|
Nov 30
2007
|
What about H.R. 3678???Posted by Mark Hill in Tax, POS, Financial Services, Electronic Commerce, ecom, Chill Services, Amendments |
Interesting enough, in all of the comments I received, no one pointed out the October 31, amendment to "Internet Tax Freedom Act Amendment Acts of 2007", which appears to be grounds for a challenge by some enterprising group of Tax Attorney's in New York.
Here is my complete response to the Joseph Goldstein, November 14, 2007 article (Spitzer's Christmas Tax Surprise Aims To Collect Levies on Sales Over Internet).
My heart goes out to all New Yorkers; history has shown that they are a benevolent group, who face adversity with class, albeit some colorful retorts, but a great deal of class none the less. I am sure that this tax will be challenged as well, with just as much color.
I was reading an article by Edward Maldanodo, in PrePaid Press, the other day (http://www.prepaid-press.com/news_detail.php?t=paper&id=2007 ) for research in my blog (http://www.chillservices.com/component/option,com_myblog/show,3-Ways-to-Address-Customer-Service-issues-during-the-Christmas-Rush.html/Itemid,9/) , and read about the Amendment to a 1998 law, signed by Bush, this past October 31, 2007, extending the prohibition of multiple and discriminatory federal taxes on electronic commerce until Nov. 1, 2014.
Regardless of what people may think of Bush, and his policies, the Bill does protect commerce, and as Mr. Hahn points out in his response to the article, helps reduce a number of issues that are taking place in the US today. As a financial services consultant, much of which is reliant on the Internet, I personally would think that this Amendment to the Bill would have some impact on what Governor Spitzer is doing.
Yes, and before someone mentions, it I do know that H.R. 3678 prohibits multiple and discriminatory federal taxes, not state, but the key is discriminatory, and as Mr. Collard points out, this tax is an excessive amount, since it not specific to any county or municipality, and I would think discriminatory... but I leave that to New York's colorful attorney's to work out.
If you want to read more about the Bill, here is the government link to this bill. http://www.govtrack.us/congress/bill.xpd?bill=h110-3678
What's your take?
