House Approves Internet Tax Ban

A bill to extend a moratorium on Internet access taxes for seven years was approved 402-0 by the House Tuesday, less than two days before it was set to expire.

The House initially approved a four-year ban, but last week the Senate passed a seven-year prohibition, despite considerable support for a permanent ban.

"Seven years is better than nothing, and that's what we're doing today," said Rep. Fred Upton, R-Mich, during remarks on the House floor.

A House bill that would make the moratorium permanent has 238 House co-sponsors, more than a majority.

The tax ban, first approved in 1998 and twice renewed, is set to expire Nov. 1.

Support for a permanent ban was strong in both the House and Senate, but concerns over the potential long-term impact on state and local governments forced a compromise.

The provision amounts to a moratorium on state and local taxes, said David Quam, director of federal relations with the National Governors Association. And with the Internet changing rapidly, the issue should be revisited periodically, he said.

"The implications could be pretty severe down the road if they got that wrong," he said. "It's actually a decent compromise that state and local governments and industry helped craft."

Rep. Linda Sanchez, D-Calif. called the bill "bipartisan legislation at its best" and noted it was supported by businesses, state and local government organizations and labor unions.

In addition to lengthening the ban from four years to seven years, the legislation also contains a provision aimed at preventing state and local governments from assessing taxes beyond those levied on simple Internet access.

At the urging of Sen. Ron Wyden, D-Ore., the legislation specifically prohibits taxation on e-mail and instant messaging services "that are provided independently or not packaged with Internet access."

The extension also exempts some states that approved taxes prior to the original enactment.

Sen. John Sununu, R-N.H., supported a permanent ban, but helped craft the seven-year compromise. "Seven years is better than we've ever done before," he told The Associated Press. "I think that's an important place to start."

The bill now goes to the White House for President Bush's signature.

[usaprophet]

Like Ron Paul, I believe the biggest threat to your privacy is the government. We must drastically limit the ability of government to collect and store data regarding citizens'' personal matters. We must stop the move toward a national ID card system (e.g., The Real ID Act). Under this new law, states are currently issuing new driver''s licenses embedded with standard identifier data (RFID chips). Although, some states like Montana are refusing to comply. A national ID with new tracking technologies means we''re heading into an Orwellian world of no privacy. Ron Paul was one of the few members of Congess who voted against the Real ID Act. Also, under current medical privacy protection rules, which Ron Paul also opposed, insurance companies and other entities have access to your personal medical information. Finally, there''s the so-called Patriot Act, which Congressman, Ron Paul also voted against. As originally proposed, it expanded the federal government''s ability to use wiretaps without judicial oversight; allowed nationwide search warrants non-specific to any given location, nor subject to any local judicial oversight; made it far easier for the government to monitor private Internet usage; authorized sneak and peek warrants enabling federal authorities to search a person''s home, office, or personal property without that person''s knowledge; and required libraries to turn over records of books read by their patrons. Ron Paul sponsored a bill to overturn the Patriot Act.

[canyoutellme-2009]

anyone wanna take bets on if Bush will VETO this bill or not?

[samael2014]

Apparently people actually believe tax-cuts or bans like this or things like a cut in the prime interest rate given to banks, translate into direct savings to taxpayers and consumers on top of the actual cost for the service. Taxpayers and consumers are losing big-time courtesy of their government and passing the burden of these losses on to their children like indentured servants. Between the benefits of "Free Enterprise" to taxpayer and consumer "capitalists" (if only you knew just how much of your children''s money and future are being dumped by thrift-minded Republicans -- as in WASTE and FRAUD BBIIIGGGG TIME -- into the hands of private contractors alone [you have to love those parasitic libertarians], not to mention all the other VAST upper-class welfare programs) and informed vigilance via the "Free Press", we just couldn''t be more "free".

I''m sure it won''t be long until denying your "freedom" exists will be a crime.

[gstevens13]

How does California get away with still charging sales tax?

[cnjcc]

Right on as far as getting the taxes somehow. How many of you know that the tax on your phone bill titled "Federal Subscriber line charge" that''s about 6 dollars and change per month on basic phone service has nothing to do with any Federal program? That money goes 100% into the phone company pocket.

[brianbwb-2009]

The ISPs will get around it by colluding with the phone companies, they won''t call it an internet tax, they will call it something else, hide it in your bill, but they are still going to take your money for nothing.

[ontheleft]

cox collects taxes on internet service where I live - apparently they were being taxed before 1998 when the law was originally passed

[cfin5]

Thanks Congress for the good judgment! This is what we expect.......Don''t fix something that ain''t broke. We''re taxed enough already.

[michellem99-2009]

They should not but what will Bush..DO

[badmofojim]

It means your ISP cant tax you for using the internet.