On my last phone bill, I had charges from three different carriers, each listing a different Hawaii tax surcharge. AT&T's was "HI Tax Surcharge 3.30%." GTE Hawaiian Tel (Intl) Services' was "Hawaii gross receipts tax surcharge 2.80%." Sprint Hawaii's "State and Local Surcharge" reflected an amount that was 3/7th of the federal excise tax, or 3 percent. I called the state Department of Taxation and was told it has nothing to do with this and was referred to the Public Utilities Commission. The PUC said it has nothing to do with regulating long-distance rates. But someone there said a 1988 legislative act authorized the tax. Why is the tax not applied uniformly? Consumer protector
regulates phone taxesThere is method to the lack of uniformity. But "whether what is being passed on is proper and/or allowable is beyond the scope and jurisdiction of the (state) Tax Department," said spokeswoman June Yamamoto.
She said any concerns should be addressed to the state Office of Consumer Protection.
But Yamamoto was able to dig up information about this complicated subject. Act 324, passed in 1986, provided for a general excise tax on all long-distance carriers providing telecommunications service in Hawaii.
Subject to the tax is "that portion of gross income from telecommunications service which is originated or terminated in the state and (which) is charged to a telephone number, customer or account in the state," Yamamoto said. This is referred to as Hawaii-billed income.
However, "the Constitution and the laws of the United States prohibit the long-distance carrier's entire Hawaii-billed income to be included in the measure of the tax," she said. Administrative rules adopted in 1988 and amended in 1989 allowed the Tax Department to calculate an "industry apportionment factor" for each carrier. Based on the formula, each carrier's current general excise tax rate is 1.91 percent.
"It is the department's understanding that besides the general excise tax, other taxes and fees may be included in the 'Hawaii Tax Surcharge' amount that long-distance carriers are passing on to their customers," Yamamoto said. This may explain the different percentage amounts.
But she also noted that "the visible pass on of the general excise tax is not a statutory requirement but rather a contractual agreement between the buyer and seller. The general excise tax law does not limit the percentage, which can be visibly passed on to the consumer, but consumer protection laws do."
But if what is passed on is represented as a GET, it cannot exceed the actual GET a business pays on the gross income from that transaction, Yamamoto said.
Again, she said, any concerns about the percentage calculation or the visible pass on of the GET should be taken up with the state consumer protector.
To the Kaneohe Post Office. I've been collecting U.S. stamp issues since my Boy Scout days. I've read all the stamp collectors' complaints about the U.S. Postal Service, but there is an exception to be found. The Kaneohe staff is always smiling, helpful and more importantly, knowledgeable about new stamp issues. Although there is a philatelic window at the downtown post office, it is sometimes not opened, not always manned and often does not have the latest or current issues. -- Arlie Carson Mahalo
To the gentleman who kindly helped my husband when he fell at Kaimuki Shopping Center about 5:30 p.m. Feb. 10 and held him until the ambulance arrived, and to the nice lady who loaned us her cellular phone to call our doctor, and all the other wonderful people so willing to help. -- M. Saiki Mahalo
