US Lawmakers Push For a Permanent Ban On Internet Access Taxes

jfruh (300774) writes Since 1998, U.S. law has forbidden states from taxing Internet access — but the law has an expiration date that's been extended five times now. The new Congress is attempting to make the ban permanent, but some members are objecting to the fact that the proposed bill leaves in place grandfather clauses for states like Texas and Ohio that already had taxes in place in 1998.

Comments

Two Sides (of the mouth)

[houstonbofh]

I SUPPORT THIS! (as long as you OK my personal exception) Why is it that we all agree that politicians suck, but we keep getting more suckage? If you keep voting for the lesser of two evils, you keep getting evil.

Re:Two Sides (of the mouth)

[Anonymous Coward]

If you keep voting for the lesser of two evils, you keep getting evil.

Perhaps you don't know how elections work? If you're so unhappy with the contenders, perhaps you should run yourself?

Re: Two Sides (of the mouth)

[Anonymous Coward]

Ethical people cannot win elections. Psychopaths and lucky idiots do OK. Good people (not evil) do not seek power over others.

Perhaps it's you who does not understand how politics works.

Re: Two Sides (of the mouth)

[Anonymous Coward]

... let's have a government duty, like that for jury ...

As the climate-change deniers have demonstrated, there are far fewer facts in government and shouting lies makes a difference. This means ordinary people unfamiliar with the processes of science and impartiality, will vote on the better story: It will be the one that proclaims truths such as 'Please think of the children', 'Why do you hate America?', "If you've got nothing to hide, ... ", "If you've done nothing wrong, ... " and 'Jesus loves/hates ...'.

The public needs better education and thinking skills before they can collectively govern the country.

Re:Meaningless drivel

[ShanghaiBill]

Later law automagically overrides, so a law cannot make anything permanent.

It is obvious that by "permanent" they mean a law without an automatic expiration date. It is much easier to let a law expire than to pass a new law, especially with the 60 vote threshold in the Senate. There is a huge bias toward inertia.

Although I agree in principle that Internet access is a dumb thing to tax, I disagree even more with the Feds telling the states what to do. If people want to elect legislators that tax their Internet access, that should be their right.

Re:Meaningless drivel

[Charliemopps]

Later law automagically overrides, so a law cannot make anything permanent.

All it'll take is a new law allowing/mandating internet access taxes to make this "permanent" ban vanish.

So they have a temporary law, and they want to make it into a permanent law, and you're saying that's meaningless because they could make another law overriding it? Other events that could render this law meaningless: Civil war, Alien invasion, Meteor strike, Solar flare that destroys all electronics overnight.

eegads, this entire endeavor is meaningless.

Re: Meaningless drivel

[Anonymous Coward]

The problem with that is the internet is a major avenue of interstate, and even international trade, making it well within the federal bailiwick. Thus the federal government is within its authority to regulate commerce by forbidding or allowing taxation.

standard sales tax, exempt. No income tax in Texas

[raymorris]

Texas doesn't specifically tax ISPs, it just doesn't give them a 100% exemption from the standard sales tax paid on all purchases. Texas DOES exempt the first $25/month, so low-end internet is tax free. Above $25, buying fast internet is just like buying anything else.

Texas has no income tax, so exemptions to the sales tax are necessarily limited - food, and school supplies and clothes during back-to-school season, and not much else.

Re: Meaningless drivel

[quenda]

Wait a minute! You mean this is just about exempting ISP fees from normal sales tax ? Why?
I thought it must have been some kind of special levy. Most of the developed world has moved away from sales tax to a broad-based "good and services" tax (GST or VAT), as goods have become a much smaller part of our spending than in the past.

    Any exemption (almost) is a dumb idea from an economics view, as it distorts the market and increases the cost of compliance and collection.
Even exempting food is a bad idea. (Better to increase benefits etc to compensate the poor.)

The US tax system is a shambles with so many of these special-interest exemptions that wealthy individuals and corporations can end up contributing very little tax.