Thursday, January 12, 2012

2011 Year in Review: Your support of the Minnesota campaign for Internet Tax Freedom has paid off!

Your support of the Minnesota campaign for Internet Tax Freedom has paid off.

Starting in July 2010 or earlier, the Streamline Sales Tax organization (SSUTA) introduced the small seller exemption or small seller exception, which exempts both buyers and sellers from collecting tax for member states at various levels, including $500,000.

This is better than the proposed Minnesota Internet Tax Freedom Act level of $250,000.

Better still would be the level federal agencies define as the annual revenue of a small business, $10m. The $10m small seller level is supported by eBay. *


It is important to remember the various interests involved sharply contrast both each other and others in their group.

The interested parties include states that want revenue and small US e-commerce professionals.

Of the 50 revenue-seeking states, some like Texas and possibly Tennessee have foolishly counted on some imaginary revenue boon due to internet sales tax revenue to offset their lack of corporate or income tax.


Note also states rights are often defended not by the revenue-seeking states but by the e-commerce professionals or citizens like you and me.

For example states interested only in revenue might have no interest in preserving state-rights, common sense, constitutionally correct thinking reflected in the 1993 Quill decision because a federal law streamlining sales tax or dictating rates would not only ensure state revenue but share or scapegoat each state's political fallout for a decision to adopt new tax.


One of our accomplishments in highlighting tax freedom is that it is becoming less likely that every state will become a member of SSUTA, supported by the Retailers Association.

Of the 50 states, about 20 have not become member of the SSUTA.

This is important because the SSUTA is sometimes it's own worse enemy when it forgets or delays important legislative components like the small seller exemption.


2011 Tax Freedom bills


Highlights


Durbin finally joined Enzi bill

Enzi bill leaves option to not join. But does it allow SSUTA members to not collect sales tax? If not, MN should withdraw from SSUTA.

Womack may be strong on states rights but the rates are dictated and there are other issues


2011 Tax Freedom bills in order of preference


1)

HR 95 (eBay) http://www.govtrack.us/congress/bill.xpd?bill=hr112-95

Congressman Dan Lungren (R-CA), Congresswoman Zoe Lofgren (D-CA), and 30 cosponsors that reject new Internet tax burdens on small businesses with their bipartisan resolution, H.Res. 95.


2) Enzi SF Marketplace Act http://www.govtrack.us/congress/bill.xpd?bill=s112-1832

(introduced Nov 2011 - includes $500k small seller exception) (Amazon supported)

Durbin came around and finally co-sponsored this bill, lending bi-partisan support.

Downside: Contains streamlined streamline sales tax verbiage, which applies even to those 20 states not members of SSUTA. Starts us down path of standardized internet tax at a level too harmful to too many small businesses. The Small Seller Exemption may actually be a refund, not an exemption. It is uncertain whether SSUTA members can opt out, which is unfair since when most states joined the SSUTA, much of the current SSUTA policy did not exist.


3) Womack Marketplace Equity HR (introduced Oct 2011 - includes 100k default State Small Seller exception and $1m Federal Seller exception)

Complicated. Not good for states rights because it dictates rates.


4) Durbin SF Mainstreet Act (introduced July 2011; 1st to include small seller exception but did not include any detail or the exemption qualification level)



SSUTA 2010 and 5/19/11 amendments including $500k small seller exemption (really a refund?)

http://www.streamlinedsalestax.org/index.php?page=modules

http://www.streamlinedsalestax.org/uploads/downloads/Archive/SSUTA/SSUTA%20As%20Amended%2005-19-11.pdf page 93-94

Compiler’s note: This section was adopted on October 7, 2010 and became effective upon its adoption. 25

Compiler’s note: On December 13, 2010 this section was amended as follows: 26

A. For purposes of this section the term “small remote seller” shall mean a new remote seller which has gross 27 national remote sales of no more


than five million dollars ($5,000,000.00) as calculated pursuant to Section 610 of


this Agreement and shall include sellers which would be “new remote sellers” but for the fact that they had gross 1 national remote sales of less


than five hundred thousand dollars ($500,000.00) as calculated pursuant to Section 2 610 of this Agreement. 3

4

B. Member states shall begin paying compensation to a “new remote seller” upon submission of the seller’s initial 5 return filed after the effective


date of the member state’s authorization for compensation that meets the standards of 6 Section 608. Notwithstanding the rates of compensation


established by a member state pursuant to Section 608, 7 to a "small remote sellers” may elect to receive


twenty percent (20%) of the tax collected and due(except for the compensation amount to be 11 retained by the small remote seller) to a state in a


month not to exceed compensation of eighty-five dollars ($85.00) 12 in any month in lieu of compensation calculated using the rates of compensation


established by a member state 13 pursuant to Section 608. Such election shall be for a six month period beginning with the first month that such 14


seller collects a member state’s tax. After such six month period, the rates used to calculate compensation for such 15 sellers shall be those rates


established by the member state pursuant to Section 608.

20

The increased amount of 16 compensation allowed by this subsection shall be available to a “small remote seller” which begins collecting tax 17 for


a member state within the first 12 months following the date of the member state’s authorization for the 18 collection of taxes on remote sales. 19

A seller subsequently found not to meet the qualifications of a “new small

23 remote seller” may be denied and 21 assessed, including any applicable penalties and interest, for any compensation it was not qualified to


claim. 22

26

The provisions of this section shall apply to each state which is currently a full member of the Agreement and to 24 each state which becomes a full


member of the Agreement after the adoption of this section. 25

B. C. If a member state determines that a "remote seller” had previously been registered in that state, 27 compensation for that seller may be


delayed until the state is required to pay compensation for all “in-state sellers” 28 as set forth in subdivision 3 subsection D of this section

31 ” The remaining subsections were 29 renumbered. 30

Section 610: SMALL SELLER EXCEPTION



*We need to ask each states' revenue dept for statistical sales tax data from companies reporting <> $10m in total sales.

It is currently estimated that 75% of state revenue is from companies reporting <$10m in total sales but I'm not so sure it is that high or that each state is like that.

Monday, January 10, 2011

Minnesota Internet Tax freedom Act - MN-ITFA

Minnesota Internet Tax Freedom Act elements.

Identify in MN code 297A the individual engaged in ecommerce as an entity-exemption.
eCommerce is any transaction involving shopping cart technology as defined by the collection of ecommerce patents owned by Soverain.
Update 297A to reflect that all eCommerce transactions are subject to Use tax only, not Sales tax.

Exempt (up to $250,000 yearly) all Minnesota eCommerce transactions in 297A.

Enact a resolution directing creation of a Revenue Commission rule that raises the Use tax exemption from $770 to $250,000.

Enact a resolution directing creation of a Revenue Commission rule whereby no seller shall collect online sales tax from any buyer and that all MN ecommerce sales are subject to Use tax to be paid by buyer only as a Use tax.

MN buyers and sellers who engage in eCommerce over $250k will be exempt from filing any remittance based on the federal ITFA and cannot ever be required to remit retroactively for the years covered by the federal ITFA.

If the federal moratorium, whichexpires in 2014, is not extended, MN buyers who engage in eCommerce over $250k / year will submit a volition-based Use tax report and remittance and sellers will continue to exclude internet sales from their sales tax remittance.
____


Minnesota Internet Tax freedom Act - MN-ITFA
Volition-based sales tax remittance
Starting at $250k / year
Minnesota - A model for the nation
Jamie.Delton@gmail.com
651-224-6564
http://www.JamieforStateRep.com/

Sunday, October 31, 2010

Cost Detail for Tax Freedom and Internet Tax Freedom

Jamie for State Rep In 2008, the number of business locations that remitted greater than or equal to $17,500 in combined state Sales and Use tax was 29,939. Their total state Sales and Use Tax (Total Tax) was $4,362,074,123.

In 2008, the number of business locations that remitted less than $17,500 in combined state Sales and Use tax was 129,958. Their total state Sales and Use Tax (Total Tax) was $311,974,251.

$311,974,251 - small biz < $250k taxable
$2,000,000 - sales and use paper-filed (unregistered individuals)
523,932,500 - cost of big biz $17,500 exemption ($17500 * 29,939)

$837,906,751 total cost with all brick & mortar sectors included and big biz $17,500 exemption included.
$313,974,251 total cost with all brick & mortar sectors included and big biz $17,500 exemption excluded.

Now, of the $837 million above in potential government lost revenue after enacting Tax Freedom for all (up to $250k), representing 160,000 Minnesota companies, what percent is internet related? If the average Minnesota company gets a small portion of their revenue from online commerce, then the expected loss of revenue for Internet Tax Freedom will be as low as $60 million (7.16% of $837 million). Many Minnesota companies are not yet online (Menards is just one example). Enacting Internet Tax Freedom will cost little, and encourage all companies to be "computer literate" by helping them engage in online commerce based in Minnesota.
Enacting Internet Tax Freedom will increase the vitality of the Minnesota economy and improve Minnesota's livability by enabling grown children to better support their elderly relatives.

Tuesday, October 26, 2010

Stand for Freedom - Support The Minnesota Internet Tax Freedom Act

The Minnesota Internet Tax Freedom Act will attract online shoppers in the same way our clothes exemption attracts clothes buyers. The Minnesota Internet Tax Freedom Act relieves shoppers of submitting tax for online purchases from Minnesota companies. This is just one way it is a win-win situation for shoppers and businesses both - people from all over the entire country will be encouraged by Minnesota's tax freedom to buy homes in Minnesota and buy online from Minnesota companies once they're here.
Moreover Minnesota will not and has never had the inclination, under Republican Attorney General candidate Chris Barden or successive Democrat Attorney Generals (including Lori Swanson), to do what Texas is doing to Amazon in the link below. By removing the sales tax collection requirement and establishing the Minnesota Internet Tax Freedom Act, we attract businesses by relieving them of collecting tax from online Minnesota shoppers.
http://www.internetretailer.com/2010/10/25/amazoncom-gets-texas-sized-tax-bill
And finally the Minnesota Internet Tax Freedom Act is a gentle, welcome push for business and shoppers towards computer literacy.

Sunday, October 24, 2010

The Minnesota Internet Tax Freedom Act

The Minnesota Internet Tax Freedom Act

No online gambling operations are recognized under The Minnesota Internet Tax Freedom Act.
Pass legislation to define online sales and online commerce as transactions using patented shopping cart technology that, where taxable, is subject to Use tax only, not Sales tax. Define online shopper and online seller as entities involved in online sales.
Enact a single resolution or rule in the Revenue Department that says no seller shall collect online sales tax from an online shopper and that all online sales are subject to Use tax to be paid by online shopper only as a Use tax. This is the opposite of California law, where California businesses collect sales tax from everyone buying online from California businesses. This aspect of California burdens small-business.
Enact a single resolution or rule that raises the Use tax exemption from $770 to $250,000.
Identify in MN code 297A the individual online shopper as an entity-exemption up to $250,000.
Businesses registered to pay Sales tax will continue to submit sales tax in the conventional manner. There will be no credit issued by the Revenue department of any kind. Sales or Use tax collected online will no longer be collected.
Our elderly can stay here and the grown children can be here with them, because the children can earn a livelihood in the greatest state in the nation – Minnesota.

Need
I oppose the Streamlined Sales Tax (SST),Streamlined Sales and Use Tax Agreement (SSUTA), any Sales or Use Tax code upgrading, and all such streamline efforts and attention to government revenue streams that is supported by Democratic revenue stream hunters(Independent gubernatorial candidate Tom Horner, local pundit Andy Driscoll), government tax professionals, democrat social engineers ( the SSUTA governing board), and the National Retail Federation because much of the streamlining efforts violate the spirit if not the letter of the 1998 federal Internet Tax Freedom Act, which currently protects online commerce by forbidding all government from imposing multiple discriminatory taxes on online commerce.
A Minnesota Internet Tax Freedom Act would clarify what online commerce is and isn't.
Under a Minnesota Internet Tax Freedom Act, all e-commerce such as eBay selling and buying, is online commerce, qualifying for a sales and Use tax exemption for the Minnesota online buyer and seller.
A Minnesota Internet Tax Freedom Act will secure an optimistic outlook and competitive edge for all Minnesotans to enjoy.
Our elderly can stay here and the grown children can be here with them, because the children can earn a livelihood in the greatest state in the nation – Minnesota.
The federal Internet Tax Freedom Act expires in 2014 and until then online commerce can't be taxed.
California's very poor online sales tax freedom act:
http://www.techlawjournal.com/internet/80824citfa.htm

There is a big difference between the genuine federal Tax Freedom Act, which prohibits multiple and discriminatory tax on online commerce and internet access, and the limited narrow California bill.
Ann Lenczewski's redefinition of telecommunication service to potentially include online commerce
https://www.revisor.mn.gov/laws/?id=154&doctype=Chapter&type=0&year=2008

https://www.revisor.mn.gov/statutes/?id=297A.669&year=2010&keyword_type=all&keyword=Telecommunications+services

Helpful starter article:
http://www.jongingerich.com/?p=23

National Retail Federation
http://www.nrf.com/modules.php?name=Pages&sp_id=1389

On July 1, 2010, Representative Bill Delahunt, D-Mass., introduced H.R. 5660, the “Main Street Fairness Act,” 24 states ... conformance with the Streamlined Sales and Use Tax Agreement
Is your state affected?
http://www.streamlinedsalestax.org/index.php?page=state-info

http://www.streamlinedsalestax.org/index.php?page=minnesota

The state of Minnesota became a full member of Streamlined Sales Tax on October 1st, 2005
http://www.streamlinedsalestax.org/uploads/downloads/State%20Compliance/Minnesota/2010/Minnesota%20Taxability%20Matrix%202010.pdf

http://www.streamlinedsalestax.org/uploads/downloads/State%20Compliance/Minnesota/2010/Minnesosta%20Letter.pdf

Daniel Salomone, MN commissioner of Revenue petition to join
http://www.streamlinedsalestax.org/uploads/downloads/State%20Compliance/Minnesota/MN%20Petition.pdf

http://www.streamlinedsalestax.org/index.php?page=state-info

I have no financial interest in Tax Free e-Commerce that all Minnesotans cannot easily share in today.
I have no financial interest in any retailer, online or brick & Mortar, Soverain, Amazon, or any entity involved in the ongoing software patent litigation. I have no financial interest in tax-free e-Commerce except as an eBay hobbyist seller. Minnesota e-Commerce is a entrepreneurial activity that the Internet Tax Freedom Act encourages and holds up as an inspiration for others to further our culture.
It's clear Soverain is consistently collecting $2.5 million from anyone it chooses to "hit up" for infringement compensation. Because of this fact, government should not further burden e-retailers who must pay so much for the use of the shopping cart model in daily business.
Further, government should exclude related technologies that are even more broad, such as the hyperlink technology for which a patent has been issued.

Liberals, like Soverain, see e-retailers like Newegg as plump prey to be shaken down. Please elect me to thwart the liberals' worst instincts and preserve internet commerce as tax free with the Minnesota Internet Tax Freedom Act.

Amazon 1 Click wins
http://yro.slashdot.org/submission/724171/Amazon-Gives-Thanks-for-Joke-of-a-Patent-System

nice summary of who owns the shopping cart tech:
http://www.internetretailer.com/commentary/2010/07/30/mother-all-patent-battles

Cost
The Minnesota Internet Tax Freedom Act, applied to businesses as well as online shoppers, would cost $133.675 million, or 2.8% of all 2008 sales and use tax remittance ($4.674 billion business sales and use plus $2 million individual Use remittance).
The Act would require a cut to the regular cost-of-living biennium adjustment of just .4%. That's less than 1/2 of 1%.
http://taxes.state.mn.us/legal_policy/pages/research_reports_sales_use_2008_statistics.aspx

How many of the 160,000 registered businesses remit more than $17,500 in sales and use tax?
It's probably between 1,500 and 5,000. let's say it's 3,500. These 3,500 businesses account for perhaps 85% of all sales and use tax remittance.
The rest of the businesses average a very small remittance - let's just say $450.
So the cost of the small businesses' sales tax exemption is $70.425 million (450 x (160000-3500)). Plus the cost of the estimated 3500 big businesses' exemptions (utilities, phone companies, energy companies and so forth): 3500 x $17500 = $61.25 million. $61.25 million plus $70.425 million = $131.675 million.
Add in the almost negligible $2 million from voluntary paper-filed Use tax remittances from unregistered individuals and you get a total cost of $133.675 million. That's $133.675 million to transform Minnesota overnight into a national small business retail tax haven with the Minnesota Internet Tax Freedom Act.
$133.675 million in tax breaks to the hardest working people in Minnesota, many of whom are caring for an elderly relative or two (while easing the housing and personnel burden of the Human Services commissioner) and would not otherwise be able to if they did not have the means to earn a competitive livelihood online.

Sunday, October 17, 2010

I have no financial interest in Tax Free e-Commerce that all Minnesotans cannot easily share in today

I have no financial interest in any retailer, online or brick & Mortar, Soverain, Amazon, or any entity involved in the ongoing software patent litigation. I have no financial interest in tax-free e-Commerce except as an eBay hobbyist seller. Minnesota e-Commerce is a entrepreneurial activity that the Internet Tax Freedom Act encourages and holds up as an inspiration for others to further our culture.
It's clear Soverain is consistently collecting $2.5 million from anyone it chooses to "hit up" for infringement compensation. Because of this fact, government should not further burden e-retailers who must pay so much for the use of the shopping cart model in daily business.
Further, government should exclude related technologies that are even more broad, such as the hyperlink technology for which a patent has been issued.

Liberals, like Soverain, see e-retailers like Newegg as plump prey to be shaken down. Please elect me to thwart the liberals' worst instincts and preserve internet commerce as tax free with the Minnesota Internet Tax Freedom Act.

Amazon 1 Click wins
http://yro.slashdot.org/submission/724171/Amazon-Gives-Thanks-for-Joke-of-a-Patent-System

nice summary of who owns the shopping cart tech:
http://www.internetretailer.com/commentary/2010/07/30/mother-all-patent-battles

Below is a recent comment received in regard to the Minnesota Internet Tax Freedom Act.

blog said...

In your opening paragraph, you point out your opposition to an awful lot of organizations because their "streamlining efforts violate the spirit if not the letter of the 1998 federal Internet Tax Freedom Act."

This is a common misconception of the Internet Tax Freedom Act.

Please take a moment to review the 1998 ITFA, in particular § 1104 (2). It describes that no new and discriminatory tax shall be placed on electronic commerce that would not otherwise be due on similar transactions to purchase any property, goods, services, or information through other means.

Sales and use taxes were adopted by the state of Minnesota in 1967 – and since then sale tax has been due on all transactions in the state, unless the purchaser has a valid entity exemption, or the item itself is subject to an exemption.

Exemptions are not available based upon the forum of a particular transaction – as such a definition would be discriminatory and would amount to government favoritism over a particular marketplace.

The ITFA in no way creates any forum-specific exemption for e-commerce. Is this what you are suggesting will be the goal of your “Minnesota Internet Tax Freedom Act?” I would expect a few retail malls might also appreciate such favoritism. Of course, as long as you are handing out forum-specific tax exemptions, I would expect that a few independent retailers may also appreciate such treatment.

The State of Minnesota is projecting a $4 billion shortfall this year (FY 2011). Last year, Minnesota failed to collect at least $143 million. No matter how aggressively MN continues to cut spending, it will be very difficult to reduce the budget by 25%. The Main Street Fairness Act (HR 5660) will grant Minnesota the right to compel out of state merchants collect and remit local sales taxes.

With the budget crisis being endured by governments across the country, the best ideas will control spending and income in a measured and prudent manner. It is a matter if basic responsibility that Minnesota should collect the tax that is already due, before forcing citizens to endure escalating taxes or reduced services. The Main Street Fairness Act, and the efforts of the 44 states (including Minnesota) in the Streamlined effort over the last 10 years should not be so quickly dismissed as they do not represent a new tax, nor a discriminatory tax on the internet – simply a mechanism to allow states to collect sales taxes which are already due.

R. David L. Campbell
Chief Executive Officer
The Federal Tax Authority (FedTax.net)



I reponded:


In the SSTGB effort to standardize categories - http://www.streamlinedsalestax.org/uploads/downloads/State%20Compliance/Minnesota2010/Minnesota%20Certificate%20of%20Compliance%202010.pdf - great effort is made to exclude specific technologies but no effort is made to exclude or include the shopping cart and online auction technologies most commonly used for e-commerce. We need to address these technologies. Show me where in the SSTGB documents you address these technologies. Eventually organizations like fedtax.net would like to see shopping-cart technology, not currently taxed, dumped into a taxable category such as "telecommunications services". This is dead wrong. It is important we preserve the current tax-free state of this body of technology or the marketplace forum, whatever is current law (and with all due respect I'm not sure you are correct in saying no marketplace-forum-based exclusions exist in tax codes) for future generations. Once taxed, the technology or forum will never again be exempted because the argument that expected revenue is lost will be used.

Saturday, October 16, 2010

Hey Tom Horner: HANDS OFF our Minnesota Sales Tax!

Hey Tom Horner: HANDS OFF our Minnesota Sales Tax!
or
Minnesota Miracle Redux - Tax-free Online Commerce - A Win-Win for young and old together.

I oppose the Streamlined Sales Tax (SST),Streamlined Sales and Use Tax Agreement (SSUTA), any Sales or Use Tax code upgrading, and all such streamline efforts and attention to government revenue streams that is supported by Democratic revenue stream hunters(Independent gubernatorial candidate Tom Horner, local pundit Andy Driscoll), government tax professionals, democratic social engineers ( the SSUTA governing board), and the National Retail Federation because much of the streamlining efforts violate the spirit if not the letter of the 1998 federal Internet Tax Freedom Act, which currently protects online commerce by forbidding all government from imposing multiple discriminatory taxes on online commerce.

A Minnesota Internet Tax Freedom Act would clarify what online commerce is and isn't.
Under a Minnesota Internet Tax Freedom Act, all e-commerce such as eBay selling and buying, is online commerce, qualifying for a sales and Use tax exemption for the Minnesota online buyer and seller.

A Minnesota Internet Tax Freedom Act will secure an optimistic outlook and competitive edge for all Minnesotans to enjoy.
Our elderly can stay here and the grown children can be here with them, because the children can earn a livelihood in the greatest state in the nation – Minnesota.
It a Win Win situation which costs nothing.
Wait a minute Jamie - aren't we creating 2 Americas - those who buy and sell online tax-free and those who can't afford to and pay Minnesota tax?
Yes - and that's the dynamic that has existed since 1998. What I propose is we recognize the prosperity and hope this generates for the lower and middle class through financial and computer literacy and harness the dynamic for the benefit of Minnesota in the Minnesota Internet Tax Freedom Act - a national first.

There is no ambiguity as to whether Internet Sweepstakes operations will qualify. Under a Minnesota Internet Tax Freedom Act no online gambling operations will be permitted.

The federal Internet Tax Freedom Act expires in 2014 and until then online commerce can't be taxed. There is enough ambiguity as to whether we are taxing items including items involved in online commerce, in the streamlining efforts of Lenczewski after 1998 (when the federal Internet Tax Freedom Act first took effect) to call for a halt to her work.

California's very poor online sales tax freedom act:
http://www.techlawjournal.com/internet/80824citfa.htm

There is a big difference between the genuine federal Tax Freedom Act, which prohibits multiple and discriminatory tax on online commerce and internet access,
and the limited narrow California bill:

This bill would enact the "California Internet Tax Freedom Act" to prohibit, with specified exceptions, the imposition, assessment, or attempt to collect any of the following: a tax on Internet access, Online Computer Services, or the use of Internet access or any Online Computer Services; a bit or bandwidth tax; or any discriminatory tax on Online Computer Services or Internet access. The bill would make specified legislative findings and declarations in connection with that prohibition.

Ann Lenczewski's redefinition of telecommunication service to potentially include online commerce
https://www.revisor.mn.gov/laws/?id=154&doctype=Chapter&type=0&year=2008

https://www.revisor.mn.gov/statutes/?id=297A.669&year=2010&keyword_type=all&keyword=Telecommunications+services

Helpful starter article:
http://www.jongingerich.com/?p=23

national retail federation
http://www.nrf.com/modules.php?name=Pages&sp_id=1389

On July 1, 2010, Representative Bill Delahunt, D-Mass., introduced H.R. 5660, the “Main Street Fairness Act,” 24 states ... conformance with the Streamlined Sales and Use Tax Agreement

Is your state affected?
http://www.streamlinedsalestax.org/index.php?page=state-info

http://www.streamlinedsalestax.org/index.php?page=minnesota

The state of Minnesota became a full member of Streamlined Sales Tax on October 1st, 2005

http://www.streamlinedsalestax.org/uploads/downloads/State%20Compliance/Minnesota/2010/Minnesota%20Taxability%20Matrix%202010.pdf


http://www.streamlinedsalestax.org/uploads/downloads/State%20Compliance/Minnesota/2010/Minnesosta%20Letter.pdf

Daniel Salomone, MN commissioner of Revenue petition to join
http://www.streamlinedsalestax.org/uploads/downloads/State%20Compliance/Minnesota/MN%20Petition.pdf

http://www.streamlinedsalestax.org/index.php?page=state-info

update
The Minnesota Internet Tax Freedom Act applies to both residents and businesses!
update #2

We
Enact a single resolution or rule in the Revenue Department that says no seller shall collect online sales tax from a buyer and that all online sales are subject to Use tax to be paid by buyer only as a Use tax.
Enact a single resolution or rule that raises the Use tax exemption from $770 to $250,000.
Identify in MN code 297A the individual online shopper as an entity-exemption up to $250,000.
Exempt (up to $250,000) all Minnesota consumer-to-consumer and consumer-to-business transactions involving the patented shopping cart technology.
All transactions involving shopping cart technology are subject to Use tax only, not Sales tax.