Internet Tax Holiday Extended--Keep Web Surfing!

Good news, for web surfers and all the ships at sea:

The U.S. Senate has given its stamp of approval to a seven-year extension of the moratorium on state and local taxes on Internet access.

...........

The Senate bill was unanimously approved in a voice vote last night. A separate measure calling for a four-year moratorium was approved earlier this month by the House of Representatives.

The House and Senate still must reconcile the differences in conference and approve a unified bill before it can be sent to the president and signed into law. Without the extension, the Internet tax ban would expire Nov. 1.

Comments

Taktix® | October 29, 2007, 9:57pm | #

You can't stop the signal!

Great news...

Cesar | October 29, 2007, 10:17pm | #

Thats great news. But whats with all these extensions? Why not just make the damn thing permanent, forever and ever?

@ Cesar | October 29, 2007, 10:35pm | #

= the question that launched 1K penile enhancement spam messages.

iih | October 29, 2007, 10:48pm | #

What are they taxing the Internet for? What is the justification? Next, they'll put a meter on my nose to tax the air I breath?

M | October 29, 2007, 10:54pm | #

@iih: Dude, I agree. That's so pre-third-millenium.

Taktix® | October 29, 2007, 10:55pm | #

iih,

You rock, but if you equate internet access to air, you might want to seek professional help ;)

Taktix® | October 29, 2007, 10:57pm | #

espasian's name still attaches to public urinals in France (vespasiennes), Italy (vespasiani), and Romania (vespasiene).

Justice at its finest...

iih | October 29, 2007, 10:59pm | #

Taktix:

Seriously, what is for the government in the Internet? Do they own the damned thing? Is this like a sales tax? I really just don't understand this. Is it because the cables run underneath the ground in the public domain?

Dave B. | October 29, 2007, 11:24pm | #

I believe that the theory the government works on is that any time you do anything that involves or could involve money, taxes are owed.

Taktix® | October 29, 2007, 11:36pm | #

Seriously, what is for the government in the Internet? Do they own the damned thing? Is this like a sales tax? I really just don't understand this. Is it because the cables run underneath the ground in the public domain?

Oh, I don't want the government sticking its dick in the proverbial mashed potatoes that is the internet either.

I'm just trying to remind people that the internet, like many luxuries, is not a basic necessity. Once it becomes a necessity in the minds of too many, it becomes an entitlement.

Just sayin'

iih | October 29, 2007, 11:40pm | #

Taktix:

Yeah, sure. How much do I wish to get rid of this luxury that we call the Internet. In any case, I was dramatizing a bit.

Taktix® | October 29, 2007, 11:56pm | #

iih:

Whoa! I don't want to get rid of the internet at all. What I fear (and hereby predicting, I suppose) is that some time down the road, politician will dream up some new way of taking our money to provide "equal access to internet."

Just like we apparently have a "right" to health care, a "right" to public education, a "right" to higher education, etc...

I sometimes fear that my comic-book-stylw power is to see tyranny coming, yet am powerless to stop it.

K. | October 30, 2007, 12:01am | #

Good news. Now lets make it permanent and move on to other issues.

iih | October 30, 2007, 12:05am | #

Taktix:

Whoa! I don't want to get rid of the internet at all.

I was talking about me and my addiction to the Internet. I am actually not addicted to it that much, but everything I do involves using a laptop which I have with me almost 24/7 (except when I am sleeping I guess). That is only for work, but then of course, one gets access to the Internet almost everywhere (including rest areas on highways [e.g., in VT rest areas]). That is why I am saying I (not "we") hope to get rid of it. Life would be much simpler/nicer. [Sarcastically: After we're done with that, lets get rid of cell phones, the microwave, TV, and live in peace for a little. Can you tell that I tired now?]

I read the same karmic books as you do,Taktix® | October 30, 2007, 12:05am | #

to see tyranny coming, yet am powerless to stop it

Taktix® | October 30, 2007, 12:11am | #

I read the same karmic books as you do,Taktix®

Strange demonstration of psychology: I have read the Cassandra story before, but did not have it on my mind when I made the previous statement.

Damn you, Joseph Campbell, DAMN YOU!

The Wine Commonsewer | October 30, 2007, 12:43am | #

What is the justification? Next, they'll put a meter on my nose to tax the air I breath?

M. Ram | October 30, 2007, 12:49am | #

If you get too cold, I'll tax the heat
If you take a walk, I'll tax your feet...

The Wine Commonsewer | October 30, 2007, 1:23am | #

everything I do involves using a laptop which I have with me almost 24/7

Dude. He said LAPTOP. [smirks]

Rick Barton | October 30, 2007, 1:49am | #

This wonderful news seems a victory for the libertarian sensibility that the power to tax is the power to destroy.

I think that the vote in the House was quite nearly unanimous. Who in the Senate voted against liberty? Let's celebrate by ordering sever electoral humiliations from Ebay and Amazon for the filth in Washington who voted the wrong way. Do they have a "sever electoral humiliations" category?

BTW, this vote helps to keep Ebay a quite capitalistic experience. I think that that's the thing that makes Ebay so much fun-the way that voluntary personal interaction runs the scene.

Rick Barton | October 30, 2007, 1:55am | #

...Make that: "*severe* electoral humiliations"

Preview button, why do I forsake thee?? Damn it!!

Rick Barton | October 30, 2007, 2:11am | #

Some folks who are pro-choice still oppose Roe v Wade cuz they contend it should be left to the discretion of the states. Can anyone stake out a meritorious, contradiction evading, position that supports this proscription against internet taxation while opposing Roe v Wade on states' discretion grounds?

Rick Barton | October 30, 2007, 2:48am | #

Off topic- You guys can keep that Conservative T Shirts girl on this page for as long a you want but there's no way that I'm gonna lust after her till I believe that she's actually over 17.

Speaking of hot girls, Captain Segue says "Sink me if Clare Grogan wasn't one of the very cutest gals of the New Wave genre."

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1ibrtEQEAKs

Untermensch | October 30, 2007, 7:26am | #

Whoa! I don't want to get rid of the internet at all. What I fear (and hereby predicting, I suppose) is that some time down the road, politician will dream up some new way of taking our money to provide "equal access to internet."

No need to predict: It's already happened at the local level in a number of cities. There are many communities that have tried to provide universal wireless (Chicago) or wired (Provo, UT) access and what they've found, not surprisingly, is that government can't provide this "basic right" at a reasonable price. These services always end up costing more and delivering less than promised. Most such attempts have either failed outright or languished from lack of use as folks have stuck with better-quality commercial services. But this idea of it being a right is at least part of why you see public libraries providing "free" service.

ed | October 30, 2007, 8:08am | #

"State and local taxes"? What about "federal"? Not to mention "intergalactic, subterranean and fifth-dimension." I guess this doesn't apply to all those "fees" on my phone bill that cryptically mention "internet" in the subtext.

Stephan Kinsella | October 30, 2007, 8:56am | #

But not necessarily good news if you value federalism and a constitutionally limited federal government that was not empowered to enact such laws.

Episiarch | October 30, 2007, 9:15am | #

It is being extended, and not made permanent, because as soon as they think that Internet connections are truly ubiquitous like phones, they will start taxing the shit out of it, because virtually everyone with a normal life will have to have a connection.

They are being pragmatic about a golden goose, is all. Don't think that they are principled. They are merely waiting for the best time to pounce.

Ben | October 30, 2007, 10:34am | #

The Constitution gives the Federal Government the right to regulate interstate commerce right? Can't this simply be seen as an extension of that.

R C Dean | October 30, 2007, 11:38am | #

Can anyone stake out a meritorious, contradiction evading, position that supports this proscription against internet taxation

The proscription against internet taxation is merely the Congress taking legislative action that is consistent with and enforces numerous court decisions that allow taxation by states of businesses that have a physical nexus with the state.

IOW, the ban on internet taxation is all about making states respect the boundaries of other states.

while opposing Roe v Wade on states' discretion grounds?

Making states respect each other's boundaries is an essential element of the federal system. Making the federal government respect those boundaries is much the same.

That wasn't so hard, was it?

J sub D | October 30, 2007, 11:42am | #

iih,

If you drive a car, I'll tax the street
If you try to sit, I'll tax your seat
If you get too cold, I'll tax the heat
If you take a walk, I'll tax your feet
John Lennon/Paul McCartney

I'm just trying to remind people that the internet, like many luxuries, is not a basic necessity. Once it becomes a necessity in the minds of too many, it becomes an entitlement.

I'm just trying to remind people that the internet books, like many luxuries, is are not a basic necessity. Once it becomes a necessity in the minds of too many, it becomes an entitlement.

Taktix® - You're just joshing, right?

J sub D | October 30, 2007, 11:43am | #

Never mind I see your just being pessimistic. Given the last 75 years, I see why.

TrickyVic | October 30, 2007, 12:44pm | #

NY state already has their work around. You are require to report the dollar amount on all out of state purchases on your State income tax form.

Sleezy bastards.

R C Dean | October 30, 2007, 12:49pm | #

You are require to report the dollar amount on all out of state purchases on your State income tax form.

Technically, many sales taxes are actually written as "sales and use" taxes to get around the out-of-state purchase "problem."

The reporting requirement is totally unenforceable, and only a fool would do anything other than ignore it.

I'd love to see their data on how many people actually write something in to that item.

Rick Barton | October 31, 2007, 2:58am | #

RC:

The proscription against internet taxation is merely the Congress taking legislative action that is consistent with and enforces numerous court decisions that allow taxation by states of businesses that have a physical nexus with the state.

But this fine vote disallows Internet taxation of businesses by a state even if they're located in the state. (BTW, thanks for exploring my question)