Internet taxes on the way... - PeachParts Mercedes-Benz Forum

mikemover · #1 01-15-2004, 10:51 AM

On Oct. 31, 2003, the future of the Internet as a driving economic force in America became suddenly uncertain. That date marked the expiration of the temporary ban on Internet-specific taxes first enacted by Congress in 1998.

The failure of the House and Senate to extend the moratorium means that state and local governments are now free to impose discriminatory taxes on the information superhighway. Taxing internet access would do very little to solve the budgetary problems many states now face and will further prevent those who still don’t have internet access from getting online.

The opportunity to extend -- or preferably make permanent -- the Internet tax moratorium (search) remains. Currently, a handful of senators have chosen to block passage of such a measure in order to give the states the ability to hike taxes on their citizenry. Advocates for blocking the tax ban moan about dire budget problems for state governments, but they fail to note that state revenues are growing at a record pace -- from $872 billion in 2002 to an anticipated $1.4 trillion in 2003. Clearly, low taxes are not the problem.

These advocates have placed themselves in a position to derail the renewed health of the high-tech sector that powered the dramatic economic growth of the 1990’s. By choosing tax revenues for government bureaucrats over economic growth and job creation, these senators fail to recognize the harm of allowing punitive Internet taxes. For the past five years, electronic commerce has grown -- yet it still represents barely more than one percent of total sales in the United States last year. That makes a lie of the argument that the Internet is now a mature technology and the industry could withstand high taxes.

Many of the opponents of extending the Internet tax ban would prefer to see broadband and other online access services subjected to typical telecommunications taxes (search). The levies placed on your local and long distance service and your cable TV plan could then be neatly applied to the Internet without so much as a vote of the state legislature or the local city council. In many cases, these telecommunications taxes approach the 20 percent rate on your bill when all local, state and federal charges are added together.

Saddling an emerging growth market like the Internet with surcharges of that magnitude would clearly place the progress of the past five years at risk. And those who would be hardest hit would be those who could least afford it. Real progress has been made in recent years to close the so-called “digital divide.” (search) The imposition of dramatic new taxes -- by sheltered government bureaucrats acting unilaterally -- could undo such progress overnight.

Tax creep (search) would make companies less likely to expand broadband services into typically underserved areas -- including rural and low-income areas. Discriminatory taxes (search) would make it less cost-effective to continue such expansion and would threaten the ability of consumers to afford the latest advances.

While the Internet continues to hold much promise for the future economic vitality of America, it very much remains in the incubator stage. Until high-speed online access achieves the same market penetration as television and radio, the information superhighway will not have reached the age of maturity.

The fact of the matter is that innovation abhors bureaucracy and undue burden. To prosper fully, the Internet must be free from multiple or discriminatory taxes. The taxman ought not to be allowed to tax your AOL account, put a surcharge on your cable modem, or impose a higher sales tax for online purchases than those made in a typical brick-and-mortar store.

Over the past few years, the Internet has been rife with rumors of e-mail taxes (search) that would in effect become the “postage stamps” of the Internet. Until now, it has been easy to dismiss these absurd hoaxes as just that. If a handful of politicians get their way, these and other discriminatory Internet taxes could see the light of day. And those e-mail tax rumors might be a hoax no more.

----Jim Prendergast is the executive director of Americans for Technology Leadership.

_________________________

Write or call your congressman and your local politicians and tell them you DO NOT support ANY taxes on the use of the internet, or on items bought and sold on the internet!

I'm telling you...Nobody seems to be getting upset about this yet, but it's coming, if we don't take action to stop it.

Mike

#2 01-15-2004, 03:02 PM

Isn't the government big enough yet Bill??? Why just let them raid your wallet for even MORE of YOUR hard earned money? Quite frankly, I got tired of the government shoving it's ever present hand in my face for more of my income a LONG time ago!!

blackmercedes · #3 01-15-2004, 03:25 PM

There are some associated infrastructure costs to the growth of the Internet. For example, we have had to hire more police in order to monitor economic and other crime that has emerged thanks to the 'net.

The government cannot bear the burden of all the costs from the existing tax base. However, how do we go about it?

Well, I do pay taxes to surf the 'net now. I pay sales tax on the monthly charge for access. There's about $3.00 per month per Canadian household alone. That's a start, and I don't mind paying that. Why should internet access be sales tax free? When I buy internet related gear (modem, cam, etc) I pay sales tax on that. I'm okay with that. Those items don't need a special tax exception.

We need to pay close attention to the growth of infrastructure costs and make sure the 'net is not a cash drain from gov't coffers.

mikemover · #4 01-15-2004, 08:04 PM

Why is it that every time the government "cannot bear the burden" of "X" problem or "Y" program, that the default answer is "we need more taxes"?

Why is the default answer not "let's take a few chunks out of the huge mountain of government waste and special interests and archaic, ineffective programs, and local pet-projects, etc., ad infinitum?....

Why is what the "government can spare" always more important than what the "individual citizen" can spare?

Our government was created to serve and protect the citizenry. NOT the other way around.

The large majority of items sold on the internet are shipped "out of state", and such items were exempt from state sales tax since long before the internet, and should not be taxed now. (Unless of course its part of a national retail sales tax plan, INSTEAD of the bloated IRS-administered progressive system. The important words in this plan are "INSTEAD of"...not "in addition to"...but that's another discussion)

The LAST thing we need right now is yet ANOTHER way of taxing an already overtaxed population.

Mike

mikemover · #5 01-15-2004, 08:14 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by 300SDLLLL
LOL someone PLEASE pass Mike some cheese.

So you're overjoyed about the idea of paying even MORE taxes?

Buy a nice warm coat and move to Canada.

Mike

mikemover · #6 01-15-2004, 08:54 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by 300SDLLLL
Did I say I was overjoyed? If I did what I meant to say was I am not freaking out and crying and writing my congressman.

And no I am not moving to Canada it's too damn cold up there. Why is it that when someone does not agree with you they must move out of the country (according to you)? You're not making any sense Mike.

Of course I'm joking about you moving to Canada....I almost never say such a pointless thing. Obviously have you missed the numerous times that Zeitgeist has been invited by various members here (not me) to leave the country due to some of his way-left views?

Anyway, I think I'm making perfect sense. We DO NOT need more varieties of taxation. We need more ways of controlling the snowballing overspending habits of our frighteningly bloated government.

The fact that this does not make sense to you re-enforces my assertion that they are succeeding in slowly numbing us to the growing government intrusion upon our lives.

Mike

blackmercedes · #7 01-15-2004, 11:30 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by mikemover
Why is it that every time the government "cannot bear the burden" of "X" problem or "Y" program, that the default answer is "we need more taxes"?

Well, if the cost to society increases due to something like the Internet, how do you propose we pay for it? Oh, I forgot, you're the one that wants to read the 911 operator your Visa card number in order to have the police come. Ooops. Forgot, that isn't the way either. We don't need cops, just guns.

The idea is that the internet is an economic growth, but requires infrastructure. If we followed the "no new taxes ever, ever" plan we'd still have the same roads we had in 1920. Meaning, barely any.

william rogers · #8 01-16-2004, 01:43 AM

POWER TO THE PEEPHOLE!!!

William Rogers...........

mikemover · #9 01-16-2004, 09:42 AM

Quote:

Originally posted by blackmercedes
Well, if the cost to society increases due to something like the Internet, how do you propose we pay for it? Oh, I forgot, you're the one that wants to read the 911 operator your Visa card number in order to have the police come. Ooops. Forgot, that isn't the way either. We don't need cops, just guns.

The idea is that the internet is an economic growth, but requires infrastructure. If we followed the "no new taxes ever, ever" plan we'd still have the same roads we had in 1920. Meaning, barely any.

I know, I know...all of you "more taxes, more taxes, more taxes" guys love to consistently ignore my mention of all of the WASTE and CORRUPTION and BLOAT that could be gotten rid of, INSTEAD of extorting MORE money from the public.

When an individual runs out of money, he must adjust his spending and balance his budget.

When the government runs out of money, they just invent a new excuse for taking more of OURS.

Mike

Hatterasguy · #10 01-16-2004, 01:57 PM

Will this cycle ever stop? The government keeps getting bigger and bigger. (With a Rep. in office to!) I already work six months for the damn government so they can piss my money down the drain. I can only imagine what our taxes would be if Gore won, or Dean wins, I will be working to October to pay them. If I wanted to live in a socialist paridise, I would go shoot up drugs in a caf'e in Denmark. (or Canada it now seems)

#11 01-16-2004, 02:03 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by Hatterasguy
Will this cycle ever stop? The government keeps getting bigger and bigger. (With a Rep. in office to!) I already work six months for the damn government so they can piss my money down the drain. I can only imagine what our taxes would be if Gore won, or Dean wins, I will be working to October to pay them. If I wanted to live in a socialist paridise, I would go shoot up drugs in a caf'e in Denmark. (or Canada it now seems)

It's actually longer than that. "Tax freedom" day is stated to be July 11th for 2004. Isn't complacency great? Just imagine the uproar if people had to pay those taxes quarterly, instead of have them automatically stolen from their wages.

Hatterasguy · #12 01-16-2004, 02:15 PM

"It's actually longer than that. "Tax freedom" day is stated to be July 11th for 2004. Isn't complacency great? Just imagine the uproar if people had to pay those taxes quarterly, instead of have them automatically stolen from their wages."

I know what would happen, can you say "Viva revolution"