Two proposed bills in Congress are receiving bipartisan support, and are aimed at providing rational and fair tax relief for American wireless consumers. CTIA Vice-President, Government Affairs, Jot Carpenter discusses the legislation on cell tax fairness and an archaic IRS policy related to listed property. To learn more watch this segment from our July installment of our Wonder of Wireless webcast, and take a few moments to see what else we have to offer in our July WOW.

"We agree with the IRS that times have changed and that this law hasn't kept up. A repeal of the archaic listed property rule is the most sensible and fair action to take on behalf of every American who uses their wireless device for professional and personal purposes. We appreciate the support of Secretary Geithner and Commissioner Shulman for the bipartisan congressional legislation that would repeal the outdated, existing law. This would be a big win for wireless consumers."

This morning the House Judiciary Subcommittee on Commercial and Administrative Law held a hearing on the “Cell Tax Fairness Act of 2009” (H.R. 1521) to examine current local and state tax rates and fees imposed on wireless service. While the complete line-up of panelists who testified at the hearing can be found here, I’d like to focus on the testimony of Indiana State Representative Mara Candelaria Reardon and Florida State Representative Joseph Gibbons. 

The overall tone from the hearing was positive and it was great that Reardon and Gibbons repeatedly mentioned that wireless users are unfairly taxed. For the past four years, wireless products and services have been taxed four times more than other taxable goods and services. This makes no sense in an economy that is increasingly mobile and information-driven. 

Representatives Gibbons and Reardon made the important point that wireless taxes are regressive in nature, with Gibbons pointing to a compelling statistic from the Center for Disease Control’s annual survey that illustrates how high wireless taxes place the greatest burden on those Americans who can least afford it. According to the CDC, adults living in poverty (21.6%) were more likely than higher income adults to be living in wireless-only households. These folks deserve a break. 

Reardon commented that access to wireless services is no longer a luxury for a select few, but rather a vital necessity for more than 270 million Americans, and especially for those facing economic challenges. When taking into account how important wireless services have become to consumers, taxing these services at such an excessive level doesn’t make sense. That will be even more true in the future, as the mobile device continues its evolution from being a phone into a handheld computer that promises to radically expand consumers' access to electronic commerce, health care solutions, education and opportunities for civic participation.  

Finally, Reardon also addressed the claim that state and local governments would miss out on critical revenue generated from wireless taxes and fees. This is a complete red-herring advanced by opponents of sensible tax policy. The reality is that H.R. 1521 preserves existing state and local revenue streams and does not take away any existing revenue from state and local governments. Instead, this bill will put a 5-year moratorium on new discriminatory taxes and fees from being added to what’s currently imposed on consumers.   
 
This is a very modest ask, and one on which we hope the Congress will act swiftly.

Yesterday, U.S. Senators Ron Wyden (D-OR) and Olympia Snowe (R-ME) introduced the Mobile Wireless Tax Fairness Act (S.1192). The bill is similar to the Cell Tax Fairness Act (H.R. 1521), which has attracted substantial, bipartisan support in the U.S. House. Below is the statement I issued today in response to the introduction of the Senate bill:

Senators Wyden and Snowe have shown their support for wireless consumers across America by sponsoring the Mobile Wireless Tax Fairness Act of 2009. On behalf of the more than 270 million U.S. wireless subscribers, we thank them for their leadership and commitment to easing the costly and discriminatory tax burden imposed on wireless services.

It is very troubling that wireless consumers have been taxed four times more than other taxable goods and services over an almost four-year period. The Wyden-Snowe bill will protect consumers from new discriminatory taxes and fees while preserving existing revenue for states and localities.

We look forward to working with Members of Congress on both sides of the Capitol to get this pro-consumer legislation passed this year.

Earlier this week, I did an interview with Urgent Communications, a leading public safety communications publication, about the recent alarming trend of state and local governments raiding E 9-1-1 funds to make up for budget shortfalls. The two articles below call attention to the work the National Emergency Number Association (NENA) is doing, along with CTIA, on behalf of wireless consumers to raise awareness about this important issue. 

• CTIA, NENA Work to Halt 911 Fund Raids
• Funds for 911 Must Be Protected

To learn more about E 9-1-1, watch this brief “Policy Point” video, check out a recent CTIA Position Brief  , or go to our E 9-1-1 Policy Section on CTIA.org. 

Below is a statement I issued this afternoon in response to Governor Jim Doyle's budget proposal:

On behalf of the wireless industry and Wisconsin consumers, I am disappointed that Governor Doyle decided to place the state's deficit on the backs' of wireless consumers. Wisconsin wireless customers already pay 11.58% in taxes and fees and to burden them with more is unfair. It will also move Wisconsin to become one of the highest wireless tax and fee states in the country.

The purpose of the E9-1-1 funds is to improve public safety systems and infrastructures and ensure 9-1-1 callers can be quickly located in emergency situations and receive an effective emergency response -- from locating missing children to alerting firefighters and police.

Considering Wisconsin has four counties that haven't started implementing Wireless Phase I and since more than 20% of Americans going wireless-only, taking money away from the E9-1-1 fund is a poor decision. In other words, in the event a wireless caller gets dropped, the Public Safety Centers would be able to identify the wireless phone number and call the person back.

While we understand the difficult financial situation Wisconsin is facing, we ask legislators to remember that public safety officials are seeing vital funds disappear and wireless consumers are getting fleeced.

Avid readers of the blog know that we talk a lot about the ridiculous taxes and fees that wireless consumers are paying.

I’ve never been a fan of taxes but this one really irritates me. In this economy, no one has “extra” money to throw around. So why are wireless consumers, on average, paying an additional 15 percent in taxes and fees? 

These  excessive taxes and fees hurt consumers, small businesses, and those on a fixed income.  It’s not fair and it’s not right. 

Our industry has always been on the side of consumers and we promise to fight to stop these unnecessary taxes and fees for wireless users. Yesterday, U.S. Representatives Zoe Lofgren (D-CA) and Trent Franks (R-AZ) introduced “Cell Tax Fairness Act of 2009” (H.R. 1521)  in the U.S. House. We are also supported by more than 20 Members of Congress from both sides of the aisle.

I assure you that you're going to hear much more from us in the coming months about this as we work together with Congress to get this bill passed. In fact, you might have already seen the advertisement we placed in today's editions of Roll Call and CQ Today, and you'll see the add in The Hill and CongressDaily tomorrow. 

In the meantime, here’s my statement that was issued Tuesday that provides more details about the bill:

“On behalf of the wireless industry and its consumers, I want to thank Representatives Zoe Lofgren (D-CA) and Trent Franks (R-AZ) for their leadership, dedication and continued commitment to defending wireless users across the country from costly and discriminatory taxation. This pro-consumer legislation has gained tremendous bipartisan support, and we are pleased to see Congress moving ahead in the right direction to ease the tax burden on wireless customers. 

Last year, Americans paid nearly $21 billion in federal, state, and local wireless taxes and fees. The Cell Tax Fairness Act will protect consumers from new discriminatory taxes and fees, but preserve existing revenue for states and localities. 

The wireless industry continues to be a critical driver for growth in our nation’s economy by providing essential and affordable services that help millions of Americans cut costs and increase productivity and efficiency. We look forward to working with the sponsors and all Members of Congress to see that this important legislation becomes law.” 

 Click on photo to see full PDF Ad.

      You've heard me talk a lot here on the blog about wireless taxes and fees... about how ridiculous it is that wireless consumers are paying, on average, more than 16% a month of taxes and fees on their bills.  A lot of people in Congress agree, and in fact, tomorrow, the Subcommittee on Commercial and Administrative Law of the U.S. House Judiciary Committee has scheduled a hearing on a bipartisan effort to stop the gouging of wireless consumers. Representatives Zoe Lofgren (D-CA) and Chris Cannon (R-UT) are co-sponsoring H.R. 5793, which will put a freeze on new, discriminatory wireless taxes and fees, and several witnesses are scheduled to talk at the hearing about the legislative proposal. As of now the hearing will be available on a webcast, which starts at 1:00 PM.  Check it out and find out why this bill should be passed, and why 114 House co-sponsors are behind it. That is an impressive number of representatives from both sides of the aisle, as 41 Democrats and 73 Republicans are standing up for wireless consumers and saying enough is enough.

       There's also a companion bill in the Senate, S. 3249, co-sponsored by Senators Ron Wyden (D-OR) and Olympia Snowe (R-ME). They, too, recognize the need to bring fairness into the equation, and should be applauded for standing up for wireless consumers. It's important to note that neither bill takes away one penny in existing state or local government revenue, and they don't prevent a jurisdiction from passing across-the-board taxes. Considering all of that, I'd like to know if anyone can come up with one good reason why wireless consumers should alone have to carry the tax loads on their backs. These proposals are a start, and very good ones at that.