PlainBillCongress, translated.Legislation. Context. Public interest.Ordered to be Reported (Amended) by Voice Vote.
Congressional Research Service
Version 00 · Introduced in House · Jul 23, 2003
Internet Tobacco Sales Enforcement Act - Amends the Jenkins Act to require each person who engages in an interstate sale of cigarettes or smokeless tobacco or in an interstate distribution of cigarettes or smokeless tobacco to comply with all the excise, sales, and use tax laws applicable to the sale or other transfer of cigarettes or smokeless tobacco in the State and place in which the cigarettes or smokeless tobacco are delivered.
Prohibits the cigarettes or smokeless tobacco from being delivered to the buyer unless in advance of the delivery the excise tax has been paid and any required stamps or other indicia that such tax has been paid are properly affixed or applied, with an exception.
Authorizes a State Attorney General to bring a civil action to obtain any appropriate relief, including money damages where appropriate, against any person who violates such prohibition or who knowingly assists or participates in such a violation. Expresses the sense of Congress that any State Attorney General who commences such a civil action should inform the U.S. Attorney General who should make information about the case publicly available. Authorizes civil penalties for violations. Eliminates the $1,000 criminal penalty limitation. Declares that the Act does not limit the remedies provided by State or Federal law with respect to alleged violations relating to a sale or distribution of cigarettes or smokeless tobacco in connection with an interstate sale or distribution of cigarettes or smokeless tobacco.
People & committees
Rep. Green, Mark [R-WI-8] · R–WI
Legislative record
A procedural vote is different from passage. Passage in one chamber does not establish enactment. Explore the glossary.
Ordered to be Reported (Amended) by Voice Vote.
Committee Consideration and Mark-up Session Held.
Forwarded by Subcommittee to Full Committee (Amended) by Voice Vote.
Subcommittee Consideration and Mark-up Session Held.
Referred to the Subcommittee on Courts, the Internet, and Intellectual Property.
Referred to the House Committee on the Judiciary.
Introduced in House
Introduced in House
Primary sources
Text links open the official source. We currently store references to these documents.
No related bills are listed in this snapshot. This does not establish whether the proposal has appeared in earlier Congresses.
Source last updated: Aug 18, 2025. Consult Congress.gov for the current record.
AI Conversation Starters
Choose a perspective, copy a prompt, and paste it into your preferred AI. Each prompt includes the bill version and available official source links, and asks for counterarguments as well as supporting evidence.
Analyze H.R.2824 as objectively as possible. Explain its main provisions, who would be affected, possible benefits and harms, implementation, exceptions, and uncertainties. Present the strongest arguments for and against it, and identify evidence needed to assess its public impact.
Examine H.R.2824 through a progressive lens, focusing on fairness, access, economic inequality, and effects on vulnerable communities. Explain potential benefits, costs, and unintended consequences. Consider the strongest counterarguments and distinguish stated goals from demonstrated outcomes.
Examine H.R.2824 through a conservative lens, focusing on fiscal responsibility, institutional stability, federalism, and the scope of government. Explain potential benefits, costs, and unintended consequences. Consider the strongest counterarguments and any provisions that challenge this perspective.
Examine H.R.2824 through a civil-liberties and limited-government lens. Consider individual rights, privacy, voluntary choice, accountability, and government power. Explain tradeoffs, possible safeguards, and the strongest counterarguments without assuming the proposal is beneficial or harmful.