Approval of Online Sales Tax Amendment Does Not Equate to Marketplace Fairness Act
3/25/2013
Last Friday, the Senate voted to include a non-binding amendment
to the FY 2014 Budget Resolution that supports the enforcement of state and
local use tax laws. Proponents of
the Marketplace Fairness Act are attempting to portray this vote as signifying
support for legislation that would impose tax collection burdens on small
Internet businesses. However, in
light of the vague wording of the amendment, as well as the passionate
objections made by such opponents as Sen. Max Baucus (R-Mont.), Sen. Orrin
Hatch (R-Utah), Sen. Kelly Ayotte (R-N.H.), Sen. Ron Wyden (D-Ore.), Sen.
Jeanne Shaheen (D-N.H.), Sen. Jon Tester (D-Mont.) and Sen. Marco Rubio
(R-Fla.), it is clear that this issue remains controversial and is by no means
settled. An amendment in support
of use tax enforcement does not equate to any kind of consensus on HOW that
enforcement is to be achieved.
The following statement can be attributed to CCIA President
& CEO Ed Black:
“This amendment dealt with ‘allowing States to enforce State
and local use tax laws and collect taxes already owed under State law on remote
sales.’ It does not deal with the
all-important question of HOW to achieve that enforcement and collection. Any issue can appear angelic without
the details wherein the devil resides.”
“As Senate Finance Committee Chairman Baucus stated on the Senate
floor, the concept of tax enforcement by states beyond their borders is
revolutionary. The Marketplace
Fairness Act would scrap the fundamental relationship between taxation and
physical presence by pressing online retailers into duty as tax
collectors. These and other
critical issues remain unaddressed, and to equate approval of this amendment to
support for the Marketplace Fairness Act is akin to pointing to general
approval for budget deficit reduction as evidence of support for specific
budget cuts.”
“CCIA will continue to push for much more extensive
consideration of this issue through regular order, as such a fundamental
rethinking of the way we consider taxes requires a thorough debate on the
consequences.”