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?"
They still don't get it, the Internet is not this easily defined thing that you can wrap thier minds around, its not about formats or drm or even email its about information. Anything thats describable as 1's and 0's can be transmitted over the internet, its like saying everytime you call a cab over a landline phone you have to pay a tax, uh no. How many ways can you now transmit info over the net now (?) its nearly infinite.
"It's so convenient to have a system where everyone is a criminal" - A. Hitler
we'll just tax the 1's and leave the 0's free?
If it's an out-bound tax, could it be used to make SPAM economically unrewarding?
put a toll meter on one of the Tubes. Voila!
If they start taxing Email I will just start using Gmail!
Now take that you bastards!
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.
If one protocol is taxed, we can push another protocol to take over. Imagine, if email is taxed, having the entire industry shift to a better system that is not regulated, and having the opportunity to design much-needed controls and authentication in to eliminate spam.
-- My Sig is a P228.
Do I get hit with a $70,000 tax bill?
What happens when I'm in a coffee shop using an anonymous mailer?
Do I have to attach my credit card number to each e-mail and, as a corrallary, can I not send e-mail 10 days later when all credit cards are canceled until further notice?
Your ad here. Ask me how!
Spammers won't give a shit or report their activities. So, they won't be the ones paying the tax - even though they do the majority of emailing.
However, legitimite businesses and users would be more likely to attempt to pay this tax - which would mean keeping track of outgoing emails.. to how many people.. resends.. attachments.. sizes?
Come on Congress! Get a fucking grasp of the ideas you're trying to make into law before you even talk about acting on them. Congress seems to be full of a bunch of morons making snap decisions based on ideas they cannot begin to comprehend.
The only thing Congress should even talk about taxing is Internet-based sales.. Taxing data that essentially costs ZERO should be taxed at a flat rate, to be fair, which would mean ZERO tax income. They could even set the rate at 500% for all I care.
--- We need more Ron Paul!
That would only be one step at a time if you were starting with Ebmail or switching to F#mail, then G#mail.
At least G#mail is pretty upscale compared to Email.
I may make you feel, but I can't make you think.
I just skimmed the bill linked in the summary... is it just me, or does this 1) not appear to apply to email whatsoever (it's not mentioned anywhere in the bill, though VOIP is) and 2) only applies to business doing $5 million USD or more in business a year.
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!
"Right now ALL retailers and people are required to pay sales tax on out of state items (depending on your state)"
Ummm... Huh?
States are forbidden from taxing interstate commerce. In some states if you buy something from out of state you the customer are supposed to pay the tax.
How can ALL the Retailers be required to pays sales tax on out of state items (depending on your state)?
1. I don't think you know what the world ALL means.
2. It isn't true. You must pay sales tax if you have a presence in that state. If you have a store, sales rep, office, or warehouse.
See my blog http://ilovecookes.blogspot.com/ for light hearted technical information.
There are two separate things going on here.
First, the bill in the story has nothing to do with taxing internet email. It has to do with, specifically, sales taxes on goods purchased over the internet.
The second part of the story is about the temporary moratorium limiting broadband taxes which limits taxes on items such as email, web surfing, etc.
Needless to say, these things are completely different. Leave it to crap|net to mix them all up to get your feathers ruffled.
In the first case, the bill being sponsored by Mr Envi, I kind of understand where he is coming from. States and local governments get a lot of their revenue from sales tax. Since there has been an increasing number of purchases made online, state and local governments and losing out on that sales tax money, which means they need to raise other taxes (e.g. property, fuel) in order to compensate. This hurts everyone, even those that do not own computers, and especially hurts the elderly who live on limited income. This bill also simplifies how states collect taxes for retailers to reduce paperwork, and has an exemption for e-tailers that earn less than $5 million a year doing internet sales.
On the temporary moratorium limiting broadband taxes, this is something that has been renewed every couple of years for the last several under the Republican-led congress. The idea is that general broadband services are not taxed, such as email and web surfing, at the federal and state levels. It does not appear this will be renewed which means *new* taxes could (and probably will) be added to Internet users.
Now that it is clear...
While some may point out that Mr. Enzi is a Republican raising taxes, he's not so much raising taxes as he is 1) simplifying sales taxes; 2) ensuring the "current" level of taxes imposed by states; 3) thus reducing property taxes; 4) helping maintain state governments who are having financial problems due to lack of sales tax revenue.
On the other hand, the Democrats, if they do not renew the ban on broadband taxes, will be creating new taxes that will impact every internet user. These are not taxes that are being avoided or taxes that are being suppressed.... these are NEW taxes.. and we all know how the Democrats love their taxes!
...income tax was voted in, and NEVER voted out, I don't see taxes not happening. I'll fight it and we all should. But don't allow the Coke and Pepsi parties to point fingers and distract you. Putting any political animal in charge of any taxes is like handing control of the local CVS(drug store) to the local drug addict. Dillinger once was asked why he robbed banks. "Because that's where the money's at." Smart man. If he had been in politics he'd have gone far.
When someone spends $40,000,000 on a $400,000 a year job, you can assume they have been corrupted. Watch them like a hawk. Always.
-- Prepared at the direction of, or to be sent to Legal Counsel, in anticipation of litigation. Attorney Client Pri
Brief Overview of Congressman Pauls Record
He has never voted to raise taxes.
He has never voted for an unbalanced budget.
He has never voted for a federal restriction on gun ownership.
He has never voted to raise congressional pay.
He has never taken a government-paid junket.
He has never voted to increase the power of the executive branch.
He voted against the Patriot Act.
He voted against regulating the Internet.
He voted against the Iraq war.
http://www.ronpaul2008.com/
When reality doesn't side with your politics, you just make stuff up or pull it out of your behind.... Kudos to the senator's staffer who found an 8 year old story and make it sound like an "impending threat of dire circumstance!" when it is complete fiction.
None of these proposals "tax"... The two issues are whether sites like Amazon.com should collect sales taxes for out of state sales (like any major catalog company like Sears has been doing for generations), and whether municipalities can tax internet access like they do phone and cable... The original moratorium was designed to encourage greater participation in the Internet. that goal has been accomplished, and further subsidizing it probably makes little sense.
Yes, it sucks.... no one likes paying taxes, but the roads don't get built by themselves, and the cops don't protect your house for free. The money has to come from somewhere.
Thanks,
Mike
Actually, certain taxes are different. Taxing gas to pay for road construction is more-or-less a pay-per-use system. It's not irrational at all.
Taxing property to pay for a fire department to protect property is similar.
Lots of taxes make sense and lots of others don't.
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.
http://www.homelandstupidity.us/2005/07/02/spanish -american-war-tax-on-telephone-service-continues-t oday/
Spanish-American war, actually.
Let's cut to the chase:
I'm not a Troll, it's reverse psychology.
Ahem:
http://politechbot.com/docs/enzi.sales.tax.bill.0
"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 would appear that the likes of YOU voted these particular imbeciles in:
http://enzi.senate.gov/public/index.cfm?FuseActio
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.