IBJNews

House votes to extend moratorium on Internet taxes

Back to TopCommentsE-mailPrintBookmark and Share

The U.S. House voted Tuesday to make permanent a moratorium that prevents state and local governments from taxing access to the Internet.

Under current law, the moratorium expires Nov. 1, exposing Internet users to the same kind of connection fees that often show up on telephone bills.

"This legislation prevents a surprise tax hike on Americans' critical services this fall," said Rep. Bob Goodlatte, R-Va., chairman of the House Judiciary Committee. "It also maintains unfettered access to one of the most unique gateways to knowledge and engine of self-improvement in all of human history."

The moratorium was first enacted in 1998. State and local governments that already had Internet taxes were allowed to keep them under the current moratorium.

But under the bill passed Tuesday, those jurisdictions would no longer be able to collect the taxes.

Jurisdictions in seven states tax access to the Internet: Hawaii, New Mexico, North Dakota, Ohio, South Dakota, Texas and Wisconsin, according to the non-partisan Congressional Budget Office. Together they would lose "several hundred million dollars annually" if they were no longer allowed to collect the taxes, CBO said.

Several House Democrats spoke against the bill, but they allowed it to pass on a voice vote, which means members did not record whether they were in favor or against the bill. The bill now goes to the Senate.

Rep. John Conyers of Michigan, the top Democrat on the Judiciary Committee, complained that cities and states that already tax access to the Internet would lose much-needed revenue under the bill.

ADVERTISEMENT

  • Taxed Enough Already
    Not being able to tax something is the Democrat party's worst nightmare. At least one good thing has come out of Washington this year.

Post a comment to this story

COMMENTS POLICY
We reserve the right to remove any post that we feel is obscene, profane, vulgar, racist, sexually explicit, abusive, or hateful.
 
You are legally responsible for what you post and your anonymity is not guaranteed.
 
Posts that insult, defame, threaten, harass or abuse other readers or people mentioned in IBJ editorial content are also subject to removal. Please respect the privacy of individuals and refrain from posting personal information.
 
No solicitations, spamming or advertisements are allowed. Readers may post links to other informational websites that are relevant to the topic at hand, but please do not link to objectionable material.
 
We may remove messages that are unrelated to the topic, encourage illegal activity, use all capital letters or are unreadable.
 

Messages that are flagged by readers as objectionable will be reviewed and may or may not be removed. Please do not flag a post simply because you disagree with it.

Sponsored by
ADVERTISEMENT

facebook - twitter on Facebook & Twitter

Follow on TwitterFollow IBJ on Facebook:
Follow on TwitterFollow IBJ's Tweets on these topics:
 
Subscribe to IBJ
  1. I am not by any means judging whether this is a good or bad project. It's pretty simple, the developers are not showing a hardship or need for this economic incentive. It is a vacant field, the easiest for development, and the developer already has the money to invest $26 million for construction. If they can afford that, they can afford to pay property taxes just like the rest of the residents do. As well, an average of $15/hour is an absolute joke in terms of economic development. Get in high paying jobs and maybe there's a different story. But that's the problem with this ask, it is speculative and users are just not known.

  2. Shouldn't this be a museum

  3. I don't have a problem with higher taxes, since it is obvious that our city is not adequately funded. And Ballard doesn't want to admit it, but he has increased taxes indirectly by 1) selling assets and spending the money, 2) letting now private entities increase user fees which were previously capped, 3) by spending reserves, and 4) by heavy dependence on TIFs. At the end, these are all indirect tax increases since someone will eventually have to pay for them. It's mathematics. You put property tax caps ("tax cut"), but you don't cut expenditures (justifiably so), so you increase taxes indirectly.

  4. Marijuana is the safest natural drug grown. Addiction is never physical. Marijuana health benefits are far more reaching then synthesized drugs. Abbott, Lilly, and the thousands of others create poisons and label them as medication. There is no current manufactured drug on the market that does not pose immediate and long term threat to the human anatomy. Certainly the potency of marijuana has increased by hybrids and growing techniques. However, Alcohol has been proven to destroy more families, relationships, cause more deaths and injuries in addition to the damage done to the body. Many confrontations such as domestic violence and other crimes can be attributed to alcohol. The criminal activities and injustices that surround marijuana exists because it is illegal in much of the world. If legalized throughout the world you would see a dramatic decrease in such activities and a savings to many countries for legal prosecutions, incarceration etc in regards to marijuana. It indeed can create wealth for the government by collecting taxes, creating jobs, etc.... I personally do not partake. I do hope it is legalized throughout the world.

  5. Build the resevoir. If built this will provide jobs and a reason to visit Anderson. The city needs to do something to differentiate itself from other cities in the area. Kudos to people with vision that are backing this project.

ADVERTISEMENT