The sales tax loophole enjoyed by purchases from Internet vendors has been a topic for debate for more than a decade.

It's an issue of fairness and state finances. Regular stores, not virtual ones, should not be at a competitive disadvantage to Internet-based competitors, and states and municipalities should not be shortchanged on tax revenue because some people shift some of their shopping to the Internet.

The tax loophole debate began a decade ago, and supporters said then that taxing Internet sales would harm an "infant" industry. The Internet and e-commerce are no longer infants. Internet retailers should stand on their own, without an artificial tax advantage.

Given the painful budget shortfalls facing many states and cities, the Internet sales tax loophole is again being targeted. U.S. Rep. Bill Delahunt, D-Mass., introduced a bill last week that would change the rules regarding Internet sales and catalog orders so that sales tax would no longer be avoided.

The National Conference of State Legislatures supports Delahunt's proposal, saying that an extra $23 billion would come into state treasuries if the loophole ended.

The retail community is split. The national association including Wal-Mart, Target, Costco and Home Depot supports the proposed changes. Internet-based retailers, like Amazon.com and eBay, naturally, oppose the bill.

But few people can deny the two basic arguments in favor of making changes. It is not fair for Internet retailers to have the advantage of the sales tax loophole. They already enjoy benefits like allowing shopping 24-hours a day, seven days a week.

Each type of retailer has its place, but an artificial advantage such as a sales tax loophole should not be a factor in a shopper's decision on where to buy a particular item.

An eBay spokesman issued a statement calling Delahunt's proposal an "Internet tax scheme." That's a bogus argument, and his choice of the word "scheme" is a calculated effort to evoke negative reactions. Once people are made aware of all the facts, they will see the merit of the fairness and state finances arguments.

And at a time when state budgets are in desperate shape, an extra $23 billion cannot be ignored.

One drawback to implementing this tax is that many states have developed absurdly complicated sales tax rules. Efforts have been under way since 2002 to streamline and simplify state sales tax rules, and 24 states have signed on to a new simplified sales tax plan.

Anyone calling Delahunt's legislation a new tax is just engaging in political rhetoric — and avoiding the real debate.

Nobody wants to see new taxes or higher taxes. But closing the Internet sales tax loophole is not creating a new tax. It is just fairly imposing an existing tax that has been improperly avoided for more than a decade.