Julianne Malveaux On Business and Economics

 

TAX FREEDOM ON THE WEB ENSNARES THE WEB-LESS

BY JULIANNE MALVEAUX

 

            While the Dow dithers about Internet stock, recent Congressional action suggests that many of our legislators still see the ‘net as one of economy’s primary engines.  While states depend on consumer taxes to pay their bills, Internet sales have been exempt from taxation for the past three years.  AS the tax moratorium on Internet sales winds down, there has been a “bipartisan agreement” to extend the moratorium for five more years.  That means that states will continue to see their revenue stream diminished by the almighty Internet, and bricks-and-mortar retailers who invest in structures and provide jobs in states will operate at a disadvantage from their competitors who exist solely on the web.

 

            Did you ever wonder why Amazon’s prices are so much more attractive than those of your local bookstore?  They have less overhead, but the same volume discount, as some of the chains.  No wonder independent bookstores are closing almost as rapidly as the NASDAQ is dropping.  If you buy books by the numbers, these folks just can’t compete.  Here’s another cost net merchants don’t have to shoulder – they don’t have to deal with the red tape associated with paying state taxes.   Thanks to the moratorium, they can keep skirting taxes, and keep offering better prices than others, both because they can afford to discount deeply, and because their buyers have the implicit discount that comes when they don’t have to pay taxes that would range between 4 and 9 percent were they to pay them in a store.

 

            The Senate, now led by Democrats, is unlikely to take a position different from the one that Republicans take.  President Bush has said he supports a five-year freeze on new Internet taxes.  Vice-President Cheney would go further, supporting a permanent ban on such taxes.  But just like all people are (theoretically) created equally, shouldn’t all purchases be taxed equally?  Should net shopping have an advantage over other shopping?  Why?

 

            From a personal perspective, let me confess my own weakness for net shopping.  While I cleave to a local bookstore, SisterSpace and Books, which specializes in books by and about black women, I buy at least half of my books on the Internet.  I’ve managed to snag some great black history classic volumes on e-bay, and have done some bulk vitamin purchasing on the net, saving that guilt-inducing trek to the health food store.  The last three wedding gifts I bought took no more than a point and a click.  My aversion to baby stores barely bubbled to the surface when I purchased a shower gift on BabysRUs.  Not a tax dollar was put onto my credit card, and though delivery charges were hefty they were diminished by the convenience of the sale.  If you took my eshopping tools away, at this point, it would make me want to holler.

 

            But even as I take advantage of the net, I’m mindful that many don’t.  The digital divide is alive and well here, with white households nearly twice as likely to have home computers and Internet access as households of color.  If we don’t pay taxes on our Internet purchases, these folks will end up shouldering our burden.  Poor households, already overly taxed in terms of time and inconvenience, are taxed even more when they can’t take advantage of the same deals that others have access too.

 

            These poor households are invisible participants in Senate deliberations about e-taxes.  The discussion has centered on whether or not states should simply their tax collection processes to make it easier for Internet retailers to pay.  Instead, it ought to center on the consequences of their nonpayment.  While many favor the continuing Internet tax moratorium, others, in the name of fairness, say that online and on street purchases ought to be taxed the same way.

 

            Analysis by the Center on Budget and Policy Priorities makes the case for equal taxation strongly.  They note that sales taxes supply nearly a quarter of all the taxes that states, cities, counties and school districts use to support the programs and services they provide.  Eleven states -- Tennessee, New Mexico, Louisiana, Nevada, Hawaii, Washington, Arizona, Arkansas, Mississippi, Florida, and South Dakota – use sales taxes to cover a third of their revenue.  Economists consider sales taxes regressive because the poor pay more of them than others do.  If the middle class and wealthy flock to the internet for their purchases, the poor are the ones stuck paying. There are four versions of the Internet Tax Freedom Act that are snaking their way through the House and the Senate.  Freedom for some creates a tax burden for others.  But few in the House or the power-shifted Senate are sensitive to those who will take the weight for so-called Internet tax freedom.  


Back