HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

 

AMENDMENT TO:

House Bill No. 1224, Senate Draft 1, Conference Draft 1

 

OFFERED BY:

Representative Mark Moses

 

DATE:

May 3rd, 2005

 

SECTION 1. House Bill No. 1224, Senate Draft 1, Conference Draft 1 is amended by amending Section 1 to include the designation "Part I" to the section, to read as follows:

"PART I.

SECTION 1. The legislature finds that the National Conference of State Legislatures estimates that, in 2003, Hawaii lost approximately $112,000,000 to $117,000,000 in state and local revenues due to the State's inability to capture tax revenues from electronic commerce transactions. The National Conference of State Legislatures estimates that, by 2008, Hawaii will lose between $157,000,000 and $245,500,000 if nothing is done by that time. Hawaii stands to be one of the top ten states in terms of tax revenues lost in electronic commerce transactions.

 

 

 

The legislature also finds that, with regard to the loss in revenues due to the State's inability to tax electronic commerce, Hawaii's situation is not unique. Other states are currently dealing with this very same problem. To this end, the Streamlined Sales Tax Project (Project) is an effort created by state governments, with input from local governments and the private sector, to simplify and modernize the collection and administration of the sales and use taxes. The Project's proposals include tax law simplifications, more efficient administrative procedures, and implementing emerging technologies to substantially reduce the burden of tax collection. The Project's proposals are focused on improving sales and use tax administration systems for both local businesses and remote sellers of all types of commerce. Forty-two states and the District of Columbia are involved in the Project. Nationally, forty-five states and the District of Columbia impose a sales and use tax.

The Project was organized in March 2000, and is conducting its work through a steering committee with co-chairs and a number of work groups. Project participants are generally state revenue department administrators, as well as representatives of state legislatures and local governments. Businesses, including national retailers, trade associations, manufacturers, direct marketers, telecommunications companies, leasing companies, technology companies, printers, accounting firms, and others, have actively participated in the Project by offering expertise and input, reviewing proposals, suggesting language, and testifying at public hearings.

The goal of the Streamlined Sales Tax Project is to provide the states with a streamlined sales tax system that includes the following key features:

(1) Uniform definitions within tax laws. Legislatures still choose what is taxable or exempt in their state. However, participating states will agree to use the common definitions for key items in the tax base and will not deviate from these definitions. As states move from their current definitions to the Project's definitions, a certain amount of impact on state revenues is inevitable. However, it is the intent of the Project to provide states with the ability to closely mirror their existing tax bases through common definitions;

(2) Rate simplification. States will be allowed one state rate and a second state rate in limited circumstances (food and drugs). Each local jurisdiction will be allowed one local rate. A state or local government may not choose to tax telecommunications services, for example, at one rate and all other items of tangible personal property or taxable services at another rate. State and local governments will accept responsibility for notice of rate and boundary changes at restricted times. States will provide an on-line rate/jurisdiction database to simplify rate determinations;

(3) State level tax administration of all state and local sales and use taxes. Businesses will no longer file tax returns with each local government within which it conducts business in a state. Each state will provide a central point of administration for all state and local sales and use taxes and the distribution of the local taxes to the local governments. A state and its local governments will use common tax bases;

(4) Uniform sourcing rules. States will have uniform and simple rules for how they will source transactions to state and local governments. The uniform rules will be destination/delivery based and uniform for tangible personal property, digital property, and services. Special sourcing rules will be developed for unique industries;

(5) Simplified exemption administration for use- and entity-based exemptions. Sellers are relieved of the "good faith" requirements that exist in current law and will not be liable for uncollected tax. Purchasers will be responsible for paying the tax, interest, and penalties for claiming incorrect exemptions. States will have a uniform exemption certificate in paper and electronic form;

(6) Uniform audit procedures. Sellers who participate in one of the certified Streamlined Sales Tax System technology models will either not be audited or will have limited scope audits, depending on the technology model used. The states may conduct joint audits of large multi-state businesses; and

(7) State funding of the system. Participating states will apportion costs of a third-party online sales tax collections software system among themselves. It is intended that each state’s allocation of costs of the new software system will be paid out of the higher level of tax revenues collected under the Streamlined Sales Tax System Project.

The legislature further finds that the states are also participating in a joint business–government study of the costs of collection on sellers. The Project proposes that states change their sales and use tax laws to conform with the simplifications as proposed by the Project. Thus, the simplifications would apply to all sellers. Sellers who do not have a physical presence or "nexus" are not required to collect sales and use taxes unless Congress chooses to require collection from all sellers for all types of commerce. Sellers without a physical presence can volunteer to collect under the proposed simplifications. Registration by sellers to voluntarily collect sales and use taxes will not infer that the business must pay business activity taxes, such as the corporate franchise or income tax.

The legislature further finds that the Streamlined Sales Tax Project envisions two components to the legislation necessary to accomplish the Project's goals. First, states would adopt enabling legislation referred to as the Uniform Sales and Use Tax Administration Act ("Act"). The Act allows the State to enter into an agreement with one or more states to simplify and modernize sales and use tax administration in order to reduce the burden of tax compliance for all sellers and all types of commerce.

According to the Project, states would amend or modify their sales and use tax laws to achieve the simplifications and uniformity required by the participating states working together. The Project refers to this legislation as the Streamlined Sales and Use Tax Agreement ("Agreement"). Some states will require only minor changes to current law to implement the requirements of the Agreement. Other states with more complicated sales tax laws may require significant changes to current law to be in accord with the Agreement.

In Hawaii, the legislature finds that few amendments are needed to the State's existing general excise and use tax laws to comply with the requirements of the Agreement and Act. The legislature further finds that, with the amendments contained in this Act, Hawaii will have conformed in most respects to the seven key features described above. The legislature intends that passage of this Act meets the threshold requirements for Hawaii to petition for a certificate of compliance and membership under the Agreement.

A certificate of compliance would document each state's compliance with the provisions of the Agreement and cite applicable statutes, rules or regulations, or other authorities supporting such compliance. Public notice and comment will be provided before a state becomes part of the interstate Agreement. A state is in compliance with the Agreement if the effect of the state's laws, rules or regulations, and policies is substantially compliant with each of the requirements of the Agreement. If a state is found to be out of compliance with the Agreement, it will not be accepted into the interstate Agreement or will be sanctioned or expelled by the other participating states. In a voluntary system, sellers who are voluntarily collecting sales taxes for participating states may decide to no longer collect for the expelled state. Also, that state may not have a vote on changes in the Agreement.

Under the Agreement, a governing board will be comprised of representatives of each member state of the Agreement. Each member state is entitled to one vote on the governing board. The governing board is responsible for interpretations of the Agreement, amendments to the Agreement, and issue resolution. A State and Local Government Advisory Council and a Business and Taxpayer Advisory Council from the private sector will advise the governing board.

On November 12, 2002, thirty states and the District of Columbia approved the interstate Agreement provisions. As of April 2004, twenty states have moved forward and enacted all or part of the conforming legislation. It is anticipated that states that enacted the conforming legislation and are found to be in compliance with the Agreement will continue as the governing states of the interstate Agreement of the future."

SECTION 2. House Bill No. 1224, Senate Draft 1, Conference Draft 1 is amended by adding a new part to be designated as "Part II" to read as follows:

"PART II.

SECTION 9. This part aims to provide income tax relief for lower-income individuals by raising the Hawaii standard deduction to approximately one-half of the 2004 federal standard deduction over a three-year period.

SECTION 10. Section 235-2.4, Hawaii Revised Statutes, is amended by amending subsection (a) to read as follows:

"(a) Section 63 (with respect to taxable income defined) of the Internal Revenue Code shall be operative for the purposes of this chapter, except that the standard deduction amount in section 63(c) of the Internal Revenue Code shall instead mean:

(1) For taxable years before January 1, 2006:

[(1)] (A) $1,900 in the case of:

[(A)] (i) A joint return as provided by section 235-

93; or

[(B)] (ii) A surviving spouse (as defined in section

2(a) of the Internal Revenue Code);

[(2)] (B) $1,650 in the case of a head of household (as

defined in section 2(b) of the Internal Revenue

Code);

[(3)] (C) $1,500 in the case of an individual who is not married and who is not a surviving spouse or head of household; or

[(4)] (D) $950 in the case of a married individual filing a separate return.

(2) For any taxable year beginning after December 31, 2005 and before January 1, 2007:

(A) $3,000 in the case of:

(i) A joint return as provided by section 235-93; or

(ii) A surviving spouse (as defined in section 2(a) of the Internal Revenue Code);

(B) $2,300 in the case of a head of household (as defined in section 2(b) of the Internal Revenue Code);

(C) $1,500 in the case of an individual who is not married and who is not a surviving spouse or head of household; or

(D) $1,500 in the case of a married individual filing a separate return.

(3) For any taxable year beginning after December 31, 2006 and before January 1, 2008:

(A) $4,000 in the case of:

(i) A joint return as provided by section 235-93; or

(ii) A surviving spouse (as defined in section 2(a) of the Internal Revenue Code);

(B) $3,000 in the case of a head of household (as defined in section 2(b) of the Internal Revenue Code);

(C) $2,000 in the case of an individual who is not married and who is not a surviving spouse or head of household; or

(D) $2,000 in the case of a married individual filing a separate return.

(4) For any taxable year beginning after December 31, 2007 and before January 1, 2009:

(A) $5,000 in the case of:

(i) A joint return as provided by section 235-93; or

(ii) A surviving spouse (as defined in section 2(a) of the Internal Revenue Code);

(B) $3,650 in the case of a head of household (as defined in section 2(b) of the Internal Revenue Code);

(C) $2,500 in the case of an individual who is not married and who is not a surviving spouse or head of household; or

(D) $2,500 in the case of a married individual filing a separate return.

Section 63(c)(4) shall not be operative in this State. Section 63(c)(5) shall be operative, except that the limitation on basic standard deduction in the case of certain dependents shall be the greater of $500 or such individual's earned income. Section 63(f) shall not be operative in this State. The standard deduction amount for nonresidents shall be calculated pursuant to section 235-5."

SECTION 3. House Bill No. 1224, Senate Draft 1, Conference Draft 1 is amended by renumbering the subsequent sections and amending the original section 10 to read as follows:

"SECTION 11. Statutory material to be repealed is bracketed and stricken. New statutory material is underscored.

SECTION 12. This Act shall take effect upon its approval; provided that section 7 shall take effect on July 1, 2005 and Part II shall apply to taxable years beginning after December 31, 2005."