With the recent growth of online retail purchases, there has been considerable interest by the state governments in ending tax-free shopping on the internet. The newly proposed Marketplace Fairness Act is an Internet Sales Tax Bill that would force all online retailers to collect sales tax, and if approved, would place added burden on small businesses. In addition, this bill would be discouraging interstate commerce for small businesses due to the increased regulations that will be placed on them. Claims from supporters that this legislation will level the playing field for businesses are false because large corporations will be the only ones with the resources to thrive in such a marketplace change. Supporters of the Marketplace Fairness Act are too focused on the additional sales tax that would be collected, and neglecting the fact that the bill is unconstitutional by enforcing regulations on businesses that have no physical presence in certain states. If we allow this bill to pass, it will set future precedent for the courts to consider the non-physical presence of the internet a legitimate way for the long arm of the Government to reach into other states.
The Commerce Clause of the Constitution was originally meant to be a check on state power across state lines, and not as a power for the Federal government to wield over the people. If we use the established “four-prong” test for the constitutionality of an out-of-state internet tax under the commerce clause, there is not a clear substantial nexus between the state and potential taxpayer, thus it would be unconstitutional to impose a tax. However, in the senate the discussion on constitutionality seems to have taken a back seat in favor of pushing this bill through. Only having the bill in their hands for a week, the motion to proceed was passed in the senate (74-20) to allow states to tax internet sales across state lines regardless of physical presence.
In 1992 the U.S. Supreme Court ruled in...