Internet Connection Tax Held Off for A Few More Years

Christopher Blanc writes "The ban on taxing Internet connections was set to expire at the end of October, but thankfully the US Congress has acted. Last night, a Senate bill was passed that extends the 1998 Internet Tax Freedom Act for seven more years. There are still some details to work out (the House's bill only extends it for four years), but it's clear both houses of Congress are looking to keep taxes out of the picture for the near future. 'Sen. Ted Stevens (R-AK) is excited at the prospect that Americans will be able to continue filing the tubes of the Internet tax-free. "The Internet has provided a powerful economic boost to our nation, and has become an important everyday tool for millions of Americans," said the senator. "By keeping Internet access tax-free and affordable, Congress can encourage Internet use for distance learning, telemedicine, commerce and other important services."'"

Comments

Re:Great news!

[Seakip18]

This is actually about the senate passing of the bill. The House only wanted 4 years, the senate is going for 7. As the summary says, the problem now is reconciling those versions to one they can send to the prez. All in all, the gov't is getting the income taxes of those who profit off the interenet. Is that not enough?

Only ISP Account is Tax-free

[Metaphorically]

This is a little misleading - the part that we often think of as "Internet access" is not taxable, several important services which are not provided by your ISP will now be explicitly taxable. This includes VoIP, Internet radio and Internet-delivered television services that don't come over email and aren't provided by your ISP as part of your account. See this thread.

Taking away money doesn't help pay for anything

[SuperKendall]

The trouble is that the wars of choice for Bush are going to have to be paid for some how.

Yes they are, so reducing government income by raising taxes seems like a particularly poor idea.

The measured effect is very simple and has repeated itself enough by now that people should know better - lower taxes increase government revenue. Raising taxes freezes up money going into the government.

The government isn't the group that creates wealth so giveing them more money only lowers what the rest of us can do with the amount we have remaining.

Re:Great news!

[operagost]

Meanwhile Richey Rich spends 5% of his income and banks the rest. Only 5% of his income is taxes on sales. And he's probably getting his income on capital gains, interest, and other investments, sitting back watching football and eating caviar while his income isn't taxed as income like the poor working man's is, but at a far lower rate.

Suggesting that "the rich" are just a bunch of lazy slobs who got it all handed to them is not a valid argument for socialism. Besides that, you seem to think that unearned income isn't taxed. I hope you haven't been forgetting to include your 1099-INT on your returns!

Let's call "regressive taxes" what they really are: fair. Unfair would be changing everyone a set amount. That's what fees like auto registration and permits are. I don't see how charging a successful person who earned $100,000 a $20,000 tax is less fair than charging a low-wage worker who earned $24,000 a $4,800 tax. The same applies for sales taxes. They're not really regressive because most states (strangely enough, not the most liberal such as NY and CA) do not charge for most clothing and food purchases. If you're poor, most of your money goes towards food and clothing (and rent, which is never taxed) so that's very progressive.