As a proud supporter of the University of Wisconsin media elite, it is logically my role to advocate unconscionably higher taxes whenever humanly possible.

I believe we should tax income, we should tax property and we should probably even tax the dead just as long as their relatives don’t bury their riches away with them.

So, it is only natural that I would support extending the money-grubbing hand of the state government to our Internet shopping, lest we keep 5 1/2 percent more money in our pockets that could be better spent by state legislators.

Nevertheless, those of you who do not plan to read this article in search of more ways to make the government bigger will nevertheless find great ways to save hundreds, thousands, perhaps millions of dollars. (While I am confident the Herald counts a few billionaires as readers, I do not suspect any of them are likely to spend billions in purchases subject to standard sales tax.)

Let’s start with the good news for you greedy capitalist shopaholics.

Many online and mail-order purchases in Wisconsin are not taxed. A customer places an order along with a payment, while the company in Idaho or Nebraska (usually one of the two) sends him or her the product tax-free. Actually, the product isn’t technically tax-free until the customer conveniently forgets to list the purchase on his income tax filings.

For some reason even Wisconsinites with the best memories and the most organized checkbooks tend to forget to pay that tax.

This triumph for 21st century shoppers everywhere comes courtesy of a Supreme Court decision in 1992 — Quill v. North Dakota — in which they ruled a state cannot require a firm to collect state sales taxes if the company has no physical presence in the state. Hence, if Amazon.com does not have any operations in Wisconsin, none of us have to pay sales tax on an Amazon purchase.

The idea behind the decision lies in the obvious differences between sales taxes in the 50 states. How could a business be expected to take responsibility for the different rates in the home states of all its customers? Not only would the business have to worry about collecting state sales tax, but it would also be responsible for the various additional taxes localities levy on sales. (Dane County tacks on 1/2 percent on to the five percent state rate.)

Unfortunately, the tax-free kingdom that is the Internet and the mail-order catalogues poses a dire threat to Wisconsin’s fiscal health as well as our state’s “Mainstreet” businesses.

According to the Wisconsin State Journal, the state is losing up to $150 million a year because of the loophole. In case you were wondering, that kind of change goes a long way in the Badger State. The anticipated cost of BadgerCare Plus — Gov. Jim Doyle’s new healthcare program — is $25 million. And Republicans will not hesitate to call this too steep a price tag for universal health insurance. Such a claim, while reflective of an amoral approach to government, is at least partially rooted in the very ugly reality of our state budget, which is currently operating at a $652 million deficit.

Fortunately, there’s a solution to the budget-busting sales-tax dodgers — or at least the beginning of one.

Enter the “Streamlined Sales Tax Project.” A consortium of states — currently 22 strong — has adopted a system of uniform sales tax standards that allow online and mail-order businesses to voluntarily collect sales taxes, which they then return to the governments of their customers’ states. According to the State Journal, over 1,000 companies are already participants.

The Wisconsin Department of Revenue estimates joining the voluntary program would bring the state $46.5 million that would otherwise go uncollected. It’s only a third of the $150 million total that we’re missing out on, but it’s still a noble start.

Now why would a business volunteer to pay taxes it doesn’t have to pay? On this question I’ve reached a dead-end. Andrew Reschovsky, UW professor of public policy and applied economics, said he wasn’t quite sure why businesses would be so benevolent to the state either. Some may value the image of “good corporate citizenship,” he suggested.  

However, Reschovsky emphasized that the current financial gains from SSTP are less important than the momentum the movement gains every time a new state joins. If enough states consolidate their power and work together, they will eventually be able to pressure Washington into adopting a policy to resolve this fiscal travesty.

When the Supreme Court ruled on this issue 16 years ago, the scope of out-of-state purchases bore little resemblance to the Internet-addicted consumer culture of the 21st century. Luckily, the very computers that created the sales-tax dilemma will make it easier for states and companies to resolve it. It is no longer a bureaucratic nightmare for a company to assess the sales taxes of all its customers and transfer the money back to the states — it’s actually become very easy.

Republicans in the Assembly predictably stalled the bill from passage during the last legislative session, perhaps out of fear of receiving a less than stellar pep rally at the next meeting of the Wisconsin Manufacturers Committee. WMC also curiously opposed the plan. Call me na?ve, but doesn’t the first word of the group’s name imply it will represent businesses actually located in the state?

Hopefully, the nasty business in the Assembly will change in November. Until then, happy shopping. And for God’s sake, don’t buy in-state.

Jack Craver ([email protected]) is a junior majoring in history.