[Congressional Record (Bound Edition), Volume 145 (1999), Part 3]
[Senate]
[Pages 3340-3341]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office, www.gpo.gov]




  INTERNET TAX FREEDOM ACT AND THE ADVISORY COMMISSION ON ELECTRONIC 
                                COMMERCE

  Mr. LOTT. Mr. President, the last Congress passed the Internet Tax 
Freedom Act. it was not an easy process, and compromises were reached. 
In the end, the debate resulted in a bill which made a good law. It 
calls for a 3-year moratorium on new taxes. This was important, Mr. 
President. The Internet is not only a new tool of communication and 
information but is fast becoming the most vibrant new marketplace as

[[Page 3341]]

America goes into the next millennium. Having said that, I am aware of 
the concerns expressed by those on main street as well as mayors--from 
Greenwood to Belzoni to Shuqualak, Mississippi--and in towns all across 
America.
  Mr. DASCHLE. Mr. President, I share the distinguished Majority 
Leader's enthusiasm for the potential of electronic commerce and his 
assessment of the role of the Internet Tax Freedom Act in the 
encouragement of that potential. I also appreciate the concerns he 
referenced about the need for balance on the Advisory Commission on 
Electronic Commerce. The advisory panel can provide policymakers with 
valuable perspective on many of the issues that must be resolved if the 
potential of electronic commerce is to be fully realized.
  Mr. LOTT. Mr. President, that is correct. Congress did recognize that 
an examination of e-commerce was needed to fully understand the ripple 
effects of taxing access to or transactions conducted on the Internet. 
During Senate deliberations on the bill, my colleagues and I listened 
intently to varying viewpoints. Consequently, the statute created a 
national Commission reflecting the stakeholders who would provide 
recommendations to Congress. Mr. President, the balance required by the 
statute has yet to be achieved. The Congressional leadership involved 
in the selection is taking another look at the current makeup of the 
membership and considering options to resolve the impasse.
  Mr. DASCHLE. Mr. President, I concur with the Majority Leader. When 
Congress debated the Internet Tax Freedom Act, considerable attention 
was paid to the section of the bill that delineated the membership of 
the Advisory Commission. The legislation is very clear in specifying a 
balanced makeup of this panel. While some adjustments have already been 
made in an effort to achieve that goal, further discussion of the make 
up of the Commission and the requirements of the statute is clearly 
required.
  As the Majority Leader knows, state and local governments have a lot 
at stake with respect to the deliberations of this Commission, and the 
Internet Tax Freedom Act anticipates their full participation on the 
panel. If we hope to reach consensus on a uniform taxation system that 
allows electronic commerce to flourish without eroding state and local 
tax bases, a balanced, representative Commission is in all parties' 
self-interest.
  Mr. LOTT. Mr. President, the Internet has arrived, and it is 
worldwide. Let me share a few statistics. There are an estimated 66,000 
new users a day, e-commerce is growing at about 200% a year, web sites 
went from 10,000 to 3.2 million in just 3 years. Congress needs the 
Commission's recommendations, and I look forward to reviewing them.

                          ____________________