posted February 03, 2004 12:52 PM            

Guess these senators and special interest friends gave away their position in the CFR, Bilderbergers and Trilateral Comm.

juniperb

posted February 03, 2004 01:39 PM              

October 1998, Congress enacted the Internet Tax Freedom Act (ITFA), which called for a 3-year moratorium on state and local taxes on Internet access and multiple or discriminatory taxes on e-commerce. After the provisions of ITFA expired in October 2001, they were extended for another two years by passage of the Internet Tax Nondiscrimination Act (ITNA). The two-year extension provided by ITNA expires on 1 November 2003.

The Internet Tax Non-Discrimination Act, a piece of legislation intended to permanently extend the moratorium enacted by the Internet Tax Freedom Act, was introduced to Congress in 2003. It was passed (as H.R. 49) by the House of Representatives on 17 September 2003 (under a motion to suspend the rules, agreed to by voice vote), but the Senate version (S. 150) has not yet been passed or voted upon.

The claim that the Senate is considering a "tax on every item on the Internet, to include a tax on each e-mail sent out" is incorrect. The Senate is merely considering whether or not to extend the moratorium on Internet taxes created by the earlier Internet Tax Freedom Act and Internet Tax Nondiscrimination Act; the Senate is not proposing any specific Internet-related taxes at this time. (A future e-mail tax remains a possibility if the bill is not passed, however.)

As described by The New York Times, the bill is hung up in a Senate debate over whether a permanent moratorium on Internet taxes might eventually become too broad a ban and deprive states of much-needed revenue streams:

The argument over the bill has been as heated as a chat-room brawl. Opponents contend that state coffers will be emptied as more areas of commerce — like telephone service — become Internet-based and fall within the ban. "Every time we, in our wisdom, tell a state or a city that it cannot use this tax, all we are doing is increasing the chance that Minnesota or Tennessee will increase some other tax, or fire some teachers or lay off some employees or close some parks," Senator Lamar Alexander, Republican of Tennessee, said Tuesday on the Senate floor.

Supporters argue that the states want to tax every e-mail message, even every electron. The bill, they say, will not have the dire effects that opponents predict.

The only thing that both sides agree on, it seems, is that the bill has nothing to do with banning sales taxes on online purchases. The moratorium bans taxes on Internet access, including high-speed access through telephone digital subscriber lines; "discriminatory" taxes, which include taxes by multiple states on the sales of a single item; and taxes that would treat Internet purchases differently from sales at brick-and-mortar stores.
As of 26 November, the Senate had still postponed voting on the bill after deadlocking on whether DSL services should be exempt from Internet access taxes, and how long the moritorium on Internet taxes should be extended if it is not made permanent. Debate continues over whether or not the Internet is still a fledgling industry in need of protection from the federal government.

posted February 04, 2004 01:15 AM            

The best way to prevent it from getting started is to make it clear to your representatives at the city, county, state and federal level that you will personally vote against them in the next election if they vote to institute taxation on Internet services.

posted February 04, 2004 11:14 AM            

Dear Representative,

As a citizen of Maryland and someone that uses the Internet for both business and personal reasons, I would like to express my complete displeasure with the proposed taxation of the Internet. Along with many of my family members, friends and colleagues, I am against any taxation of a medium that allows all people the chance to keep connected to family, friends and business contacts.

Most importantly, I feel this would be detrimental to those constituents in the lower income bracket that cannot even afford computers and must rely on public libraries to stay in contact with the outside world.
Taxing the Internet will prevent our senior citizens and lower income populations from the ability to adequately research information about medications, look for jobs and receive important notifications concerning vital issues.

It will also prevent the population from allowing our voices to be heard as I am doing now. If all people had to pay a tax not only to access the government through the Internet, but also by sending an e-mail, you are cutting out the very people you have promised to protect. Passage of this bill will cause to me re-evaluate the representatives I support in this state and would throw my allegiance to other candidates that are more sympathetic to the needs of all people, specifically the elderly and disadvantaged.

Sincerely,

posted February 04, 2004 02:31 PM            

It's not as refined and respectful as yours Pidaua and won't measure up to yours Harpyr but it sounds angry, even to me and that's the impression I wanted to convey.

Senators:
Nelson
Graham

Congressman:
Bill Young

Governor:
Jeb Bush

It has come to my attention the House of Representatives passed a ban on Internet taxation in September 2003, only to have the cowardly Senate of the United States cave in to a gaggle of special interest groups, including the National Governor Association (NGA) and the Multi-State Tax Commission (MTC).

Hats off to the House of Representatives and Congressman Young.

I connect to the Internet by phone modem. A quick review of my phone bill reveals I'm paying plenty of tax, including Federal, State and local taxes for the service.

My service provider is paying corporate taxes to the Federal, State and local governments as well.

That's enough. It's also enough from the tax, spend and wind crowd who proclaim the sky is falling whenever they wish to increase taxes.

I'm not normally a single issue voter, nor am I an activist but I will campaign tirelessly to defeat anyone running for elected office who votes to tax the Internet or it's related activities.

Sincerely,

jwhop

posted February 04, 2004 03:14 PM            

That was classic. You chose the right words, I guess I am bit too refined at times LOL..I really wanted to let my more liberal (which is 90% of the peeps in office) know that taxing the Internet will hurt the same people they are always preaching they will protect. It's not only wealthy people accessing information online.

Aph,

I hope things don't go that route. It would be sad to see people having to pay so much for access. The gov gets enough from our phone, electric and gas, let alone the Internet.

posted February 04, 2004 03:23 PM              

Signed,

posted February 06, 2004 03:25 AM              

(Just thought I would add that in.)

Yeah, go ahead tax everything, while the standard of living keeps increasing, decent jobs are outsourced, and pretty soon the only jobs will be at Wal-mart, and no one will be able to afford to shop there.

Service charges for "customer service" from your phone companies, cable service, gas companies..nothing is really changed, except the growing need for corporations to prove to stockholders that they turn a profit, so people will invest fictional money in the stock market gamble but still screw the low ranking employees out of a pension plan.
Keep in mind when you call for customer service, you are talking to India.

Arrrrgh!!! Sorry for the rant, it makes me snarky.....the way the world has become. Millions of lost manufacturing jobs, just so middle America can by pickles by the gallon for $3.49 instead of $3.99.
There are so many new "charges" and "taxes" that more and more of our take home income is sucked into the hole of paying CEOs 400% more than the average employee.

Can you say "wage slave"?????

PS I still hand write letters to my legislators....email is WAY too easy to ignore. AND with the abundance of spam and viruses, most security firewalls, as I would imagine Congress would have, wont even allow hotmail or yahoo addresses. They get filtered out. Same with email petitions..

*SIGH*