According to one report, at the end of 2004, some 70 million
U.S. adults logged on to access the Internet during a typical day. As
public use of the Internet grew from the mid-1990s onward, Internet
access became a potential target for state and local taxation. In 1998,
Congress imposed a moratorium temporarily preventing state and local
governments from imposing new taxes on Internet access. Existing state
and local taxes were grandfathered. In amending the moratorium in 2004,
Congress required GAO to study its impact on state and local government
revenues. This report's objectives are to determine the scope of the
moratorium and its impact, if any, on state and local revenues. For
this report, GAO reviewed the moratorium's language, its legislative
history, and associated legal issues; examined studies of revenue
impact; interviewed people knowledgeable about access services; and
collected information about eight case study states not intended to be
representative of other states. GAO chose the states considering such
factors as whether they had taxes grandfathered for different forms of
access services and covered different urban and rural parts of the
country.
The Internet tax moratorium bars taxes on
Internet access services provided to end users. GAO's interpretation of
the law is that the bar on taxes includes whatever an access provider
reasonably bundles to consumers, including e-mail and digital
subscriber line (DSL) services. The moratorium does not bar taxes on
acquired services, such as high-speed communications capacity over
fiber, acquired by Internet service providers (ISP) and used to deliver
Internet access. However, some states and providers have construed the
moratorium as barring taxation of acquired services. Some officials
told us their states would stop collecting such taxes as early as
November 1, 2005, the date they assumed that taxes on acquired services
would lose their grandfathered protection. According to GAO's reading
of the law, these taxes are not barred since a tax on acquired services
is not a tax on Internet access. In comments, telecommunications
industry officials continued to view acquired services as subject to
the moratorium and exempt from taxation. As noted above, GAO disagrees.
In addition, Federation of Tax Administrators officials expressed
concern that some might have a broader view of what could be included
in Internet access bundles. However, GAO's view is that what is
included must be reasonably related to providing Internet access. The
revenue impact of eliminating grandfathering in states studied by the
Congressional Budget Office (CBO) would be small, but the moratorium's
total revenue impact has been unclear and any future impact would vary
by state. In 2003, when CBO reported how much states and localities
would lose annually by 2007 if certain grandfathered taxes were
eliminated, its estimate for states with grandfathered taxes in 1998
was about 0.1 percent of those states' 2004 tax revenues. Because it is
hard to know what states would have done to tax access services if no
moratorium had existed, the total revenue implications of the
moratorium are unclear. In general, any future moratorium-related
impact will differ by state. Tax law details and tax rates varied among
states. For instance, North Dakota taxed access service delivered to
retail consumers, and Kansas taxed communications services acquired by
ISPs to support their customers.
Click here for the full GAO Report, PDF Version