Considering the rancor associated with most any telecom policy debate over the last year, it's refreshing when an issue comes up that bridges this digital divide to garner support from players in multiple corners of the online arena.

The issue in question here is the Internet Tax Moratorium.

Instituted in '98, it's been renewed twice over the years and is set to expire yet again November 1st.

This post [1] by Larry Irving on the Internet Innovation Alliance blog sums up nicely the history of the moratorium while stating an eloquent case for extending it permanently.

This post [2] on the Google public policy blog details what the moratorium currently does.

Support for extending the moratorium cuts across some interesting lines, as evidenced by the supporter list [3] of a group called Don't Tax Our Web, which has come together to push this issue.

For example, Verizon, Google. Amazon, and AT&T are all listed as supporters.

Considering the debate we've seen between companies like these on other telecom-related matters which shall remain nameless, it's a relief to find an issue on which they can find common ground.

And I'm all for extending the moratorium. We need to do everything we can to continue encouraging the adoption of broadband access and the use of ecommerce, and adding taxes to these activities will undoubtedly slow this process.

Additionally, I couldn't be more supportive of the fact that Internet traffic is far too fluid to try and draw hard lines as to what constitutes interstate commerce and what doesn't, rendering most non-federal Internet legislation ineffective.

At the same time, I am somewhat wary of a permanent extension of the moratorium, which could effectively prohibit taxes on the Internet.

My hesitation on this subject stems from the fact that I can envision a likely future where the vast majority of commerce is conducted online.

For example, I recently discovered the wonders of ordering groceries online and having them delivered to my door. I can already get all of my entertainment needs satisfied through an online purveyor. I buy most of my books online. And so on…

Eventually, we might need to tax the Internet simply to maintain current levels of state and local government funding as more and more commerce leaks online.

In general, my sense is that it's rarely a good idea to cut off the opportunity for legislation to be pursued in the future, especially in an area as dynamic as the Internet, but I also understand the inefficiency of having to continuously rehash the same debate in order to renew the moratorium every few years.

Perhaps what we could pursue is a moratorium that renews automatically without requiring any debate. But then also include some mechanism for accepting and reviewing petitions to alter or end the moratorium, which could then be vetted prior to elevating the matter into a Congressional debate.

The qualifications on what constitutes a viable petition could include parameters like: can a local or state government agency prove that it has lost revenue by commerce moving online? Can this agency prove that a resident business is conducting commerce purely within a specific community or geographic area?

In this way we wouldn't be banning debate on the moratorium or potentially restricting our future flexibility to deal with a shifting marketplace while at the same time hopefully avoiding the need for Congress to make sense of this issue all over again every time it's set to expire.