Internet tax bill advances in Senate

April 26, 2013

no Web taxPurchases made over the Internet may soon be taxed after the U.S. Senate closed debate on the issue Friday and prepared to vote on the issue upon return from a week-long vacation. (San Jose Mercury News)

The bill’s easy passage in the Upper House is anticipated, but some House members have already suggested they won’t support it because they consider it a new tax. President Obama said he supports the measure.

Called the Marketplace Fairness Act, the bill would allow states to collect taxes from out-of-state buyers of online products. Proponents say the measure puts Internet sales on the same competitive level as so-called brick-and-mortar stores. Sales taxes would then be sent to the state where shippers reside.

“The special treatment of big online businesses at the expense of retailers on Main Street will soon be a thing of the past,” said Bill Hughes of the Retail Industry Leaders Association.

Opponent Sen. Ron Wyden, D-Ore., said the plan “is coercive. It requires a number of states to collect the taxes of other states thousands of miles away against their will.” He also opined the bill gives an unfair advantage to foreign retailers.



  1. Rambunctious says:

    We need a national tax revolt…it may not happen in my lifetime but it will happen. Every time you turn around some Government entity is trying new ways to tax and regulate the American people. Hell…we can’t let all of those immigrant terrorist go hungry. FOOD STAMPS FOR EVERYONE!

    (5) 7 Total Votes - 6 up - 1 down
    • kettle says:

      We need a national tax revolt against corporation’s who don’t pay taxes.

      If the corporations paid a fair share we would not need to cut social programs and we would pay less personal taxes.

      (-1) 5 Total Votes - 2 up - 3 down
      • Rambunctious says:

        They just pass the cost along to you….you don’t really think that Oil companies for example just pay the extra tax without charging you more for gas do you?

        (4) 4 Total Votes - 4 up - 0 down
  2. The Gimlet Eye says:

    Something to think about:

    U.S. Spends $1.75 Trillion to Enforce Federal Regulations

    (5) 5 Total Votes - 5 up - 0 down
  3. jimmy_me says:

    Well, the rich won’t let you raise their taxes, such as taxing their $32 trillion in offshore accounts, we have to raise taxes on everyone instead. Too bad for the common-folk, who simply can’t afford the purchase price of politicians.

    (0) 10 Total Votes - 5 up - 5 down
  4. isoslo says:

    This will give big Internet businesses a huge advantage. the small guy cannot handle the administrative burden of dealing with fifty states differing tax, collection, depositing and reporting rules. A blow for small business. another job killer by the Obama administration.

    (11) 11 Total Votes - 11 up - 0 down
  5. r0y says:

    It’s not requiring States to collect other States’ taxes, it’s requiring citizens of other states to act as unpaid agents of a state they neither live in, nor consume its resources.

    This is the ultimate Taxation without representation.

    Does California expect me to pay California taxes on items I purchase while visiting other states, too?

    The gubmint has been eyeballing the intr0netz for sometime now, dreaming of how “they can get theirs” and further control the lives of other people.

    (19) 21 Total Votes - 20 up - 1 down
    • r0y says:

      I forgot to add, with the telcom-level data duplication going on, and the vast storage of internet traffic in Utah by NSA – what would prevent the government from “backtracking” citizens’ purchases? Wasn’t Prop 30 in CA “retroactive” to the beginning of the year?

      Let’s say we move to a National VAT (Value Added Tax, another Federal sales tax on top of your local+state ones), and let’s say they make it retroactive to whatever they want… task their buddies at Google, Apple, and Microsoft to get those bots running and form up pictures of everything you’ve ever bought online…

      Yeah, it’s a bit out there, and 20 years ago, I’d be wearing a tinfoil hat… but I’m guessing a good number of you (regardless of political persuasion) don’t think this is that far out there now…

      (14) 16 Total Votes - 15 up - 1 down
    • slowtime says:

      I recently went to Philadelphia. On our way back to the airport, we went across the border into Wilmington Delaware where there is no sales tax. I was surprised to find just along the border, huge shopping malls and big box stores. This was obviously a benefit to the residents of Pennsylvania. I understand it is similar in Portland OR and Vancouver WA.

      (11) 11 Total Votes - 11 up - 0 down
  6. The Gimlet Eye says:

    Oh, and by the way,


    (15) 17 Total Votes - 16 up - 1 down
  7. The Gimlet Eye says:

    This is unconstitutional and unworkable and impedes economic progress.

    The Supreme Court has already ruled in 1992 that states cannot require businesses in other states to collect taxes for them.

    (14) 16 Total Votes - 15 up - 1 down
    • r0y says:

      Yeah, but the Supreme Court also CREATED this whole mess with it’s Wickard v. Filburn case (where a farmer grew more than the government said he could, which was unconstitutional to begin with, and that he would not be buying his feed from the open market as a result, even though he could grow his own feed…)

      That single case, Wickard v. Filburn, is (in my opinion) the single most damaging case the US Supreme court botched from start to finish. It was still rolling with Progressive plants to destroy any semblance of self reliance. Even back in the early 20th century, so this is nothing new that is happening today with broadening the legal definition of “fair” taxation (such as it is).

      (5) 5 Total Votes - 5 up - 0 down

Comments are closed.