Slashdot Mirror
Senator Warns of Email Tax This Fall
cnet-declan writes "State and local governments in Washington this week began an all-out lobbying push for the power to tax the Internet, according to our article at News.com. A new Senate bill would usher in Internet sales taxes, and the Federation of Tax Administrators (representing state tax collectors) advised senators at a hearing on Wednesday not to renew a temporary moratorium limiting broadband taxes that expires in November. One irked Republican senator warned that unless the moratorium is renewed, we could start seeing email taxes by the end of the year. Former House Majority Leader Dick Armey blames it on the Democrats taking over, as do Yahoo and eBay lobbyists. Is this a non-hoax version of bill 602P?"
That makes sense because Mr. Enzi, the bill's sponser, who is listed at the very top of the bill as its sponser, is a Republican.
Yes. That's right. Republicans want big government in your computer and want big government's hand in your wallet.
nor is it a set group of people, places, etc.
Just how do they expect to enforce their levy of taxes?
Trying to tax the internet is somewhat like trying to tax other forms of communication. The best they'll be able to do is tax the businesses that provide a service to connect to the internet (telcos and ISPs).
That reminds me of something... wasn't the Stamp Act one of those "taxation without representation" things that pissed off the revolutionaries in the 13 colonies? Hmmm...
Insisting on "correct" English is like saying that there is only one, definitive recipe for chili.
Is the people need to stop electing idiots.
It's similar to what the Dems pulled with the "bringing back the draft" BS they tried to claim Republicans were planning during the 2004 election (Dems were the ones who proposed twin bills for it, but then voted against it cause it was just a campaign tool to get college students to pledge votes for Kerry).
Now Republicans seem to be doing the same thing. Propose a BS bill, then claim "it's the Democrats' fault!"
I F-ING HATE POLITICS
I like basketball!!1!
From a bricks and mortar perspective, *stopping* the shipment of goods shipped over state lines would be a good thing. I can see many states setting up tax systems that are so complicated and expensive it effectively shuts down direct marketers. (internet and catalog)
The thing is, the constitution is clear on this. The states don't have a right to charge taxes on stuff shipped across state lines. Why are we even having this discussion?
All ideas^H^H^H^H^Hprocesses in this post are Patent Pending. (as well as the process of patenting all postings)
Because Congress (both state and federal) likes to keep the Supreme Court on its toes? It certainly seems like it sometimes.
Javascript + Nintendo DSi = DSiCade
Because if there is one thing our government will work hard to to its lighten your wallet.
You talk like the Constitution is able to limit government's power somehow. I guess you haven't been paying attention, because that hasn't been true for some time now.
>>> I thought you DID pay a tax when you used a land line phone? For each and every call you make a small portion goes to state and federal tax coffers.
And I already pay a variety of local and state taxes on my internet monthly bill.
Republicans raise taxes --> that's really lowering taxes.
Democrats don't raise taxes --> that's really raising taxes.
ORWELLIZATION COMPLETE.
gg gop
We know where leadership by an anti-intellectual "strongman" who scapegoats minorities and likes boisterous rallies goes
Well there were several things mentioned in the article. While taxing email is technically unfeasible not to mention rather ridiculous, they definitely want to tax commerce that utilizes the Internet to work more efficiently.
For example, if you buy a book off Amazon.com, Amazon would pay local taxes to the "streamlined sales tax" system they're proposing. Of course, the consumer would bear the expenses of such a tax.
They (I'm lumping all the tax maggots into one pronoun) also want to impose a monthly internet use tax, i.e. a DSL tax.
What the Dems don't get is that the supply side approach is much better as was demonstrated during the 90s when many successful companies were founded such as Amazon and EBay. Although local sales taxes are avoided, these companies nonetheless contribute mightily to the tax base through employee income taxes, employee purchase of local homes, cars, food, travel services, and other products, corporate income tax, capital gains and other stock transaction related taxes, etc.
The internet revolution demonstrated the superiority of supply side economics. The successful companies generate the most revenue streams for the government in an organic manner. Imposing a regressive, universal tax on transactions will probably not destroy the current giants but will certainly discourage new companies from flourishing. Instead, incompetence will be rewarded because local governments will get all kinds of revenue they didn't deserve and will become totally dependent on it.
Then there are the unknown future uses of the internet that most of us can't even conceive. What about internet-based medical care? A surgeon on another continent operating on a patient via precision remote control, or physicians providing consultative services remotely--all of this will get taxed, and the middleware companies that are trying to market these services will get taxed to death before they can even get off the ground.
Monthly internet connection tax--what a slippery slope! Next they'll be taxing by the byte. Ultimately the cost of doing business for everyone will go up, including bricks and mortar stores which are also dependent on the internet today to run their businesses. Salaries will necessarily go down, people will have less discretionary income as a result, and the U.S. economy will be further Europeanized.
It will then become even more economically attractive to outsource manufacturing and service jobs. This is all to China and India's benefit. Thank you Hilary and the Dems for destroying the last bits of American competitiveness, and thank you to the American people for voting these imbeciles in.
it's = "it is"; its = possessive. E.g., it's flapping its wings.
Let's cut to the chase:
His opinion on those things do not matter. He is a constitutionalist, and is of the correct position that the federal government has no business in legislating anything related to abortion, gays and "all the usual stuff". States are the ones supposed to deal with such matters.