Here's why it is important we support the Permanent Internet Tax Freedom Act of 2009

Here's why it is important we support the Permanent Internet Tax Freedom Act of 2009 (USl House HR 1560)

http://www.hawaiisenatemajority.com/2010/03/04/in-support-of-streamlined-sales-tax-proposal/

"In 2003, Hawaii became a participant in the national Streamlined Sales
Tax Project by enacting the Hawaii Simplified Sales and Use Tax
Administration Act (Act 173, Session Laws of Hawaii 2003). In 2009, the
State Legislature passed streamlined sales and use tax legislation by
wide margins (23-2 in the Senate, 42-7 in the House) but Governor Linda
Lingle vetoed the measure. Twenty-three states representing over thirty
percent of the nation’s population have already been certified as being
in compliance with the Streamlined Sales and Use Tax Agreement:
Arkansas, Indiana, Iowa, Kansas, Kentucky, Michigan, Minnesota,
Nebraska, Nevada, New Jersey, North Carolina, North Dakota, Ohio,
Oklahoma, Rhode Island, South Dakota, Tennessee, Utah, Vermont,
Washington, West Virginia and Wisconsin."

http://salestaxbuzz.org/2009/03/27/internet-sales-tax-cowgirls/
The well-established multistate Streamlined Sales Tax Project (“SSTP”)

http://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=327202
"Minnesota: Similar to Hawaii and New York, there’s the late January
introduction of a Minnesota bill (S.F. No. 282) to tax Internet sales.
Rep. Loren Solberg and Chair of the House Ways and Means Committee
proposed an expansion of the tax on Internet sales that currently
applies to sales of over $770 per year to include all Internet sales.
If this bill passes, it will go into effect June 30, 2009. But will
this one pass? Word on the Sales Tax Street is that Governor Pawlenty
just doesn’t like it very much . . . we’ll have to all wait and see"

http://www.house.leg.state.mn.us/hrd/bs/86/HF0401.html

HF0401 Status in House for Legislative Session 86
Bill Name: HF0401
Bill Text Companion: SF0282
Senate author Tom Bakk
Senate Search Revisor Number: 09-1384
House Authors Solberg ; Lenczewski

The socialist liberals accomplish two things: 1) they establish 33% of the states as having passed something related to an internet sales tax to make it look like widespread support and expectation exists.
2) They talk about existing Use laws such as section 297A.14, subdivision 4, which allows a personal use tax exemption for up to $770 in purchases per year, as if they were ever actually applied which they weren't, because of the 1998, 2001, 2004
and 2007 Internet Tax Freedom Acts (IFTA).
The Federal Internet Tax Freedom Act is set to expire in Nov 2011.
It is important H.R. 1560: Permanent Internet Tax Freedom Act of 2009
is passed to renew the Internet Tax Freedom Act permanently.

http://www.govtrack.us/congress/bill.xpd?bill=h111-1560&tab=summary

H.R. 1560
[Good !!]
Rep. Anna Eshoo [D-CA14]hide cosponsors
Cosponsors:
Geoff Davis [R-KY4]
Virginia Foxx [R-NC5]
Jane Harman [D-CA36]
Lynn Westmoreland [R-GA3]

[Bad !!]
HF0401 Status in House for Legislative Session 86
Bill Name: HF0401
Bill Text Companion: SF0282
Senate author Tom Bakk
Senate Search Revisor Number: 09-1384
House Authors Solberg ; Lenczewski

H.F. No. 401, as introduced - 86th Legislative Session (2009-2010)
Posted on Jan 28, 2009
1.1 A bill for an act
1.2 relating to taxation; sales and use; defining solicitor for nexus
purposes;
1.3amending Minnesota Statutes 2008, section 297A.66, by adding a subdivision.
1.4 BE IT ENACTED BY THE LEGISLATURE OF THE STATE OF MINNESOTA:
1.5 Section 1. Minnesota Statutes 2008, section 297A.66, is amended by adding a
1.6subdivision to read:
1.7 Subd. 4a. Solicitor. (a) "Solicitor," for purposes of
subdivision 1, paragraph (a),
1.8means a person, whether an independent contractor or other
representative, who directly
1.9 or indirectly solicits business for the retailer.
1.10(b) A retailer is presumed to have a solicitor in this state if it enters into an agreement
1.11with a resident under which the resident, for a commission or other consideration, directly
1.12or indirectly refers potential customers, whether by a link on an Internet Web site, or
1.13otherwise, to the seller. This paragraph only applies if the total gross receipts from
1.14sales to customers located in the state who were referred to the retailer by all residents
1.15with this type of agreement with the retailer is at least $10,000 in the 12-month period
1.16ending on the last day of the most recent calendar quarter before the calendar quarter in
1.17which the sale is made.
1.18(c) The presumption under paragraph (b) may be rebutted by proof
that the resident
1.19with whom the seller has an agreement did not engage in any solicitation in the state
1.20 on behalf of the retailer that would satisfy the nexus requirement of the United States
1.21 Constitution during the 12-month period in question. Nothing in this section shall be
1.22construed to narrow the scope of the terms affiliate, agent,
salesperson, canvasser, or other
1.23 representative for purposes of subdivision 1, paragraph (a).
2.1(d) For purposes of this paragraph, "resident" includes an
individual who is a
2.2 resident of this state, as defined in section 290.01, or a business
that owns tangible
2.3 personal property located in this state or has one or more employees
providing services
2.4 for it in this state.
2.5 EFFECTIVE DATE.This section is effective for sales and purchases
made after 2.6June 30, 2009.

Bill Summary
House Research Department
File Number: H.F. 401 Version: As introduced
Date: March 2, 2009
Authors: Solberg and Lenczewski
Subject: Defining “solicitor” for sales tax
nexus purposes

Analyst: Pat Dalton
"The bill defines a “solicitor” as a person who enters into a contract
to directly or indirectly refer potential customers to a business or
the Web site of the business. States that a business is presumed to
have a solicitor in this state, and therefore has a duty to collect the
state sales tax, if it has at least $10,000 annually of sales into
Minnesota based on referrals from residents of this state or businesses
with a physical presence in the state. Provides for a rebuttal of that
presumption. Effective beginning with sales made after June 30, 2009.
This law is based on a law recently enacted in the state of New York.
The law is aimed at establishing a duty to collect sales tax on
out-of-state Internet businesses, such as Amazon.com, that enter into
contracts with bloggers to put links from their sites to the company’s
website. The contracts often specify payment based on the number of
“referrals” or the amount of sales generated through these links.
Amazon challenged the New York law in a state court as violating the
interstate commerce clause. The New York court upheld that law. "

More caselaw (not part of MN analysis):
http://www.disco-tech.org/2007/01/strengthen_the_internet.php
http://money.howstuffworks.com/personal-finance/personal-income-taxes/internet-tax-freedom-act.htm/printable