thus, the telcos see an easy route to fall under the radar of regulation.
Be careful what you wish for - regulation has its ups and downs, but I'm pretty sure I don't opt for NO regulation.
I realize regulation and taxation are two different entities, but the government doesn't often regulate that which it doesn't also tax.
So, should this pass? Who I am to say?
One ring to rule them all, and in the darkness named them...
I know its unpopular, but shouldnt internet shoping and what not be taxed? After all, they are still goods and services.
We've still gota pay tax to keep kids in school, our roads being repaired etc.
I think internet goods and services should be taxed, just like any other bloody good or service.
Giving IE users a taste of their own medicine since 2005 - http://pods.-is-a-geek.net/
Like it or not, taxation is the basis for a stable society. No tax, no government. No government, no authority. No authority, breakdown of civil society.
Although citizens naturally prefer low-tax regimes, sometimes it's just silly: look at California's budget to see what "low tax at any price" does.
The internet is so significant, and carries so much trade, that taxation is inevitable and so long as it's sensible and not punitive, why not?
Ceci n'est pas une signature
I thinkn they would charge the sender, instead of the receiver. It would be like most mail. Sender pays. It might actually reduce spam.
In US, you can easily buy enough major firearms to wipe out your neighbourhood but a few little fireworks are banned.
"Let's make sure that our access to information is metered and doled out in equal portions, so that everyone gets an equal piece of the pie. Also, let's put the government in charge of our access to information, including news, commerce, communications, and education, and trust them to make sure that we get access to what we need and have a constitutional right to view."
Where do I sign up?
-- lk t lv ll th vwls t f wrds. T svs lts f tm t wrt bt ts pn n th ss t rd nd mks m lk lk cmplt dpsht.
First of all unless both paries are within the same state it should be clearly untaxable without the explicit concent of congress. It would be interstate commerce. Of course looking at the track record of the supreme court lately...
One thing I don't get the basis for the state of the customer collecting the tax money. Either congress was bought off sometime in the past or the supreme court messed up. It should be clearly the state the bussiness is in. Although if that were I case I think there might be at least some basis for taxation. Taxation from the customers state is clearly for the political/economic reason that bussiness would move to states with lower or no taxation as should be the case. Of course many of those states have higher income and property taxes to compensate so bussinesses would have to balence many factors.
The only compromise I can see is if federal goverernment imposed an interstate sales tax and redistributed said money amoung the states. It would be divied equally, by population, by where the purchasers reside or by taxation rates or a combination of many factors. That way it might not be as much money as the states would otherwide get it would but they would get something and bussinesses would have an easier job of bookkeeping and paying those taxes.
Unfortunately, the Senate is having a problem with members of the Senate Intelligence Committee trying to use classified intelligence as political weapons. If Senators had Americans as their priority instead of their seats and their party, we might have some sort of sensible legislation pass in Congress.
Strange women lying in ponds distributing swords is no basis for a system of government.
How would that be measured. It sounds like a mess to me, and more like a gangsta's paradise (again).
Why a difference? Because some places (like Colorado) have insanely complicated sales tax codes. Where I live, the tax districts include: state, county, city, regional transportation district, cultural facilities district, a special downtown district, and probably some others. Each district's tax depends on the nature of the goods (food, clothing, electronics, services, etc. all have different tax rates in different jurisdictions). The difference is that a local retailer can (with difficulty) figure out their tax liability based on their own address. But what address do you use for an internet retailer when decide which local sales taxes to apply?
The only solution with internet sales taxes is to use the address of the recipient. And that means that each internet retailer must figure out which of all the overlapping tax districts EVERY customer is in and the calculate the tax on each item based on the type of item and the district's tax structure and then remit them to the appropriate agency.
Its not as easy as it looks.
Two wrongs don't make a right, but three lefts do.
[devil's advocate]
An internet tax could be a good idea. There are many technical areas the money could go to:
1) Improve the government's online services. For example, make it so we can perform more DMV actions on the web instead of waiting 5 hours in line.
2) Improve the technical capability of libraries. Get some better/quicker search engines for browsing the catalogues.
3) Fund grants to colleges doing useful research (anti-spam R&D, security, etc...)
4) Fund the anti-electronic fraud teams in the DOJ.
[/devil's advocate]
Here's a hint: education isn't one of them, it's a local responsibility. And for that matter, breast cancer research doesn't belong in the Defense Budget either, but it's there. . .
Lastly, get rid of both tenure and teacher's unions: force teachers and schools to PERFORM if they want a higher paycheck and/or more funding. After all, that's the way it works for the rest of us. . .