Minnesota Republicans skeptical of DFL's proposed new tax on social media
WASHINGTON, DC - JANUARY 20: Facebook CEO Mark Zuckerberg arrives for the inauguration of U.S. President-elect Donald Trump in the U.S. Capitol Rotunda on January 20, 2025 in Washington, DC. Donald Trump takes office for his second term as the 47th President of the United States. (Photo by Kenny Holston-Pool/Getty Images)
Republicans in the Minnesota Senate and House on Wednesday were unconvinced by Democrats' proposal to implement a first-in-the-nation tax on social media companies that collect data on Minnesotans, arguing the costs of the comparatively small tax on the nation's largest corporations that earn billions annually would eventually trickle down to middle-class Minnesotans.
The bill, chief authored by Senate Taxes Committee Chair Sen. Ann Rest, DFL-New Hope, would impose an excise tax on social media companies based on the number of monthly active Minnesota consumers from whom the company collects data.
Minnesota is facing a looming multi-billion dollar budget deficit, and lawmakers are working to cut spending and generate new revenue to offset the imbalance — the new tax on social media is among the ideas.
Under the bill (SF 3197), the largest social media companies — those that have over 1 million Minnesota consumers — would be taxed $165,000 per month, plus 50 cents times the number of consumers over 1 million.
The Department of Revenue estimates the tax would apply to 14 social media companies. The tax would begin in January 2026 and would generate around $46 million in the first fiscal year, $92 million in the second and about $100 million annually after that.
Meta, the parent company of Facebook, reported $62 billion in profit in 2024, on $164 billion in revenue.
Republicans on the Senate Taxes Committee said the new tax would hurt Minnesota businesses. Local businesses advertise on social media, and platforms like Facebook and Instagram would pass on the cost of the tax onto Minnesota businesses, said Sen. Bill Weber, R-Luverne.
'Quite frankly, if you don't believe that the cost of their advertising is going to go up as a result of a new tax, I think you're kidding yourself. It is going to be a cost to Minnesotans at the end of the day,' Weber said.
Rest on Wednesday acknowledged that the bill will likely lead to litigation, as companies could interpret the legislation to be in violation of the Internet Tax Freedom Act, which prohibits state and local governments from imposing taxes directly on internet access or online activity.
University of California Davis School of Law Professor Darien Shanske, who studies digital taxation, testified that Minnesota would have a strong case.
'It would be inappropriate for legislatures to give up on sound tax policy in the face of novel legal arguments that will ultimately be defeated,' Shanske told the Senate Taxes Committee Wednesday. Courts have generally ruled in states' favor in disputes over revenue generators, he said.
Even as social media companies make hundreds of billions of profit, social scientists are sounding the alarm on the widespread use of the apps, especially by young people.
Democrats on the Senate Taxes Committee framed the tax as one worth fighting for, resembling sin taxes on tobacco and alcohol.
Sen. Grant Hauschild, DFL-Hermantown, compared the social media tax to state taxes on mining. When you mine the earth, Hauschild said, companies pay taxes so people in the area can benefit from social services funded by mining taxes. The same should be done for social media, he argued.
'These are leeches on our society. Leeches that we have come to accept, but they are leeches nonetheless,' Hauschild said of the billionaires who run social media companies. 'There's no reason that we shouldn't, as Minnesotans, decide to fight the fight, take the legal recourse and try to tax these people who are benefiting most from us.'
Versions of the bill were heard in both the Senate and House on Wednesday, and both were laid over for possible inclusion in a tax omnibus bill at a later date.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
The Hill
40 minutes ago
- The Hill
Trump touts ‘great unity' in GOP after Iran strikes, pushes to get ‘big, beautiful' bill done
President Trump touted the 'great unity' among Republicans following the U.S. strikes on Iranian nuclear facilities, as he called on the party to focus on getting his agenda bill through to his desk. 'Great unity in the Republican Party, perhaps unity like we have never seen before,' Trump said in a post on Truth Social on Sunday. 'Now let's get the Great, Big, Beautiful Bill done. Our Country is doing GREAT. MAGA!' he added. The president's remarks come after he announced Saturday evening that U.S. forces bombed three Iranian nuclear sites and said to Iran in a social media post, 'NOW IS THE TIME FOR PEACE!' The bombs targeted three nuclear sites in Natanz, Esfahan and Fordow, located inside a mountain. Six 'bunker buster' bombs were reportedly dropped on Fordow, while more than two dozen Tomahawk missiles were launched at the other two sites. The bombings put the U.S. directly in Iran's crosshairs for retaliation and made it an active participant in the Mideastern war, which Israel launched with airstrikes against Iran on June 13. Ahead of the strikes, news outlets had focused on the so-called 'civil war' in the GOP, between the pro-Israel foreign policy hawks and supporters who identified more with the 'America-First' agenda. Members of both groups had been publicly lobbying the president in opposite directions as he considered taking military actions against Iran. While some anti-interventionist Republicans—including Rep. Thomas Massie (R-Ky.)—still publicly criticized the strikes, most of the GOP expressed support following the announcement. The news also comes as the Senate enters a pivotal week for the president's massive agenda bill, which Republican leaders in Congress still say they hope to get done by July 4.
USA Today
44 minutes ago
- USA Today
Trump was right to bomb Iran. Even Democrats will be safer because of it.
The fact that progressives can't give President Trump this win − a win that will give us a safer world − is yet another indicator of why the Democratic Party continues to devolve into irrelevance. While the Middle East slept early on June 22, the Islamic Republic of Iran discovered that the Trump administration's diplomatic efforts have an end date. With a planned and precise show of controlled force, the U.S. military "obliterated" three of Iran's major nuclear sites. In a June 22 news conference, Secretary of Defense Pete Hegseth and Air Force Gen. Dan Caine, chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, dispelled any notion that the strike on Iran was ad hoc or done to goad Iran into a full-blown war with the United States. "The order we received from our commander in chief was focused, it was powerful and it was clear," Hegseth said. "We devastated the Iranian nuclear program." That is good news for the United States and its allies. The fact that progressives can't give President Donald Trump this win − a win that will give us a safer, more stable world − is yet another indicator of why the Democratic Party continues to devolve into irrelevance. With 'Operation Midnight Hammer,' Trump sent Iran a message Trump is already receiving extraordinary criticism for this attack on Iran. Democrats like Rep. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez of New York have called for his impeachment because Trump, like other presidents before him, launched the attack without congressional approval. Virginia Sen. Tim Kaine said Trump's decision displayed "horrible judgment." Yet, there is ample precedent of presidents, including Joe Biden, Barack Obama and Bill Clinton, ordering targeted military strikes without prior congressional approval under the War Powers Act. Did Congress approve Iran bombing? AOC howls about impeaching Trump. But president had the authority to bomb Iran. | Opinion Reactionary and partisan criticism from the left detracts from the success of this mission, which anyone, regardless of party affiliation, should appreciate. It appears that Operation Midnight Hammer was an incredible show of the U.S. military's strength and precision. "The scope and scale of what occurred last night would take the breath away of almost any American if you had an opportunity to watch it in real time," Hegseth said June 22 at the Pentagon. He noted that America's B-2 Spirit stealth bombers "went in and out ... without the world knowing at all. In that way it was historic." Iran's nuclear capabilities were a threat Concerns about retaliation from Iran are serious, of course, and U.S. forces are braced for it. But the threat of Iran, a country that has long bankrolled terrorism in the Middle East and around the world, building nuclear weapons shouldn't be minimized. That fact has nothing do with political ideology or partisan politics. Hegseth reminded reporters the morning after the attack that Trump was "fully committed to the peace process" and gave Iran "plenty of time to continue to come to the table and give up enrichment" of nuclear materials. Iran has a long history of attacking Americans, including holding more than 50 U.S. Embassy workers hostage in 1979 for more than a year. It's accused of bankrolling the 1983 bombing of the Marine Corps barracks in Beirut, Lebanon, that killed 241 American service members. Now, the Iranian regime has orchestrated attacks against American interests and allies through its terrorist proxies. Opinion: Trump must back Israel against Iran. 'Kooky' Carlson is wrong about nuclear threat. Despite these facts, it seems that liberals hate Trump so much that they are loathe to acknowledge that this president has now done what other presidents have done − act boldly to protect our nation and its citizens. Trump is a different president in many ways than any who have come before him. But like other presidents, he has shown he will do what is needed to protect America and our allies and to secure long-term peace. For that, all Americans should be thankful. Nicole Russell is an opinion columnist with USA TODAY. She lives in Texas with her four kids. Sign up for her newsletter, The Right Track, and get it delivered to your inbox.
Miami Herald
44 minutes ago
- Miami Herald
Toyota makes a tariff move customers are going to hate
While President Donald Trump's social media posts make it seem as though his tariff moves are executed at his whim, it is clear that at least some industries have a seat at the negotiating table. The auto industry's top executiveshave said they are in close contact with the White House and have even praised the president and his White House team for hearing their concerns. However, it is also clear that Trump's interest in protecting the auto industry's bottom line is minimal. Related: General Motors makes $4 billion tariff move Ford, Stellantis, and General Motors - America's Big 3 automakers - have all said that Trump's tariffs will cost them billions, and they've pulled their guidance due to a lack of visibility. Trump has made it clear to every industry that he doesn't want prices to increase, even going as far as telling companies like Walmart to just "EAT THE TARIFFS." So, every time the auto industry has been observed raising prices in recent months, it has denied that it has anything to do with tariffs. Others, like Mazda, have indeed eaten the tariffs, with the Japanese automaker sending a letter to its U.S. dealers informing them that it would not raise its sticker prices or tack on import fees for any vehicles already on dealership lots or that will come into the country before May 1. Toyota is the latest Japanese automaker to make a pricing move, but it isn't blaming the move on tariffs. Toyota sold over 2.3 million vehicles in the U.S. last year, a 3.7% year-over-year increase. Between April 2024 and March 2025, the company built 1.96 million units in the U.S., according to Statista. So, despite a U.S. production capacity that can handle nearly 2 million vehicles a year, Toyota still ships in nearly half a million vehicles from overseas to sell in the U.S. On June 21, Toyota said that prices for several Toyota and Lexus brand vehicles will rise by an average of $270 and $208, respectively, starting in July, according to an email seen by Bloomberg. While the price increase could be seen as a response to the 25% duties Trump has placed on auto imports, Toyota insists that the move is just part of its regular price review process. Related: Jeep parent Stellantis ponders drastic action on struggling brand In April, fellow Japanese automaker Mitsubishi said it would hold its vehicles in port for the foreseeable future instead of offloading them and being forced to pay duties. "We have sufficient stock on the ground at dealers for the moment to not impact customer choice," the company said at the time. While it was unclear how much cargo was in the ports, Mitsubishi's 330 U.S. dealers sold 109,843 vehicles in the U.S. in 2024, a 25.8% year-over-year increase and the brand's best performance since 2019. Earlier this month, the company announced that it is raising prices on three models, also saying that the move was just a regular adjustment and not a reaction to tariffs. Japanese car companies aren't the only ones afraid to pin their price increases on tariffs. In May, Ford sent a notice to dealers saying it planned to raise prices on the Mustang Mach-E electric SUV, Maverick pickup truck, and Bronco Sport SUV by as much as $2,000 on some models. Those vehicles are made in Mexico. More Automotive news Detroit Big 3 benefit from auto tariffs now, but time is running outPopular Ford newcomer overtakes Jeep in a key areaToyota makes surprising move to beat Tesla in key market A Ford spokesperson confirmed that the price increases will be seen on vehicles built after May 2. Those vehicles will start arriving on dealer lots in late June. The company emphasized that its employee pricing promotion remains for all of its vehicles through the July 4 weekend. Just like Mazda and Toyota before it, the company says the increase was due to its usual midyear pricing actions, but it was also "combined with some tariffs we are facing. We have not passed on the full cost of tariffs to our customers." Related: Car buyers, dealers are both shocked by latest price trends The Arena Media Brands, LLC THESTREET is a registered trademark of TheStreet, Inc.
