Ban on Internet Access Tax Dies in Senate 191
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 can't pass up a revenue stream (Score:1, Insightful)
Re:They can't pass up a revenue stream (Score:2, Interesting)
I like the whole "no taxes" thing, and it could continue to happen if the internet were a technology showcase used by a couple of people, however as the internet becomes (became) an integral part of our lives, and a key point of purchase for a massive value of goods
Re:They can't pass up a revenue stream (Score:3, Informative)
Re:They can't pass up a revenue stream (Score:5, Insightful)
Then we'd arguably not need an internet tax.
Internet Access... (Score:1)
Good Point (Score:2)
The power to tax is the power to destroy, and the American government will never allow unfettered access to free commun
Re:Internet Access... VoiceXML & ENUM (Score:2)
I suspect that the senate found it rather hard to create a clear demarcation between commerce based on "internet access" versus commerce based on traditional, taxed categories of custmer interactions.
Email (Score:1)
Re:Email (Score:3, Insightful)
Re:Email (Score:2)
Re:Email (Score:2)
Re:Email (Score:2)
By the warped logic of lawmakers, they are more likely to outlaw spam if they tax it than if they dont. The reasoning being that, when you have a service under the government 'protection' of being taxed, they then have in incentive to keep their 'taxpayers' happy. Thus, once they tax each email, they are more likely to legislate spam.
By another twist
Re:Email (Score:3, Funny)
Look, I used to say it all the time to our customers when I used to work tech support in 1996: "Don't be silly, there's no such thing as an e-mail virus. It's just text and you'd have to have some kind of broken client that attempted to execute the text. It's just another hoax like the modem tax."
I blame Microsoft for Internet taxation when (not if) we get it. ;-)
Bad Name to Blame (Score:5, Funny)
Re:Bad Name to Blame (Score:5, Funny)
My choice would have been Freedom to Access Required Telecommunications Infrastructure for the Next Generation (FARTING). I'm pretty sure it would have passed and swept through both houses of Congress with little opposition.
Packetized Regulation (Score:5, Insightful)
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?
Re:Packetized Regulation (Score:1)
Come on... this is why there are congressional aides... "Sir, your re-election campaign received a sack of unmarked bills, some drugs and a couple hookers so you'd vote against this. And remember, tomorrow's vote is in favour of the corp that gave you that other sack of cash, so you need to v
Re:Packetized Regulation (Score:2)
Hmmm, I'm in agreement with you on that.
No regulation on VoIP - for starters the "Do Not Call List" wouldn't apply to VoIP customers. No recourse for obscene or harassing phone calls. No recourse for billing problems.
I think the VoIP companies are ripping off the public if they get 911 service without paying the 911 taxes.
Re:Packetized Regulation (Score:2)
Re:Packetized Regulation (Score:2)
why a difference between net and non-net goods? (Score:5, Insightful)
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.
Re:why a difference between net and non-net goods? (Score:4, Insightful)
Re:why a difference between net and non-net goods? (Score:2)
Re:why a difference between net and non-net goods? (Score:1)
My state, Ohio, gets around it by calling it a "Use Tax". For example, if I buy something in one county that has a 5% sales tax and I live in a county that has 8% sales tax, I must pay a 3% Use tax to the state to make u
Re:why a difference between net and non-net goods? (Score:2)
If they are operatig a business in a state that has a corporate income tax and they generate revenue (not necessarily profit), it is taxed. The owners icome from the business is taxed. The employees salaries are taxed. Right now there is just one less layer, the transaction layer, free from taxes.
Re:why a difference between net and non-net goods? (Score:3, Informative)
Quill essentially affirms Bellas Hess [findlaw.com].
There's a four-prong "Complete Auto" [findlaw.com] test which has been used as a criterion for the validity of state taxes on interstate commerce:
interstate commerce == waste of fuel (Score:2)
Re:why a difference between net and non-net goods? (Score:2)
could someone clarify if normal order-by-post or order-by-phone shopping has the same rules as net shopping? and if not, why on earth not and are your legislators retarded?
Re:why a difference between net and non-net goods? (Score:1)
Re:why a difference between net and non-net goods? (Score:5, Informative)
In the US, if you order something from a company which has a physical presence in your own state, you must pay state sales tax. This is true whether the purchase is made in a brick-and-mortar store, online, or via mail order catalog.
If you order something from a company which does not have a physical presence in your state, you are not required to pay sales tax to either your own home state or to the state of the purchase. In many states, you're supposed to pay a "use tax" or something similar in your home state. In practice, hardly anyone does this except in the case of significant purchases. Very, very few people even know that the "use tax" (or whatever it's called in your state) exists to begin with.
In any case, that isn't what this bill is about. It's about taxes on internet service, not internet shopping.
Re:why a difference between net and non-net goods? (Score:2)
In the US, if you order something from a company which has a physical presence in your own state, you must pay state sales tax. This is true whether the purchase is made in a brick-and-mortar store, online, or via mail order catalog.
Perhaps I misunderstand what you're saying, but I don't think this is correct. If I walk into a brick and mortar store and buy something, I have to pay sales tax to the state in which the store is located, even if I don't live there. Or do I? Is there a little-known loophole
think about it (Score:2, Interesting)
Without those taxes, the high school football team might not be able to afford new lockers this year, instead waiting until next year.
Without those taxes, Echelon/Carnivore might have been made by Microsoft, and be less efficient in their violations of our right to protection from unreasonable search and seizure.
Without those taxes, Iraq might not get the money Bush wants to give
Re:think about it (Score:2)
Holy Shit!
I definitely should have majored in education!
Re:think about it (Score:2)
So... where does that $100,000 come from again? And it's a rare school principal that makes 100,000!
Here's an idea: shave off... maybe 1/10 of the "defense" budget and give it to schools. That should double or triple the income of most school systems at least....
Re:think about it (Score:2)
Here's an idea: shave off... maybe 1/10 of the "defense" budget and give it to schools. That should double or triple the income of most school systems at least....
That won't do anything except inflate the salaries of the higher-ups. the teachers will still get shafted.
Re:think about it (Score:3, Insightful)
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. . .
Re:think about it (Score:2)
That's not true. An "experienced" principal at a high school will often make over $100,000 where I live, and I'm sure that in states with more education funding, the principal will make more. Thank the people who think that dumping an extra billion dollars into education will do anything but line the pockets of those who are in administration.
Re:why a difference between net and non-net goods? (Score:4, Insightful)
What services will a government a thousand miles away offer my business in return for the taxes they are attempting to collect? Will California send Road repair crews out of state to fix the roads near my business? Will New York send funds out of state to pay for Teachers in the school district where my business is located?
If the taxpayers that actually who actually live in areas that need funds for roads and schools don't care enough to pay for them, then why should I care if they have substandard schools and pothole filled roads?
If a group of people think so little of me that they are willing to tax me without providing any benifit to me in return, why should I care what they have to do without?
The desire to tax the internet is being driven by deadbeats who don't want to pay for local services they are unwilling to do without, and by sleezy politicans who are pandering to those deadbeats.
Re:why a difference between net and non-net goods? (Score:2)
Here in Ohio at least, the school funding situation is more complicated than that. You see, schools are paid for by a property tax. The obvious problem is that regions of the state where property is worth more can raise more tax revenues this way, while still having a lower tax! Meanwhile poore
Re:why a difference between net and non-net goods? (Score:2)
The problem isn't a total lack of money in poor neighborhoods, it's fucked up priorities over what to do with limited funds. Robbing me to provide services for these people won't cure that basic problem.
Re:why a difference between net and non-net goods? (Score:2)
Re:why a difference between net and non-net goods? (Score:2)
In this case, not so rantish, or quite as long, but yes, there is an opinion that you may not agree
I'm just a Canadian, but... (Score:2)
What services will a government a thousand miles away offer my business in return for the taxes they are attempting to collect?
I thought that's "taxation without representation" - Isn't there something in your constitution that outlaws this?
Re:why a difference between net and non-net goods? (Score:4, Insightful)
Under mail order tax collection, the rules are: If you do not have offices in other states, you only have to charge customers in the state you operate sales tax. Transactions going to other states are tax free.
Let's say I sell books and I live in Missouri and I mail a copy to someone in St. Louis, I have to collect state sales tax on that transaction. Let's say I mail a copy to someone else in little rock arkansas, no sales tax because I don't operate out of AR.
Re:why a difference between net and non-net goods? (Score:2)
Re:why a difference ... complicated local tax code (Score:5, Insightful)
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.
Re:why a difference ... complicated local tax code (Score:2)
Re:why a difference between net and non-net goods? (Score:2)
Re:why a difference between net and non-net goods? (Score:2)
Article(1)of subsection post(a) of Slashdot thread (Score:3, Funny)
(1) Subsections (a)(b)(e) and clasues (d)(c)(f) and (fee)(fie)(foe)(fum) state that, while (2)(a)(c) and (3)(1)(a)(b(c))(d)(e) must make (1) true.
Now you can clearly see why this post make sense. And if you can't then you obviously didn't see the modus operandi behind sections (1)(e)(v)(2)(a(b(c(e(2))))).
Silly rabitt
Re:Article(1)of subsection post(a) of Slashdot thr (Score:2)
John( 16:4 )
looks like code to me
But of course! (Score:4, Interesting)
Sure, the Act probably was just created to make it look like the folks on Capitol Hill were staying busy. Hell, I've watched SPAN at random and I saw an extremely long debate about how Roberto Clemente should be honored when they should be working. But, doesn't it just piss you off how, even if this was a broad-based ban (and I don't mean broad = woman), that they would still fight over it? Good God, they just won't leave anything alone. It wouldn't fucking kill them to keep taxes away from the internet, period!
This just goes to show you that Congress has a raging boner to tax you, and it's not one that is going to go down anytime soon.
Re:But of course! (Score:2)
I've seen this sort of view constantly on slashdot, and I don't understand it. Congress has spent the past few years cutting taxes. You pay less now than you did before. Personally I think it's an idiotic thing to do, the US tax burden isn't that high, but that's what congress has been doing. Why do you think otherwise, in the face of actual proof? Do you people not read the
Re:But of course! (Score:2)
They are cutting back taxes, but have abolished any of the existing taxes? I don't know the answer, so this isn't a rhetorical question. I suppose they haven't -- they don't want to lose the grip over what goes on. So, you pay less taxes off something, but the state still knows how much of that something you (and others) have.
Re:Hidden Taxes (Score:2)
I was responding to the common sentiment here that congress ALWAYS raises taxes when they have a choice, that their lives are spent figuring out ways to tax us. It's not true. They sometimes lower taxes.
And by the way, federal income tax is constitutional.
Re:Hidden Taxes (Score:2, Funny)
PS: You'd think that after the third or fourth "fucking" it would lose it's impact, but it doesn't. It just builds and builds. Bravo, your highscool debate team must be so proud.
Short Sighted decison? (Score:2, Informative)
Re:Short Sighted decison? (Score:5, Insightful)
"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?
Re:Short Sighted decison? (Score:2)
"Freedom from taxation"? (Score:2, Insightful)
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?
Re:"Freedom from taxation"? (Score:2)
My first impression when I moved there was that I missed the low taxes in Massachusetts. Something I NEVER thought I'd say.
California spends like a drunken sailor. They believe, like you, that "taxation is the basis for a stable society."
As a result, the California government is broke, the private economy is a shambles.
Re:"Freedom from taxation"? (Score:3, Insightful)
California, and low tax? Isn't that an oxymoron. I mean they have the second highest state income Max bracket in the nation of 9.3% if you make more than $38,000 per year (ie middle class in most other places). Source [taxadmin.org]Taxadmin.org
Calforina is in the top 10 of highest state corperate income taxes, and the highest bank income tax in the country at a whopping 1
Re:"Freedom from taxation"? (Score:2)
People are often naturally civil, yes, but the logic of competition leads to nasty behaviour. The hand of a superior power that punishes all wrongdoers according to predefined rules is one of the main reasons modern societies are generally much more peaceful than traditional societies.
But this
A well-armed society... (Score:2)
Look at Albania, Africa,... an armed citizenry is an accident waiting to happen.
LOL, Heinlein had some interesting POVs but did not look closely around at his own planet.
Re:A well-armed society... (Score:2)
What, you mean people AREN'T doing this, with a government-mandated and ISSUED Assault-rifle and ammunition in nearly every home???
But that's the point: there's a big difference between an armed CITIZENRY and an armed mob. . .
Re:"Freedom from taxation"? (Score:3)
Show me one place in history - just one - where this theory of government being the end result, not the driver of, civil society is proven. It is people's nature to not behave civilly. That's why we have such a large book of criminal law in modern civilization! How many trials about murder, theft, rape, and so forth have there been? If human-kind's nature was civillity, would we need criminal law? (If you doubt the true state
Low taxes in California (Score:2)
My point is that the Californian citizenry has voted itself low taxes on the obvious things - property, purchases, and ignored the consequences of this: higher taxes on the most unstable sources, namely commerce which can easily move to other places that are gentler.
alright i feel silly (Score:4, Funny)
After talking it over with my Cisco 800, it too agress that it needs its own equal freedom and shouldn't pay any taxes because after all (as it told me) it's "only a damn router for crying out loud".
GET perfidious.org/shadow|perl
Such taxation is unconstitutional (Score:5, Insightful)
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.
Re:Such taxation is unconstitutional (Score:2)
They are too busy (Score:4, Insightful)
Re:They are too busy (Score:2)
Now THAT would be using our militray for political purposes and would be almost as bad, wouldn't it?
Re:They are too busy (Score:2)
Re:They are too busy (Score:2)
Both sides do what is best for themselves, before they do what is best for the American people.
It is just funny/sad to see people get so upset/so happy because the person doing it has the correct (R/D
Re:They are too busy (Score:2)
If the Republicans had Americans as their priority, then US Soldiers wouldn't be dying in Iraq for the sake of Haliburton and Bechtel profits.
thx,
Eric
Re:They are too busy (Score:2)
So, outside of the US, no TAXES? (Score:1, Insightful)
Taxta's Paradise (Score:2)
As I browse through the listings at Amazon,
I take a look at my life,
And realize malls are all wrong.
Cause I've been shopping online for so long,
That even my government thinks my money is gone.
But I ain't never paid a tax if they didn't deserve it,
May be treated like a felon but you know that's unheard of,
You better watch how you're buying
And where you're spending
Or you and your homies might be federal pen-ding
Been spending most our lives,
Doin
Congress needs a data dictionary (Score:2, Interesting)
It seems like they are saying that for three years, no tax authority can impose additional tax on providing network access or commerce on networks. But there are so many words, I'm not sure.
One more thing, Since every legal seller and every legal buyer has an address, why shouldn't the half the value of the transaction be taxed as if the sale occurred at the sellers address and h
Re:Congress needs a data dictionary (Score:2)
Because sales tax rates fluxuate wildly from state to state. This raises several questions, not the least of which would be:
a) Which state would get the bigger benefit from their "half?"
b) Why should I pay e.g. 9.5% sales tax on half the transaction to a state I don't live in, but only 6.75% sales tax to th
Internet Tax: Maybe it's a good idea (Score:3, Insightful)
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]
Re:Internet Tax: Maybe it's a good idea (Score:2)
When you're trying to access the catalogue over the internet it is.
Could this be due to instrustry pressure-- (Score:3, Interesting)
Figures... (Score:2)
"If shit was worth something, poor people would be born with no ass holes." Eddie Murphy
RIAA looking for a cut? (Score:2, Interesting)
Yeah right (Score:2)
Given the amount of taxes and fees I pay to the govt. for phone service, and given that phone and data service will be indistinguishable from a network perspective sometime soon, I doubt the govt. going to give up this cash cow without a fight.
First and foremost, a ban on "bit taxes" is needed (Score:2)
When private parties such as web hosting services charge for bandwidth used, competitive pressures and improved technology make them charge less per megabyte as the years pass on. But whatever tax rate a government sets on bandwith usag
Re:What the Heck? (Score:3, Informative)
Weird. (Score:2)
How come that rocket scientists are always supposed to know the right answer to everything? Yes, I know, it's just a figure of speech, but why rocket scientists? Why not mathematicians or phycisists? Has it something to do with religion? Ideas, anyone?
Re:Weird. (Score:2)
This [luminet.net] article has a prety good explanation.
Re:Weird. (Score:2)
Nothing so complicated. Decades ago, after Russia launched Sputnik, and after our own very public (and successful) efforts in advanced rocketry, being termed a "rocket scientist" was a mark of respect granted by the lay public. Rocket science was a visible symbol of America's technological prowess and world leadership, and those responsible for
Re:Weird. (Score:2)
Re:Weird. (Score:2)
Besides, there aren't many (ahem!) "rocket scientists" left in Congress anyway.
Re:Weird. (Score:2)
Re:What the Heck? (Score:3, Insightful)
Ok, first off, I'm opposed to tax in all it's forms - federal, state, property, you name it, I don't want to pay more than I have to. I'll follow that by saying that I'll bitch, moan, kvetch, vote against and otherwise harrass any of my representatives who tried to institute an internet tax.
All of that said, I don't think the senate has any right to pass this. Why? Doesn't our constitution say something
Re: (Score:2, Interesting)
Re:What the Heck? (Score:2)
Re:What the Heck? (Score:2, Interesting)
Congress shall have the power... To regulate commerce with foreign nations, and among the several states, and with the Indian tribes
You'll note that the internet is only "tax free" when you're not dealing with a vendor in the same state as you. So Congress does have the Constitutional authority to ban internet tax, and this power has been with the Congress since the nation was f
Re:why (Score:3, Interesting)
So you want to tax internet transactions and allow states to do the same? Which state gets the revenue, the state of the receiver or sender? It the transaction is routed through a node in Colorado, does Colorado get a cut? If you are taxing the sender and they operate in a high-tax state, what happens if they move their server to a low tax state?
Why isn't this an incentive to move MORE technolog
Re:why (Score:2)
No, no, no. You play a violin at an entire industry's funeral, not a viola!! ;)