Login or Register
Welcome , Settings |  Logout

Bill Would Tax Out-of-State Internet Purchases

Thursday, 14 Apr 2011 09:41 AM

By Grover Norquist

Share:
More . . .
A    A   |
   Email Us   |
   Print   |
From the ATR website.

Just in time for tax day, Sens. Dick Durbin, D-Ill., and Mike Enzi, R-Wyo., are expected to unveil a bill shortly that would permit, for the first time, states to collect taxes on Internet, catalog, and other sales when the seller is not based in the state.

All told, the estimated $23 billion Internet tax hike would permit a small cartel of states to reach outside of their borders to force individuals and businesses who aren't even residents to collect taxes.

The Durbin-Enzi bill is not just an enormous tax hike, its a threat to federalism, accountable government, and interstate commerce. Below is an excert from ATR's policy brief (click here for the full document) on the Senate plan to tax what you buy online:

The federal Main Street Fairness legislation to authorize a compact for Streamlined Sales Tax (SSUTA) compliant states would allow states to raise taxes by an estimated $23 billion. Under the U.S. Supreme Court decisions in Bellas Hess v. Illinois and Quill v. North Dakota, a state cannot require an out-of-state retailer without a physical presence to collect and remit taxes, as this places an impermissible burden on interstate commerce. Main Street Fairness legislation would give Congress’s stamp of approval to circumvent this physical nexus requirement. The legislation would allow SSUTA compliant states to extend tax collection obligations to remote, out-of-state retailers. This would expressly permit — for the first time — state tax collection on Internet, catalogue, and other sales where the seller is not based in the state.

First, the project itself allows a small cartel of tax administrators to write multiple states’ tax codes. Federal legislation would incent revenue-hungry states to join this cartel. Second, it exports the burden of tax collection to non-voting out-of-state individuals and businesses that have little ability to petition state and local governments. It puts a significant burden on out-of-state actors to comply with 8,500 tax jurisdictions (brick-and-mortar stores comply with only one), without the ability to object to the multitude of tax rate increases proposed across the country every year.



© 2013 Newsmax. All rights reserved.

Share:
More . . .
   Email Us   |
   Print   |
Around the Web
Join the Newsmax community.
Register to share your comments with the community. Already a member? Login
Note: Comments from readers do not necessarily reflect the viewpoint of Newsmax Media. While we attempt to review comments, if you see an inappropriate comment you can block it by rolling over the comment, clicking the down arrow and selecting "Flag As Inappropriate."
blog comments powered by Disqus
 
Email:
Country
Zip Code:
 
Hot Topics
Top Stories
Around the Web
You May Also Like

Obamacare's Tax War on Mothers

Sunday, 12 May 2013 08:39 AM

Grover Norquist's Perspective: President Obama delivered a Mother's Day-pegged speech from the White House on Friday whe . . .

Heritage Immigration Study Is Flawed

Monday, 06 May 2013 18:56 PM

Americans for Tax Reform (ATR) pushed back today on a Heritage Foundation study that found a net fiscal cost of $6.3 tri . . .

Top 10 Tax Hikes in the Obama Budget

Wednesday, 10 Apr 2013 17:30 PM

There are literally dozens of new tax increases in the FY 2014 Obama budget. In total, they increase taxes by nearly $1  . . .

 
 
NEWSMAX.COM
America's News Page
©  Newsmax Media, Inc.
All Rights Reserved