Tags: atr | americans | tax | reform

Bill Would Tax Out-of-State Internet Purchases

Thursday, 14 Apr 2011 09:41 AM

By Grover Norquist

  Comment  |
   Contact Us  |
|  A   A  
  Copy Shortlink
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.

© 2014 Newsmax. All rights reserved.

  Comment  |
   Contact Us  |
  Copy Shortlink
Around the Web
Join the Newsmax Community
Please review Community Guidelines before posting a comment.
>> Register to share your comments with the community.
>> Login if you are already a member.
blog comments powered by Disqus
Zip Code:
Privacy: We never share your email.
Hot Topics
Follow Newsmax
Like us
on Facebook
Follow us
on Twitter
Add us
on Google Plus
Around the Web
Top Stories
You May Also Like

'Margin Tax' Would Slam Small Businesses in Nev.

Wednesday, 15 Oct 2014 10:01 AM

Despite having no income tax in Nevada, spending interests are pushing a new business tax despite opposition from taxpay . . .

How High Will Marijuana Taxes Go?

Monday, 13 Oct 2014 10:42 AM

If the Washington state legislature hiked taxes on marijuana, will the voters buy it on the ballot? . . .

Big Labor Enjoys Tax-Funded Payouts

Thursday, 09 Oct 2014 10:49 AM

The Center for Worker Freedom's executive director, Matt Patterson, was quoted in a Washington Examiner article written  . . .

Most Commented

Newsmax, Moneynews, and Independent. American. are registered trademarks of Newsmax Media, Inc. Newsmax TV, NewsmaxWorld, NewsmaxHealth, are trademarks of Newsmax Media, Inc.

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