I think it an object of great importance...to simplify our system of finance and bring it within the comprehension of every member of Congress. --Thomas Jefferson
Navigate

Blog Home

NTU Home Page

Blog FAQs

About "Government Bytes!"

Support NTU

 
Subscribe
Sign up with NTU's Taxpayer Action Center





 
Blog Contributors
Aleksander Danilov
Guest Blogger

Andrew Moylan
Director of Government Affairs

Dan Barrett
Policy Analyst

David Keating
Senior Counselor

Demian Brady
Senior Policy Analyst

Elizabeth Terrell
Guest Blogger

Jeff Dircksen
Director of Congressional Analysis

Jordan Forbes
Federal Government Affairs Manager

Joshua Culling
State Government Affairs Manager

Kristina Rasmussen
Guest Blogger

Kristine Tuinstra
State Policy Analyst

NTU Gov
Government Affairs & Communications Associate

Paul Gessing
Guest Blogger

Pete Sepp
Vice President for Communications

Rachael Slobodien
Communications Manager

Ross Kaminsky
Blogger

Sam Batkins
Guest Blogger

Tom Horne
Policy Associate

Send to a Friend
Email:
Send to Friend
The Official Blog of National Taxpayers Union

Discriminatory Tax on Consumers of Satellite Television

Posted by Doug El Sanadi - August 05, 2008

H.B. 599, the Ohio Video Tax Fairness Act, is up for passage in Columbus. Currently, the estimated 980,000 Ohioans who watch television by satellite pay a 5.5% sales tax for those services. Meanwhile, cable consumers are exempt from this tax, putting satellite companies at a distinct disadvantage. H.B. 599, sponsored by state Representative Louis Blessing, would end this discriminatory sales tax.

Even if H.B. 599 passes, though, there are at least five other states with this type of legislation in place: they include Florida, Kentucky, North Carolina, Tennessee, and Utah. With that said, the House Judiciary’s Commercial and Administrative Law subcommittee voted eleven days ago in favor of H.R. 3679. This State Video Tax Fairness Act mandates that if a state taxes television service providers then it must tax them equally.

Read NTU’s information about H.B. 599 here, and its letter about H.R. 3679 here.

Thoughts?   Add Comment -


There are no comments for this entry yet.