PlainBillCongress, translated.Legislation. Context. Public interest.Became Public Law No: 110-108.
Congressional Research Service
Version 49 · Public Law · Oct 31, 2007
(This measure has not been amended since it was passed by the Senate on October 25, 2007. The summary of that version is repeated here.)
Internet Tax Freedom Act Amendments Act of 2007 - Amends the Internet Tax Freedom Act to extend until November 1, 2014, the moratorium on state and local taxation of Internet access and electronic commerce (moratorium) and the exemption from such moratorium for states with previously enacted Internet tax laws (grandfathering provisions).
Redefines, effective November 1, 2003, "Internet access" to prevent certain states from claiming an expanded exemption under the Internet Tax Nondiscrimination Act from the moratorium. Delays the application of such redefinition until June 30, 2008, for a state or local tax on Internet access that is: (1) generally imposed and actually enforced on telecommunication services; or (2) the subject of litigation instituted in a state court prior to July 1, 2007.
Showing the opening paragraphs of the official summary.
Expands the term "Internet access" to include related communication services (e.g., emails and instant messaging). Redefines "telecommunications" to include unregulated non-utility telecommunications (e.g., cable services).
Provides for a specific exception to the moratorium for certain state business taxes enacted between June 20, 2005, and before November 1, 2007, that do not discriminate against providers of communication services, Internet access, or telecommunications.
Repeals the exception from the moratorium for taxing Voice over Internet Protocol (VoIP).
Renders inapplicable the grandfather provisions of the Internet Tax Freedom Act for states that repealed or nullified their tax laws on Internet access more than 24 months prior to the enactment of this Act.
Makes the amendments made by this Act effective November 1, 2007.
People & committees
Rep. Conyers, John, Jr. [D-MI-14] · D–MI
Legislative record
A procedural vote is different from passage. Passage in one chamber does not establish enactment. Explore the glossary.
Became Public Law No: 110-108.
Became Public Law No: 110-108.
Signed by President.
Signed by President.
Presented to President.
Presented to President.
Cleared for White House.
Motion to reconsider laid on the table Agreed to without objection.
On motion that the House suspend the rules and agree to the Senate amendment Agreed to by the Yeas and Nays (2/3 required): 402 - 0 (Roll No. 1014). (text as House agreed to Senate amendment: CR H12160-12161)
House roll call 1014 · Individual votesResolving differences -- House actions: On motion that the House suspend the rules and agree to the Senate amendment Agreed to by the Yeas and Nays (2/3 required): 402 - 0 (Roll No. 1014).(text as House agreed to Senate amendment: CR H12160-12161)
House roll call 1014 · Individual votesAt the conclusion of debate, the Yeas and Nays were demanded and ordered. Pursuant to the provisions of clause 8, rule XX, the chair announced that further proceedings on the motion would be postponed.
DEBATE - The House proceeded with forty minutes of debate on the motion to suspend the rules and agree to the Senate amendment to H.R. 3678.
Ms. Sanchez, Linda T. moved that the House suspend the rules agree to the Senate amendment. (consideration: CR H12160-12164, H12168-12169)
Message on Senate action sent to the House.
Passed Senate with an amendment by Unanimous Consent.
Passed/agreed to in Senate: Passed Senate with an amendment by Unanimous Consent.
Measure laid before Senate by unanimous consent. (consideration: CR S13429-13430)
Read the second time. Placed on Senate Legislative Calendar under General Orders. Calendar No. 429.
Received in the Senate. Read the first time. Placed on Senate Legislative Calendar under Read the First Time.
Motion to reconsider laid on the table Agreed to without objection.
On motion to suspend the rules and pass the bill, as amended Agreed to by the Yeas and Nays: (2/3 required): 405 - 2 (Roll no. 968). (text: CR H11567-11568)
House roll call 968 · Individual votesPassed/agreed to in House: On motion to suspend the rules and pass the bill, as amended Agreed to by the Yeas and Nays: (2/3 required): 405 - 2 (Roll no. 968).(text: CR H11567-11568)
House roll call 968 · Individual votesConsidered as unfinished business. (consideration: CR H11575-11576)
At the conclusion of debate, the Yeas and Nays were demanded and ordered. Pursuant to the provisions of clause 8, rule XX, the Chair announced that further proceedings on the motion would be postponed.
DEBATE - The House proceeded with forty minutes of debate on H.R. 3678.
Considered under suspension of the rules. (consideration: CR H11567-11573)
Mr. Watt moved to suspend the rules and pass the bill, as amended.
Placed on the Union Calendar, Calendar No. 230.
Reported (Amended) by the Committee on Judiciary. H. Rept. 110-372.
Reported (Amended) by the Committee on Judiciary. H. Rept. 110-372.
Ordered to be Reported (Amended) by the Yeas and Nays: 38 - 0.
Committee Consideration and Mark-up Session Held.
Referred to the House Committee on the Judiciary.
Sponsor introductory remarks on measure. (CR E2001)
Introduced in House
Introduced in House
Primary sources
Text links open the official source. We currently store references to these documents.
Source last updated: Apr 7, 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.3678 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.3678 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.3678 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.3678 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.