Maryland Enters the World of Digital Tax

Charles Maniace
February 23, 2021

The Maryland Legislature overrode gubernatorial vetoes on two bills that substantially change how Maryland approaches digital tax. The Legislature adopted a novel rule that seeks to tax digital advertising services. Additionally, it expanded Maryland sales tax to include digital equivalents of tangible personal property.

The concept of taxing the revenue earned by companies operating in the digital economy, while relatively new, is not novel. Over the last year or two, taxes on digital advertising have been enacted in Austria, France, Italy, Hungary (temporarily suspended), Turkey, Spain, and the UK.

From a policy perspective, a general sentiment exists that tax systems fail in effectively capturing revenue earned in the digital economy. Companies earn profits by directing advertising at the eyeballs around the world but the countries where those eyeballs reside are unable to tax those profits. Politically, the perception (exacerbated by the COVID-19 pandemic) is that digital companies have earned substantial profit while not always acting in society’s best interest. Therefore, taxing them a little bit more is not a bad idea.

Maryland Breaks New Ground

While this idea was considered in a handful of state legislatures last year, Maryland is the first state to tax digital advertising services, which the law defines as:

advertisement services on a digital interface, including advertisements in the form of banner advertising, search engine advertising, interstitial advertising, and other comparable advertising services.

The tax would apply to revenue earned in Maryland from said advertising (derived based on an apportionment formula), with the applicable rate varying based on the provider’s global annual gross revenue.

Putting political and social concerns to one side, the question is whether this levy violates the US Permanent Internet Tax Freedom Act (PITFA). Fundamentally, the PITFA prevents state and local governments from enacting discriminatory taxes on internet commerce. Essentially, you cannot pose a tax on commerce conducted over the internet unless an identical levy is imposed when the commerce takes place by more traditional means.

Is the Law Constitutional?

The Maryland Attorney General suggests it is possible if you view the prohibition from the perspective of how digital advertising is sold. Basically, a tax on digital advertising is discriminatory if it is only charged when the buyer and the seller complete their transaction over the internet. When the tax is levied equally, regardless how the buyer and seller effectuate the sale (over the phone, in-person, over the internet), then it is constitutional.

However, if you view the prohibition from the type of good or service being sold, you reach a different result. The tax becomes discriminatory (and thereby unconstitutional) because Maryland does not impose a similar tax on the revenue earned from providing advertising transmitted to Maryland residents by traditional means (print, television, radio, etc.).

The Maryland AG added that since the PITFA intrudes on a matter generally left to state governments, the prohibition must be construed narrowly and will only stand if tied to a “clear and manifest purpose of Congress.” Under this heightened standard, the tax should stand unless it is completely clear that Congress intended to prohibit it.

What’s Next?

The bill makes the tax effective for all taxable years beginning after December 31, 2020. Under Maryland law, bills enacted pursuant to a veto override generally take effect 30 days after the override. In this case, the law becomes effective in mid-March. However, much is left to be determined. For example, the Maryland Comptroller must adopt regulations specifying how companies determine what constitutes advertising revenue earned in Maryland. The legislature is also expected to adopt a bill prohibiting companies from directly passing this tax on to consumers. Finally, a legal injunction could prevent any enforcement until the Constitutional question is settled by the courts.

In any event, the fate of the Maryland Digital Advertising tax will influence other states considering similar levies, including Connecticut, Indiana, Nebraska, New York, Oregon, South Dakota, and Washington. If the law survives legal scrutiny it could absolutely trigger a legislative avalanche.

In an upcoming blog, we will discuss Maryland’s concurrent decision to extend its sales tax to digital products – a move that is squarely less controversial and more likely to become effective in the very near term.

Sign up for Email Updates

Stay up to date with the latest tax and compliance updates that may impact your business.


Charles Maniace

Charles Maniace is Vice President – Regulatory Analysis & Design at Sovos, a leading global provider of software that safeguards businesses from the burden and risk of modern tax. An attorney by trade, Chuck leads a team of attorneys and tax professionals responsible for all the tax and regulatory content that keeps Sovos customers continually compliant. Over his 15 year career in tax and regulatory automation, he has provided analysis to the Wall Street Journal, NBC and more.
Share This Post

North America Tax Information Reporting
November 28, 2022
The Great Resignation to the ‘Great Confusion’ — What It Means for 1099s

The Great Resignation may technically be behind us, but the ripple effects are far from being complete. More than ever people are pursuing a side gig in addition to a job (full- or part-time). In some cases it’s out of economic necessity, while in others it can be for a lifestyle choice or based on […]

November 23, 2022
Fire Brigade Tax in Slovenia

Problems encountered with Fire Brigade Tax rate increase in Slovenia Slovenia’s Fire Brigade Tax (FBT) has changed. The rate increased from 5% to 9%. This came into effect on 1 October 2022. The first submission deadline followed on 15 November 2022. Unfortunately, the transition has been plagued by problems. We discuss some issues and how […]

E-Invoicing Compliance North America VAT & Fiscal Reporting
November 22, 2022
E-invoicing and Fiscal Digitization in Africa

African countries are following e-invoicing and continuous transaction control trends implemented rapidly by many countries around the globe. Each country in the continent is developing their variation of a tax digitization system. This means there is currently no standardisation with compliance requirements differing in each jurisdiction. A common transaction reporting feature among African countries is […]

North America ShipCompliant
November 17, 2022
How Can Direct-to-Consumer and Three-Tier Complement One Another?

Historically, the three-tier and direct-to-consumer (DtC) channels for beverage alcohol have operated independently, sometimes even viewing the other as competition. But in reality, there are many opportunities for a symbiotic relationship between these business units. For beverage alcohol producers that depend on both, a collaborative approach is imperative. DtC and three-tier—what’s the difference? First, some […]

E-Invoicing Compliance EMEA
November 16, 2022
Denmark E-Invoicing Requirements

New bookkeeping law – Lov om bogføring On 19 May 2022, the Danish Parliament passed a new bookkeeping law – Lov om bogføring – introducing requirements for companies to use a digital bookkeeping system. Section 16 of the Law requires many Danish companies to use a digital bookkeeping system and make their bookings electronically. The final […]