Margin Between Keeping, Removing PITFA From Customs Bill Down to 'Handful of Votes'
Senators involved in the debate over whether to keep the Permanent Internet Tax Freedom Act (PITFA) language in the Trade Facilitation and Trade Enforcement Act (HR-644) remained tight-lipped Thursday about the state of support for and against keeping the language. Meanwhile, some who support passage of PITFA as part of HR-644 told us they believe the margin between the number of senators who would support sustaining or overturning an attempt to remove the PITFA language from HR-644 is very tight. PITFA supporters have been lobbying in recent weeks to ensure they get at least 60 senators to vote to overturn an expected challenge by Sen. Lamar Alexander, R-Tenn., and Senate Democratic Whip Dick Durbin, D-Ill. Alexander and Durbin are expected to seek a point of order ruling that an ITFA extension is outside the scope of HR-644 (see 1601130071).
Sign up for a free preview to unlock the rest of this article
Timely, relevant coverage of court proceedings and agency rulings involving tariffs, classification, valuation, origin and antidumping and countervailing duties. Each day, Trade Law Daily subscribers receive a daily headline email, in-depth PDF edition and access to all relevant documents via our trade law source document library and website.
“I hope we can do something soon [with HR-644], maybe next week,” said Senate GOP Whip John Cornyn, R-Texas, to reporters Thursday. Stakeholders on Capitol Hill Thursday to brief reporters and rally support for keeping PITFA in HR-644 said they still expect the Senate to take up the bill before the Presidents Day recess begins Feb. 13 as previously indicated (see 1601280049). Several told us they believe Wednesday is the likeliest date for invoking cloture on HR-644 if negotiations continue to progress.
Durbin and Sen. Ron Wyden, D-Ore., who co-wrote the Senate PITFA equivalent Internet Tax Freedom Forever Act (S-431) and led the charge to include that bill's language in HR-644, revealed little Thursday about PITFA's current status. Alexander and Durbin “are still talking to members about their votes on cloture” for HR-644, Durbin told reporters. “We expect to move [HR-644] forward,” Wyden said in an interview. “What we are trying to do now is address concerns members have on other issues.” Alexander and Durbin are pushing to remove PITFA from HR-644 and instead renew their push to have PITFA considered in combination with the controversial Marketplace Fairness Act (S-698), which would let states tax remote sellers that have annual revenue exceeding $1 million.
Senate supporters of overturning an attempt to remove PITFA from HR-644 are believed to outnumber supporters of sustaining Alexander and Durbin's planned challenge, but the margin “is tight,” said National Taxpayers Union President Pete Sepp in an interview. “It's somewhere north of 50, but it's going to come down to a handful of votes.” R Street Institute Executive Director Andrew Moylan told us he's “cautiously optimistic even though there's obviously an ongoing effort to strip” PITFA from HR-644. “But, we know what the vote looked like on the House side [for PITFA (HR-235)]. This has passed twice in the last several years on a voice vote so there's been no significant objection to speak of” in the House, Moylan said. “I don't think there's any question that the Senate could easily support this measure on its own but the question is how many people are going to succumb to the temptation to torpedo” passing PITFA as part of HR-644 “in favor of some ploy to carry along a much more controversial” S-698.
Many factors are complicating the current state of play on PITFA as part of HR-644, including whether some of S-698's current co-sponsors would vote to keep PITFA in HR-644 despite wanting further Senate consideration of S-698, Sepp said. Other senators may concentrate on HR-644's underlying text and “may say that if there's any chance that this debate could derail passage of the underlying bill, 'don't do it,'” Sepp said. “I don't think anybody has a solid whip count” on support for keeping PITFA in HR-644 because “nobody knows exactly what the tactics are on the Democratic leadership side along with the few Republicans who are” supporting Alexander's involvement in the PITFA challenge, Moylan said.