Court rules federal excise tax on cell phones illegal

The federal government owes wireless phone subscribers about $9 billion in tax refunds for the 3% federal excise tax charged on their bills, which was ruled illegal by a federal court today; however, the paperwork is likely to put off most people from filing for the refund, according to USA TODAY.

All told, three federal appeals courts have ruled that the federal excise tax, which began as a levy to fund the Spanish-American war, could not apply to telephone calls which were charged only by time, and not by distance.

The Bush administration has not decided whether to appeal the rulings, and in the meantime, the government can continue collecting the tax.

On Friday, a court in Washington, D.C., became the third federal appeals court since May to void the tax. Two other federal appeals courts, covering seven states, have ruled the tax unlawful, and cases are pending elsewhere in the nation’s 13 appeals courts. In all, nine federal courts have ruled that a 3% federal tax doesn’t apply to phone calls that are priced only by how long a person talks — not by how far the call travels.

That means cellular phones, Internet phone service and about one-third of long distance calls would be exempt from the tax. The wireless industry estimates that consumers would save about $4.5 billion a year. Taxpayers also would be due three years of refunds — about $9 billion.

The cellphone industry wants the tax removed immediately from bills and the money refunded. “Our customers shouldn’t be paying a tax that courts have repeatedly found illegal,” says Steve Largent, president of CTIA-The Wireless Association and a former Republican congressman. . . .

“It sounds absurd, but the law is written so that the government can keep collecting a tax even though it’s been ruled unlawful,” says Hank Levine, a lawyer representing businesses that challenged the tax. Federal law makes it nearly impossible to get an injunction to stop the government from collecting a tax, he says.

The average consumer would be entitled to a refund about the size of the average $49.52 monthly bill paid by the USA’s 195 million wireless subscribers. However, consumers would be required to seek refunds individually, documenting how much they paid each quarter in separate claims.

The time limit for refunds is three years. A person entitled to a $50 refund would have to fill out forms a dozen times to get the three years’ worth of refunds permitted under tax law. Collecting records and preparing the form would take about seven hours. — USA TODAY

Because the tax can only be legally applied to calls which are charged by distance, it cannot apply to most wireless, VoIP and long distance plans, which offer unlimited U.S. calling. It still applies to international calls, though.

It’s about damned time. In the meantime, until the IRS actually decides to abide by the decisions of the courts, to stop the tax collection, you can file a tax protester form with your wireless or VoIP provider.

25 Responses to Court rules federal excise tax on cell phones illegal


2 Trackbacks & Pingbacks »»

  1. Pingback by Hammer of Truth » FCC Wants to Tax ‘Net Phones | 2006/06/26 at 16:27:59
  2. Pingback by synaesthesia » Blog Archive » 2006 IRS telephone excise tax refund | 2007/04/04 at 08:40:51

23 Comments

  1. Comment by Matt | 2005/12/17 at 15:47:14

    Anyone know where we can go to get the paperwork for this refund?

  2. Oh, sorry! To claim your refund you need to fill out IRS Form 8849 (PDF) and Schedule 6 (PDF). You have to fill out a separate Form 8849 and Schedule 6 for each quarter, and you can only go three years back.

  3. Comment by Kevin Fields | 2005/12/19 at 06:29:27

    I don’t care if it only gets me a penny back. I think we should do this for the principle of the matter.

  4. Comment by Rachel DiZoglio | 2005/12/24 at 10:38:05

    I have to agree with Kevin, the amount I would get back is irrelevant; it is the principle of the matter here. We are taxed enough, why should they be allowed to tax us on something that has been ruled illegal. I for one will be taking the time to fill out whatever forms I must regarding this matter.

  5. Comment by Cindy Snow | 2006/01/14 at 08:36:08

    I’m filling out my federal forms even for a little refund.
    Does anyone know if any taxes on ATT land line phone bills are refundable?
    I’m retired and can use any refunds I can get.

  6. Cindy, I don’t think they are refundable on landlines, but you can lodge a protest about the federal excise tax with AT&T and they should remove it from your bill going forward.

  7. Comment by M. Raunig | 2006/01/18 at 17:34:13

    Which jurisdictions have made this ruling so far (or which have not?)?

  8. Comment by Vicki Stewart | 2006/01/25 at 14:39:02

    how do I apply for this refund????????????

  9. Comment by Lisa | 2006/01/31 at 13:22:11

    How do we apply for a refund?

  10. Comment by Helen | 2006/02/08 at 12:15:47

    Comment No. 2 above explained the forms you need. Actually, the court cases were specifically addressing land line situations. If you have long distance service that is billed only according to the length of the call, but not according to the distance of the call, you can file for a refund. (Calls could be charged at different rates if to different countries.) Radio Shack recently filed a class action in the federal claims court.

  11. Comment by casey | 2006/02/15 at 10:58:32

    Does this refund only apply to certain states?

  12. Comment by Carolyn | 2006/02/22 at 10:36:33

    Are all states exempt for the federal excise tax? If not can you tell me if Missouri is exempt?

  13. Comment by Gwen King | 2006/03/06 at 08:55:53

    How do I get the forms to apply for a refund? I don’t care how many pages or how much time.

  14. You download the forms from the links I already provided!

  15. Comment by Gary Tatro | 2006/03/19 at 11:10:29

    Does anyone know the dates and other relevant information on these court decisions?

  16. The information on these court decisions relevant to MOST people is already posted above. If you’re looking for case citations, etc., go to LexisNexis.

  17. Comment by Anonymous | 2006/06/10 at 22:36:35

    Um.. this hasn’t been updated in over a year. Two questions:

    1. Can one still be retroactively refunded via the above forms?
    2. Is it me or does this excise tax still exist on my Cingular bill?

    I thought it was ruled “illegal” as of a certain date, but I could swear I just paid it. If it is “illegal”, let’s say as of January 2005, how are they still charging it?

    Thanks,

    Anonymous in NJ

  18. Comment by Charlotte | 2006/09/08 at 18:57:57

    How do you get copies of the bills 3 yrs back to see how much excise tax you where charged.

  19. Comment by Cathy | 2007/01/11 at 22:28:18

    If you want copies of your bills, you would need to ask your cell company, and they will probably charge you more than the tax refund amt. I saved my old Verizon bills and I have a new question. Verizon doesn’t list anything anywhere on the bill as FET — but there is an item that is labeled as Federal Tax. Can anyone confirm that this Federal Tax is actually the FET?

  20. Comment by TIM | 2007/02/16 at 15:41:02

    I SENT THIS TO ATT TODAY ABOUT FET—- FOR THE Federal excise tax—Why isn’t Cingular offering on line billing statements from 2003 also like ATT. I think it’s a ripe off for Cingular to charge $5.00 as for each paper bills since they only have 12months of bills on line. I would like to ask the CEO of ATT this.

  21. Comment by Sandra | 2007/03/24 at 02:19:28

    I AGREE WITH TIM. All phone companies, including Cingular should provide FREE billing statements from 2003 to the present. Instead of paper statements, they should at the very least be forced to supply online statements!

  22. I think the government should fill this bs out of figure it out themselves how much everyone gets back they’re the ones who screwed up.

  23. Can you imaging anyone else but the goverment being found guilty on something, but abeing llowed to continue with crime. Whether you agree with the desicion is irelevant, it is the principle that is the point.
    If it is illegal, it is illegal. just as anything else that applies to the law.
    If there were any group of individuals that should apply the law it is the administration that promotes it.
    Astonishing!

Bad Behavior has blocked 582 access attempts in the last 7 days.