That old saw about politicians eventually getting around to taxing the air we breathe hasn't quite come true in Illinois — yet. First, Illinois Democrats have to figure out how to tax social media.
Judging by this first effort, we can relax because if Democrats in the Land of Lincoln don't understand what social media is and how to figure out how to tax it, our air is safe.
"A nearly $56 billion state spending plan is headed to Gov. JB Pritzker's desk after the Democratic-controlled Illinois legislature approved it in the early-morning hours of another overtime spring session," the Chicago Tribune's Dan Petrella noted last week. "The biggest source of new revenue is a new per-user tax on large social media companies."
Per user or per account? Some users have several accounts on the same platform. That's the first clue that the tech-ignorant Illinois Democrats don't know what they're doing.
This cockamamie tax scheme originated in the office of governor and future Democratic presidential candidate, J.B. Pritzker, and you can almost hear the Rotund One smacking his lips in anticipation of raising $200 million from deep-pocketed social media companies.
The plan has numerous problems, not least of which is that a similar tax passed by Chicago is tied up in court. A more serious problem, as pointed out by Straight Arrow News, is that "one of the elements that remains the most unclear is what exactly is being taxed? The language in the bill does not answer that question directly and is, frankly, confusing."
Confusion is the Democrats' natural state of being.
As passed, the budget plan imposes a tax on social media companies based on "the average number of monthly users of the platform located in the State of Illinois." Platforms with 100,000 to 500,000 "Illinois users" will have to pay $0.10 per user each month; platforms with 500,000 to 1 million "shall pay $40,000, plus $0.25 per month" per user; and platforms with over 1 million users will pay $165,000, plus $0.50 per user, each month on the number of users over 1 million. A provision adjusts the tax for inflation starting in 2028. Companies that fail or refuse to pay will be punished with a fee of "an amount equal to 100% of the unpaid fee and any penalties each month until the fee is paid."
"Let's begin here: what is a user?" asks Jared Walczak of the Tax Foundation. "Is a user a person or an account? If a person has multiple accounts on the same social media platform, does each account constitute a separate user, or is the person one user? To the extent that those accounts are not linked and social media companies lack identifying information on the owners of free accounts, what information, if any, may they use to associate multiple accounts with a single person?"
The bill is silent about consumers who have accounts on multiple platforms owned by the same company, such as Meta's Facebook, Instagram, Messenger, and WhatsApp.
"Indeed, is an account even required?" adds Walczak. "If someone reads a Reddit thread without an account, do they count as a user?"
Are we having fun yet, pointing our fingers at Illinois Democrats and laughing our a**es off?
Recommended: Why America Sucks at Soccer
The Democrats can't even define an "Illinois user." Is it "a person or account resident in the state, or if it counts anybody using a social media platform while physically present in the state—say, posting on TikTok while passing through the airport," asks J.D. Tuccille. "Is an Illinois resident still an Illinois user if posting on social media while out of state?"
The budget plan also has a sloppy definition of "social media platform," which it defines as "a website or internet medium that…permits a person to become a registered user, establish an account, or create a profile for the purpose of allowing users to create, share, and view user-generated content through that account or profile." That captures the big platforms—Facebook, LinkedIn, and the like—that we traditionally think of as social media. But it could also scoop up review sites, messaging services, email services, and publishing platforms.
"The federal Permanent Internet Tax Freedom Act prohibits discriminatory taxes on e-commerce," point out Bryce Hill and Ravi Mishra of the Illinois Policy Institute. "Opponents of the governor's plan would likely argue it violates that law, as it targets large online platforms without a comparable tax on offline media or communication services."
This is what happens when the Democrats' greed outruns their knowledge. Illinois, a one-party state much like California, doesn't have to sweat the small stuff like voters' anger or even legality. In the immortal words of Star Wars Chancellor Palpatine, when questioned about the Trade Federation's invasion of Naboo being legal, "I will make it legal."
Illinois Democrats always find new and inventive ways to separate coin from the purse of hardworking taxpayers.
Editor's Note: The Democrat Party has never been less popular as voters reject its globalist agenda.
Help us continue exposing Democrats' plans to lead America down a dangerous path. Join PJ Media VIP and use promo code FIGHT to receive 60% off your membership.
Join the conversation as a VIP Member