On The Horizon: Don't Stifle Internet Access With Taxes - InformationWeek

InformationWeek is part of the Informa Tech Division of Informa PLC

This site is operated by a business or businesses owned by Informa PLC and all copyright resides with them.Informa PLC's registered office is 5 Howick Place, London SW1P 1WG. Registered in England and Wales. Number 8860726.

IoT
IoT
Business & Finance
Commentary
5/7/2004
07:52 PM
Bradford Brown
Bradford Brown
Commentary
50%
50%

On The Horizon: Don't Stifle Internet Access With Taxes

States should quit whining about their inability to tax Internet sales and just stop spending so much, Bradford C. Brown says.

Art Buchwald once said, "Tax reform is taking taxes off things that have been taxed in the past and putting taxes on things that haven't been taxed before." As many states wrestle with budget deficits, taxation of the Internet has roared back as a tax option to generate state revenue.

Recently, the Senate avoided the taxation shell game and voted 93 to 3 to extend the ban on taxing access to the Internet. In addition, states that tax DSL now have two years to phase out their taxes at a cost of millions in state revenue.

Sens. George Allen, R-Va., and Ron Wyden, D-Ore., introduced the proposal known as S-150, The Internet Tax Non-Discrimination Act. It called for making permanent the moratorium on taxing access to the Internet and ensured that it applied to all 50 states. A number of members balked, though.

For example, Sen. Lamar Alexander, R-Tenn., wanted to make Internet taxation a states-rights issue. "What we're talking about is whether Tennessee and other states can collect a sales tax from an Internet service provider when it connects my computer to the Internet, just as it collects a sales tax from the telephone company when it connects my telephone..." As a result, he and Sen. Thomas Carper, D-Del., fought to weaken S-150.

The Alexander/Carper argument neglected to account for the fact that the network isn't just connecting Nashville with Dover, it's ubiquitous. This is a national issue about the future of the Internet, open access, global E-commerce, jobs, and growth, not a local issue about funding services.

Evidently, a compromise was reached, and the Senate agreed to extend the ban for four years instead of making it permanent. Internet telephony wasn't exempted from taxation because some senators, who saw telephony migrating to the Internet, had worried the proposal could have been interpreted to prevent voice over IP from also being taxed, costing states billions of dollars in revenue.

However, the fight isn't over. The House version of the bill, which also has passed, provides for a permanent ban on Internet-access taxes. It also exempts Internet telephony from taxes. That remains an issue because states like Florida already are moving to tax voice over IP. It's likely that many governors and mayors will continue lobbying to get the best deal that they can as the differences between the House and Senate are ironed out.

In the end, the message for federal and state legislators should be clear: Don't try to balance state budgets by creating an Internet-access tax; don't slow the growth of the Internet with short-sighted efforts to tax access to it because it's an easy way to raise revenue; don't deny universal broadband Internet access to all Americans by making the cost of access out of reach. In short, states already are receiving billions of dollars in tax revenue for communications services and Internet sales. A ban on access taxes won't stop that revenue flow.

The Internet can continue to be a pipeline for education, a channel for new economic growth, and a communications tool that transcends borders and politics, but only if access is unfettered.

Let's hope that legislators will embrace growth and the potential of the Internet and have the courage to balance state budgets by simply spending less.

Bradford C. Brown is chairman of the National Center for Technology and Law at the George Mason University School of Law. Reach him at [email protected]. (Any opinions expressed in this article are solely those of the author and do not necessarily represent those of the George Mason University School of Law.)


To discuss this column with other readers, please visit the Talk Shop.

We welcome your comments on this topic on our social media channels, or [contact us directly] with questions about the site.
Comment  | 
Print  | 
More Insights
2021 State of ITOps and SecOps Report
2021 State of ITOps and SecOps Report
This new report from InformationWeek explores what we've learned over the past year, critical trends around ITOps and SecOps, and where leaders are focusing their time and efforts to support a growing digital economy. Download it today!
InformationWeek Is Getting an Upgrade!

Find out more about our plans to improve the look, functionality, and performance of the InformationWeek site in the coming months.

Slideshows
10 Things Your Artificial Intelligence Initiative Needs to Succeed
Lisa Morgan, Freelance Writer,  4/20/2021
News
Tech Spending Climbs as Digital Business Initiatives Grow
Jessica Davis, Senior Editor, Enterprise Apps,  4/22/2021
Commentary
Optimizing the CIO and CFO Relationship
Mary E. Shacklett, Technology commentator and President of Transworld Data,  4/13/2021
Register for InformationWeek Newsletters
Video
Current Issue
Planning Your Digital Transformation Roadmap
Download this report to learn about the latest technologies and best practices or ensuring a successful transition from outdated business transformation tactics.
White Papers
Slideshows
Twitter Feed
Sponsored Live Streaming Video
Everything You've Been Told About Mobility Is Wrong
Attend this video symposium with Sean Wisdom, Global Director of Mobility Solutions, and learn about how you can harness powerful new products to mobilize your business potential.
Sponsored Video
Flash Poll