Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutCOM 0855.000 1996-1998 OJNYY Of M, Y AL SMITH Phone: (808) 961-8267 Virc Chairman FAX: (808) 969-3291 1rF oi'M~'!' COUNTY COUNCIL County of Hawaii Hawaii County Buildinv 25 Aupuni Stretl Hilo, Hawaii 967,20 May 14, 1998 TO: Chairman Arakaki and Members of the Hawai'i County Council FROM: Al Smith 410f - SUBJECT: RESOLUTION SUPPORTING THE PROPOSED AMENDMENT TO THE INTERNET TAX FREEDOM AC 1, Attached for your consideration is a resolution supporting a proposed amendment to the Internet Tax Freedom Act that is currently being considered before the United States Congress. In addition as supplemental information, please find a copy of the proposed amendment as offered by the Honorable Christopher Cox (R-.Calif) and supporting materials from the National Association of Counties (NACo). NACo has gone on record opposing federal preemption of state and local taxing authority and opposing the establishment of an unlimited moratorium on state and local taxation of electronic commerce. NACo has urged a delay of federal legislation until a thorough and impartial study is completed on the taxation of electronic commerce and its impact on local businesses. NACo is supporting the Cox amendment. The purpose of this resolution is to express Hawai'i County's support of the Cox amendment to the Internet Tax Freedom Act and to support NACo's position on this matter. This matter is also being considered as a position of the Hawat'i State Association of Counties (HSAC)_ Attach. KCS. 175' _t- MAY 1 9 1998 FPR 01 198 11:54AM N R 00 P.2/17 F:\M5\COX\COX.061 AMENDMENT IN THE NATURE OF A SUBSTITUTE To H.R.1054 OFFERED BY MR. COX OF CALIFORNIA Strike all after the enacting clause and insert the following: SECTION 1. SHORT TITLE. 2 This Act may be cited as the "Internet Tax Freedom 3 Act". 4 SEC. 2. P'mmGs. 5 The Congress finds the following: 6 (1) As a massive global network spanning not 7 only State but international borders, the Internet 8 and the related provision of online services and 9 Internet access are matters involving interstate and 10 foreign commerce within the jurisdiction of the Unit- 11 ed States Congress under Article I, section 8, clause 12 3 of the United States Constitution I3 (2) Even within the United States, the Internet 14 does not respect State lines and operates independ- 15 ently of State boundaries. Addresses on the Internet 16 are designed to be geographically, indif(erent_ 17 Internet transmissions are insensitive to physical 18 distance and can have multiple geographical address- 19 es. Mamh 18.1598 (1226 P.m.) a APR 01 '98 11:55M N A CO P.3/17 F:\MS\COX\COX.o61 2 1 (3) Because transmissions over the Internet are 2 made using computer protocols, in particular the 3 Transmission Control ProtocoVlnternet Protocol, 4 that utilize packet switching technology, it is impos- 5 sible to determine in advance the precise geographic 6 route over which individual Internet transmissions 7 will travel; and it is therefore infeasible to separate 8 domestic intrastate Internet transmissions from 9 interstate and foreign Internet transmissions. 10 (4) Consumers, businesses, and others engaging 11 in interstate and foreign commerce through online 12 services and the Internet could become subject to 13 new taxes imposed by thousands of separate taxing 14 jurisdictions in the United States alone. 15 (5) Inconsistent and inadministerable taxes im- 16 posed on the Internet, Internet access, and online 17 services by Federal, State, and local governments 18 would subject consumers, businesses, and other 19 users engaged in interstate and foreign commerce to 20 multiple, confusing, and burdensome taxation, and 21 restrict the growth and continued technological mat- 22 uration of the Internet itself 23 (6) The Federal Government does not pres- 24 ently, and as a matter of national policy should not Leash 18. 1988 (1226 P-m-) APR 01 '9A 11: SSAM N A Co P. 4/17 F:\M5\cox\cox061 3 1 in the future, tag the Internet, Internet access, on- 2 line services, or electronic commerce. 3 (7) The twenty-first century marketplace re- 4 quires a twenty-first century sales tax system that is 5 more uniform, consistent, and streamlined. Not only 6 will tag simplification make businesses more com- 7 petitive, but it will make government more efficient, 8 resulting in personal benefits to every consumer and 9 citizen. 10 (8) Because the tax laws and regulations of so 11 many jurisdictions were established long before the 12 advent of the Internet, their application to this new 13 medium in unintended and unpredictable ways could 14 prove to he an unacceptable burden on the interstate 15 and foreign commerce of the Nation. 16 (9) The electronic marketplace of services, 17 products, and ideas available through the Internet 18 can be especially beneficial to senior citizens, the 19 - - physically challenged, citizens in rural areas, and 20 small businesses. It also offers a variety of uses and 21 benefits for educational institutions and charitable 22 organizations. 23 (10) A consistent and coherent national policy 24 regarding taxation of electronic commerce conducted 25 over the Internet, and the concomitant uniformity, APR 01 '98 11:56AM N A 00 P.5/17 F:\MS\COX\COJL061 4 1 simplicity, and fairness that is needed to avoid bur- 2 dening this evolving form of interstate and foreign 3 commerce, can best be achieved by the United States 4 exercising its authority under Article 1, section 8, 5 clause 3 of the United States Constitution to eneour- 6 age a cooperative solution among Federal, State, 7 and local levels of government. 8 SEC- 3_ MORATORIUM ON CERTAIN TAXES. 9 (a) ExTF,NT aNn DNxnTIoN of MoRAToFxux-For 10 a period of three years following the enactment of this Act, 11 neither any State nor any political subdivision thereof 12 shall impose, assess, collect, or attempt to collect any of 13 the following specified taxes: 14 (1) Taxes on Internet access- 15 (2) Taxes on online services. 16 (3) Bit taxes. 17 (4) Bandwidth taxes- 18 (5) Multiple taxes on electronic commerce. 19-- - ---(6) Discriminatory taxes on electronic com- 20 merce. 21 (b) E%CgmoN.-The prohibition in subsection (a) 22 shall not apply to taxes on Internet access or online serv- 23 ices generally imposed and actually enforced prior to 24 March 1, 1998: Provided, That the rate of such tax may U.,!h t0. 7948 ft9?P. n.m.l APR 01 '96 11=56lY9 N A 00 P.6/17 F:\M5\COX\COX.061 5 1 not be increased beyond the rate imposed on Mardi 1, 2 1998. 3 SEC_ 4_ CONSULTATIVE GROUP ON THE IN ERNAITONAL 4 TAXATION OF ELECTRONIC COMMERCE. 5 (a) CONSULTATIVE GROUP.-The Secretaries of the 6 Treasury, State, and Commerce, in consultation with ap- 7 propriate committees of the Congress, States and political 8 subdivisions thereof, consumer and business groups, and 9 other appropriate groups, shall undertake an examination 10 of the international taxation of- 11 (1) domestic and international communications 12 and transactions using the Internet; 13 (2) goods and services imported to and exported 14 from the United States using the Internet; 15 (3) goods and services imported to and exported 16 from the United States by means in competition 17 with the Internet, including mail order sales; 18 (4) Internet access; and 19 (5) the telecommunications infrxstrueture used 20 by the Internet, online services, and Internet access. 21 (b) PREsmF.NT. Not later than 2 years from the 22 date of enactment of this Act, the President shall, to the 23 extent and in the form the President deev^W appropriate, 24 transmit to the appropriate eommittees of Congress policy ---------PPR 01 '98 SL:57PM H R CO P.7117 F:\M5\COX\COX 061 6 1 recommendations on the international taxation of commu- 2 nications and transactions using the Internet. 3 SEC. s. COMMISSION oN nwmRNEr COMMERCE. 4 (a) ESTABLLSIIIaxT of CobtnusgioN.-There is es- 5 tablished a commission to be known as the Commission 6 on Internet Commerce, hereinafter referred to as the 7 "Commission". The Commission shall- 8 (1) be composed of 29 members, including the 9 Chairman, in accordance with subsection (b); and 10 (2) conduct its business in accordance with the 11 provisions of this Act. 12 (b) MEMBEBS1nP.- 13 (1) IN GE-vERAL.-The Commissioners shall 14 serve for the life of the Commission. The member- 15 ship of the Commission shall be as follows: 16 (A) The Seeretary of the Treasury and the 17 Secretary of Commerce. 18 (B) Two representatives each from the Na- 19 tional Governors' Association, the National 20 Conference of State Legislatures, the Council of 21 State Governments, the National Association of 22 Counties, the National League of Cities, the 23 United States Conference of Mayors, and the 24 International City/County Managers Associa- 25 tion_ March 16. 1888 (1228 p.m-) APR 01 '9B 11:57AM N A Ca P.Bi17 F:\M5\C0X\C0X.061 7 1 (C) Twelve representatives of consumers 2 and business, of which two each shall be ap- 3 pointed by the President, the Senate majority 4 leader, the Senate minority leader, the Speaker 5 of the House, the House majority leader, and 6 the House minority leader. 7 (2) Cain Exsox-The Chairperson of the 8 Commission shall be appointed upon the joint rec- 9 ommendation of the Senate majority leader, the Sen- 10 ate minority leader, the Speaker of the House, the 11 Rouse majority leader, and the House minority lead- 12 er, based on nominations from the National Gov- 13 ernors' Association. 14 (3) APPonxTME\7s.-Appointments to the 0 Commission shall be made within 45 days of enact-- 16 meet of this Act. 17 (e) QIA)Ri71L-b'ifteen members of the Commission 18 shall constitute a quorum for c ondueting the business of -19 the mmisslon. 20 (d) DLrTiEs of THE CoMMms1oN.-The Commission 21 shall, in consultation with the National Tax Association 22 Communications and Electronic Commerce Tax Project 23 and other appropriate groups, undertake an exAmir'ation 24 of- March is, 1888 (x2'26 p.m-) PPR 01 '98 11:58RM N R 00 P.9/17 - F:\M5\COX\COX061 1 (1) a uniform system of definitions of remote 2 commerce subject to sales and use tax within each 3 State; 4 (2) a simplified system for sales and use taxes 5 that provides for a single statewide sales or use tax 6 rate on all remote commerce, which rate may be 7 zero, and establishes a method of distributing to po- 8 lineal subdivisions within each State their propor- 9 tionate share of such taxes; 10 (3) silmificant simplifications in the interstate 11 administration of the sales and use tax, including 12 uniform tax registration, tax returns, remittance re- 13 quirements, and filing procedures; 14 (4) an independent third party collection system 15 that would utilize the technology of the Internet to 16 further simplify sales and use tax administration 17 and collection; and 18 (5) the level of contacts between a State impos- 19 ing sales or use tax on remote commerce that should 20 be considered sufficient to subject the remote seller 21 to collection obligations imposed by the State, in- 22 eluding the definition of a level of contacts below 23 which a State way not impose on a remote seller the 24 obligation to collect sales or use talc. March 18. 1998 (1226 P.m.) 9 - APR 01 '98 11:58M N A 00 P.10/17 F:\M5\COX\COx.061 9 1 SEC. 6. LEGISLATIVE RECOMMENDATIONS. 2 (a) TIiANSJ' USSION OF PROPOSED LEGISLATION TO 3 THE PRF.smFvT.-Within 2 years from the date of enact- 4 ment of this Act, the Commission described in section 5 5 shall transmit to the President proposed legislation reflect- 6 ing its recommendations concerning the matters described 7 in section 7. 8 (b) CONTENTS OF PROPOSED LEGISLATION.-The 9 proposed legislation submitted by the Commission shall- 10 (1) define with particularity the level of con- 11 tarts between a State imposing sales or use tax on 12 remote commerce that will be considered sufficient 13 to subject the remote seller to collection obligations 14 imposed by the State; 15 (2) provide that if, and only if, a State has 16 adopted a single sales and use tax rate for remote 17 commerce, and adopted simplified procedures for the 18 administration of its sales and use taxes, including 19 uniform registration, tax returns, remittance re- 20 quiremeuts, and filing procedures, then such State 21 shall be authorized to impose on remote sellers a 22 duty to collect sales or use tax on remote commerce; 23 (3) provide that, of dive upon the expiration 24 of 4 years from the date of enactment of the legisla- 25 tion described in this section a State which elects 26 not to adopt a single sales and use tax rate and sim- Mamh 16. 1998 (1226 P.m.) APR 01 198 11a59M N R 00 P.11/17 F:\M5\COX\COX.061 10 1 plified mmistrative procedures shall be deemed to 2 have adopted a sales and use tax rate on remote 3 commerce equal to zero; 4 (4) include uniform definitions. of remote com- 5 merce subject to sales and use taxes; 6 (5) make permanent the temporary moratorium 7 described in section 3 on Internet access taxes, bit 8 taxes, and bandwidth taxes, and permanently ban 9 sueb other taxes on electronic commerce as the Com- 10 mission deems appropriate; and 11 (6) he consistent with the statement of policy 12 set forth in paragraphs (1) and (2) of section 230(b) 13 of the Communications Act of 1934, as amended. 14 (c) TRANSW.SSION OF PRoposm) LEGIM ATION TO 15 THE CONGRESS: Within 45 days after the transmission 16 to the President of the legislation proposed by the Com- 17 mission, the President shall transmit to the Congress a 18 report containing the President's approval or disapproval 19 of the legislative recommendations, and his reasons there- 20 for. Upon the expiration of 45 days after the transmission 21 to the President of the proposed legislation submitted by 22 the Commission., the Commission shall transmit such pro- 23 posed legislation to the Congress. March 18, 1998 (1226 p.m.) -----------rPR 01 '92 11-59M N R 00 - P. 12/17 F:\M5\COX\COX.061 ll I SEC. T. EXPEDITED CONSIDERATION OF LEGISLATIVE REC- 2 OMMENDATIONS. 3 Within 90 legislative days after the transmission to 4 the Cons of the proposed legislation described in see- 5 tion 6(c), such legislation shall be discharged from the re- 6 spective committees of jurisdiction within the House of 7 Representatives and the Senate, and shall be referred to 8 the proper calendar on the floor of each House for final 9 action. 10 SEC. S. DECLARATION THAT THE INTERNET SHOULD BE II FREE OF FOREIGN TARIFFS, TRADE BAR- 12 BIERS, AND OTHER RESTRICTIONS. 13 It is the sense of the Congress that the President 14 should seek bilateral and multilateral agreements through 15 the World Trade Organization, the Organization for Eco- 16 nomic Cooperation and Development, the Asia Paeific 17 Economic Cooperation Council, and other appropriate 18 international fora to establish that commercial trans- ----19 actions using -the Internet are free from tariff and tax 20 ation. 21 SEC. 9. DEFAYTCIONs. 22 For the purposes of this Act: 23 (1) INTEMNEET ---The term "Internet" shall 24 have the meaning set forth in section 230(c)(1) of 25 the Communications Act of 1934, as amended. AAamh 18.19M (1226 o.m.) n . APR 01 '96 12=00PM N R 00 - P.13i17 F:\M5\COX\COX.061 12 1 (2) LvrERNET AccEss.-The terns "Internet 2 access" means the offering or provision of the stor- 3 age, computer processing, and transmission of infor- 4 mation that enables the user to make use of re- 5 sources found via the Internet. 6 (3) ON-uN'E sERvicE: ---The term "online serv- 7 ice" means the offering or provision of information, 8 information processing, and products or services to 9 a user as part of a package of services that are com- 10 bind with Internet access and offered to the user 11 for a single price. 12 (4) ELECTwNic (x)JSMERL'R -The term "elec- 13 tropic commerce" means any transaction comprising 14 the sale, offer, or delivery of goods or services (in- 15 eluding Internet access) via the Internet. 16 (5) REx(YrE coxmHwE.-The term "remote 17 commerce" means the sale and delivery of goods or 18 services by a person in one State to a purchaser in 19 another State. 20 (6) REmoT1; SELLER.-The term "remote sell- 21 er" means a person who sells goods or services from 22 one State to a purchaser in another State. 23 (7) TAIL.-The term "tax" means- March 18, 19%(1228 p.m.) PPR 01 196 12=0WM N R 03 P. 14/17 F:\MS\COX\COX.06l 13 1 (A) any levy, fee, or charge imposed under 2 governmental authority by any governmental 3 entity; and 4 (B) the imposition on the seller of an obli- 5 gation to collect and remit to a governmental 6 entity any such levy, fee, or charge imposed on 7 the buyer by a governmental entity. 8 (8) BIT TA%.-The term "bit tax" means any 9 transactional tax imposed on or measured by the IO amount of digital information transmitted electroni- 11 tally, or any transactional tax imposed on or meas- 12 ured aecording to any of the technological or operat- 13 ing charaeteristies of the Internet. 14 (9) BANDWIDTH T.Sx.-The term "bandwidth 15 tax" means any transactional tax imposed on or 16 measured by the physical eapaeity of an available 17 signal to transmit digital information electronically. 18 (10) MULTIPLE TAX.-The term "multiple tax" 19 means any tax that is imposed by one State or polit- 20 ieal subdivision thereof on the same or essentially 21 the same electronic commerce that is also taxed by 22 any other State or political subdivision tbereof 23 whether or not at the same rate or on the sane 24 basis, and includes any tax that does not ensure that 25 the cost incurred in using telecommunications serv- APR 01 '98 12:01P11 N A CO P.15/17 F;\M5\COX\COX.061 14 1 ices to offer, sell, or provide electronic commerce is 2 not subject to taxation under the same tax at a dif- 3 ferent stage of the process of offering, selling, or 4 providing such electronic commerce. 5 (11) DISCR.n"ATORY TAm-The term "di-s- 6 criminatory tax" means any tax imposed by a State 7 or political subdivision thereof on electronic com- b merce that is not generally imposed and legally eol- 9 lcetible at the same rate by that State or political 10 subdivision thereof on simil ar goods or services not 11 using the Internet, online services, or Internet ac- 12 cess, and includes 13 (A) any tax on electronic commerce that 14 imposes an obligation to collect or pay the tax 15 on a different person or entity than in the case 16 of similar goods or services not using the 17 Internet, online services, or Internet access; 18 (B) any tax imposed or levied by a State 19 or political subdivision thereof, where- 20 (i) the use of a computer server on 21 the Internet to create or maintain a World 22 Wide Web page or site by a remote seller 23 is considered as a factor in determining 24 whether the remote seller has a substantial 25 nexus; or March 18. 1998 (1226 om.1 FFR 01 '98 12:02PM N R OD P. 16117 F:\M5\COX\COX.061 In 1 (ii) an Internet access provider, online 2 service provider, or World Wide Web 3 hosting service provider is deemed to be 4 the agent or representative of a remote 5 seller as a result of the provider maintain- 6 ing or.talang orders via a web page or site 7 on a computer that is physically located 8 within a taxing jurisdiction; 9 Provided, That this definition does not include 10 a tax imposed or levied by a State where a re- l I mote seller's interest in physical property such 12 as computer hardware (but not including data) 13 is considered as a factor in determining whether 14 a remote seller has a substantial nexus; 15 (C) any tax purportedly levied by any 16 State or political subdivision thereof on elee- 17 tronic mail services, Internet site selection, elee- 18 trome newsgroups and bulletin boards, Internet 19 relay chat, Internet search services, and other 20 online services that are either not taxed by such 21 jurisdiction when provided via means other than 22 the Internet or online services, or that by their 23 nature are so related to the Internet or online 24 services that substantially the same service is 25 not offered via means other than the Internet • APR 01 '9B 12:02PM N A 00 _ P.17/17 F:\M5\COX\COX.061 16 1 or online services within sueh State Or Political 2 subdivision; and 3 (D) any tax that establishes a classification 4 for providers or sellers of electronic. commerce 5 or online services for purposes of applying a tag 6 rate higher than the tax rate generally applied 7 to providers of similar goods or information 8 services not using the Internet. 9 SEC. 10. NO EXPANSION OF TAX AU rHORTIY_ 10 Nothing in this Act shall be eonstrac d to expand the 11 duty of any person to collect or pay taxes beyond that 12 which existed on March 1, 1998. NACo: Legislatiw Affairs - Fact Shits - Internet http://w .~.org/policy/factsrmterfs.ht a;u Legislative avgn NACo Fact Sheets Bulletin LegislaUve Proposed Internet Taxation Bills Priorffits Two House subcommittees approved legislation in October to place a six-year moratorium on any new state and local taxes on electronic commerce, including the Internet. Many tax experts say that the latest version of the bill (H.R. 1054), as approved by the House Advocacy Docuw,nts subcommittees, would also prohibit a number of existing telecommunications, franchise, gross receipts, business and corporate taxes. The full House Commerce and Judiciary Committees are not R Bill Tracking expected to mark up legislation until next year. f' NACo, The Senate Commerce Committee approved similar legislation (S. 442) Lohwsts on November 4. While a number of Senators, including chairman John McCain (R-Ariz.), indicated the bill needs more clarification before f Steering going to the floor, the committee agreed by a 14 to 5 vote to report it. Committees Senate Majority Leader Trent Lott (R-Miss.) has stated his concerns about fairness and equity issues between "Main Street" businesses and e America" companies on the internet who would be exempt from taxation. Lott County urged that the legislation be redrafted to address many of the concerns Platlomi raised by state, county and city officials about federal preemption of state and local taxes. NACo passed a resolution at the Annual Conference opposing federal preemption of state and local taxing authority and establishment of an unlimited moratorium on state and local taxation of electronic commerce. NACo urged delay of federal legislation until a thorough and impartial study is completed on the taxation of electronic commerce and its impact on local businesses. A joint industry-government study under the auspices of the National Tax Association is underway. The group has met twice and will meet again in early February. The following point and counterpoint is helpful in understanding some of the arguments being made by some electronic and telecommunications companies Internet Taxation: Myths and Realities MYTH: States and localities are looking to the Internet as a "cash cow" to afford additional public expenditures. 1 of 3 05/01/98 15:17:5 NACo: Legislative Affairs - Fact Sheets - Internet T -s http://v .taco.org/policy/fwtsfmterfs.hti REALITY: States have lowered their tax revenues each year for the past four years, and in 1997 alone, Connecticut, Florida, Georgia, Iowa, Massachusetts and New York have each exempted the Internet from taxation. Neither states nor localities are moving to enact new taxes on the Internet. All levels of government are attempting to do more with less. MYTH: To ensure that states and local sales taxes are non-discriminatory, such taxes should not be imposed on Internet transactions because these sales are like mail order catalogue sales. REALITY: The goal of a non-discriminatory sales tax would require that all sales are treated the same, including "Main Street" retail sales, mail order catalogue sales and Internet sales. Today, $4 billion of nearly $150 billion in states sales tax collections are lost through mail order catalogue sales. The expected explosive growth of the Internet will doom the sales tax unless a genuinely non-discriminatory, easy-to-administer sales tax can be developed with industry. MYTH: 30,000 taxing jurisdictions will suffocate the Internet's development. REALITY: Transactions over the Internet are nearly always taxable on the basis of the purchaser's jurisdiction, and transactions take place one at a time. Thus, if any tax is due on a transaction, it can be easily traced to a single jurisdiction. MYTH: Small businesses hoping to use the Internet to sell their goods or services have no reliable way of knowing what sales tax is due on a particular sale. REALITY: Small business are not liable to collect sales taxes on sales made anywhere but in their home state, where they are likely to know the applicable law. Only companies with operations in more than one state must collect more taxes, and then only in states where they operate. Only one state, Texas, requires out-of-state businesses that use a server located within Texas to collect the Texas sales tax. MYTH: States and localities can kill the Internet by seeking to tax every transaction that moves through their jurisdiction. And since the Internet moves products by packet switching, one never knows what route the material has taken from seller to buyer. REALITY: A so-called "bit tax," taxing the flow of bits through the wires of the telecommunications companies located a jurisdiction, has been discussed by academics in Europe, but the concept has not been adopted either in the United States or abroad. The U.S. Constitution would prohibit such a tax if a state or locality ever imposed it, as it 2 of 3 05/01/98 15:18J, •NACo: Legislative Afrain - Fact Sheets - latemet Tees httpl/www. .Org/pofcy/fwftrmterfs.htn effectively operates as a border tax, an unfair burden on interstate commerce. MYTH: Congressional action is necessary to keep states and localities from imposing new taxes on the Internet. REALITY: Because states aren't enacting new taxes, no moratorium is needed. In fact, states have joined a voluntary industry-government effort, led by the National Tax Association and including local government representatives, to develop mutually acceptable tax policy to ensure that consistent and administrable tax policy for the Internet. MYTH: As soon as a company's Web site appears on a computer in another city or state, that company may be liable for taxes. REALITY: United States courts have already determined that access to a Web site in a jurisdiction does not permit any long-arm jurisdiction over the company. The standard for sales tax jurisdiction is even higher. Based on such precedents, no company has any rational basis to fear that a state could assert sales tax jurisdiction merely because its Web site was accessible there. Contact: Ralph Tabor 202/942-4254 rtabor@naco.org January 1998 About NACo About Counties I Membership Benefits] Legislative Issues Affiliates I Conferences Services for Counties I Publications NACo Website Comments/Questions ®1997 National Association of Counties 3 of 3 05/01/98 15:18:0: •Cwnty News-April 13, 1998 F" //wwwmeo.org/a,chive%~awc/98-04-(3lmtemet.hm U. National Association of Counties Washington, DC / Vol. 30, No. 7 April 12, 1998 Previous story Table of Contents I Next story Internet tax bill to be marked up after recess By Ralph Tabor associate legislative director The House Commerce and Judiciary committees are expected to mark up a revised Internet Tax Freedom Act soon after Congress returns from the Easter recess. NACo, along with other state and local organizations, has been meeting with Commerce Committee Chairman Tom Bliley's (R-Va.) staff to negotiate a substitute bill that would be used for a committee markup. The latest draft basically follows the agreement reached last month between Rep. Christopher Cox (R-Calif.) and the National Governors' Association, NACo and other state and local groups. The draft bill proposes a three-year moratorium or time-out on all new state and local government taxes on Internet access fees and online services. Existing taxes are grandfathered if they had been imposed before March 1. The draft also places a three-year moratorium on all multiple and discriminatory taxes on electronic commerce. The draft bill would establish a 15-member commission on electronic commerce - seven representing state and local government, six representing business or consumers and the secretaries of Commerce and Treasury. The state and local government members would be selected by NACo and six other national organizations. The commission would be charged with the responsibility to examine: • Simplification of state and local sales and use taxes, including a single rate per state with a proportionate share returned to counties and cities, uniform definitions and simplified administration. I of 4 05/08/98 08:39:37 County News-April 13, 1998 r.//www.n .org/mhive/emws/98-04-13fmtemet.h • Need for an independent third party collection system. • Level of contacts or dollars of sales within a state necessary for Internet businesses to collect sales and use taxes, including a dollar threshold of sales. The commission has two years to report its findings and to propose federal legislation to implement its recommendations. States would have four years after Congress acts to pass necessary enabling legislation. If a state did not take such action, it would not be able to require out-of-state sellers to collect sales and use taxes. A number of key issues in the bill are still changing as the Commerce Committee staff meets with other players in this legislation. The following issues are likely to be raised in a markup: • Length of the Internet tax moratorium: Some members of the electronic commerce industry think three years is too short. NACo contends that a longer period of time would make it more difficult to enact further legislation on sales tax issues. The focus should be on the work of the commission and congressional adoption of its results. • Grandfathering language: Some members of the industry oppose any grandfathering of existing Internet taxes. • Commission scope: The Bliley staff draft is written for electronic commerce transactions and would not include other remote sellers such as mail order and catalogue companies. It is hoped that the bill considered by the Judiciary Committee will expand this scope. The House Judiciary Committee plans to mark up a different bill (H.R. 3529) sponsored by Rep. Steve Chabot (R-Ohio). This bill is similar to the legislation negotiated with Reps. Cox and Bliley. His bill also has been referred to the Ways and Means Committee. In the Senate, Commerce Committee Chair John McCain (R-Ariz.) has expressed some interest in the bill negotiated with state and local groups. He has raised questions, however, about several provisions including the grandfathering of existing Internet taxes. Sens. Judd Gregg (R-N.H.) and Joseph Lieberman (D-Conn.) introduced a new Internet bill (S. 1888), which provides for a three-year moratorium on new Internet taxes. Their bill envisions a commission to propose model legislation regarding commercial transactions on the Internet but does not address collection of sales taxes on remote sales. Senate Majority Leader Trent Lott (R-Miss.) has stated clearly and frequently that no legislation will be considered unless state and local 2 of 4 05/08/98 08:39:4 County News-April 13, 1998 ://www.rwc -Org/archive/ n ws/98-04-13fmtemet.ht, governments agree to its provisions. The bill (S. 442) approved by the Senate Commerce Committee is opposed by NACo and the other state and local government groups. Action Needed on Internet Bill Urge House Commerce and Judiciary Committee members from your state to support the substitute Internet Tax Freedom Act agreed to by Rep. Cox, the National Governors' Association, NACo and other state and local groups. Ask them to oppose amendments to the Cox legislation that would: • include existing state and local taxes in the moratorium • lengthen the moratorium to more than three years; and • confine the commission's study to Internet sales only, ignoring the issue of other so-called "remote sales" such as catalog sales. Following is a list of House Commerce and Judiciary Committee members. You may access them through NACo's toll-free number: 888-LEG-NACo (I-888-534-6226), or via Internet at http://www.house.gov. House Commerce Committee House Judiciary Committee Members Members • Joe L. Barton • Bob Barr • Brian P. Bilbray • Howard L. Berman • Michael Bilirakis • Rick Boucher • Tom Bliley • Ed Bryant • Rick Boucher • Steve Buyer • Sherrod Brown • Charles T. Canady • Richard M. Burr • Christopher B. Cannon • Tom Coburn • Steve Chabot • Christopher Cox • Howard Coble • Michael D. Crapo • John Conyers, Jr. • Barbara Cubin • Bill Delahunt • Nathan Deal • Barney Frank • Diana DeGette • Elton Gallegly • Peter Deutsch • George W. Gekas • John D. Dingell • Robert W. Goodlatte • Eliot L. Engel • Asa Hutchinson • Anna G. Eshoo • Henry J. Hyde • Elizabeth Furse • Bob Inglis • Greg Ganske • Sheila Jackson-Lee • Paul E. Gillmor • Bill Jenkins • Bart Gordon • Zoe Lofgren 3 of 4 05/08/98 083943 `'County New4-April 13, 1998 .//www.neco.org/archive/cnews/98-04-13rmtem t.hta JV • Gene Green • Bill McCollum • James C. Greenwood • Martin T. Meehan • Ralph M. Hall • Jerrold Nadler • Dennis Hastert • Ed Pease • Ron Klink • Steven R. Rothman • Scott L. Klug • Charles E. Schumer • Steve Largent • Robert C. Scott • Rick A. Lazio • F. James Sensenbrenner, Jr. • Thomas J. Manton • Lamar Smith • Edward J. Markey • Maxine Waters • Karen McCarthy • Melvin Watt • Charlie Norwood • Robert Wexler • Michael G. Oxley • Frank Pallone, Jr. • Bill Paxon • James E. Rogan • Bobby L. Rush • Tom Sawyer • Dan Schaefer • John M. Shimkus • Cliff Stearns • Ted Strickland • Bart Stupak • W.J. "Billy" Tauzin • Edolphus Towns • Fred Upton • Henry A. Waxman • Rick White • Edward Whitfield • Albert R. Wynn Previous story I Table of Contents Next story 4 of 4 05/08/98 08:39:47