Congress Takes Up Online Sales Tax 297
head_dunce writes "A bill introduced Thursday by a bipartisan group of U.S. lawmakers seeks to make it easier for states to collect sales taxes stemming from online purchases. Amazon is among the e-retailers supporting the proposal, while a lobbying group representing eBay and Overstock.com stands opposed. From the article: '"Small businesses and states alike are suffering from the inability to collect due -- not new -- taxes from purchases made online," said Rep. Steve Womack, R-Ark., adding the legislation is a "bipartisan, bicameral, common-sense solution that promotes states' rights and levels the playing field for our Main Street businesses."'"
Amazon's strategy (Score:5, Insightful)
I've been noticing that Amazon has been spreading out physical presence in a lot of states in recent years, and in the process cutting deals [politico.com] with those states to suspend sales taxes specifically on them (though a few states wouldn't play ball). So it makes sense to me why they might actually support this. As a big employer in a lot of states, Amazon can continue to create and extend special deals to exempt themselves at the state level, while sticking competing online retailers who don't have so much local presence with a new tax burden. Plus, it also standardizes the now chaotic process a little more at the federal level.
Idiots gives suspended taxes (Score:5, Interesting)
Only idiot politicians give out tax suspensions. Its happened several times with VW and Sony. As soon as the 10 year suspension was up both companies packed up and left.
Re:Idiots gives suspended taxes (Score:4, Insightful)
And yet they still benefited. Several people had jobs and were paid for 10 years and they paid income taxes and spent their money mostly in local places, which was sales taxed. The area didn't benefit as much as it could have, but it still benefited.
Re:Idiots gives suspended taxes (Score:5, Interesting)
And yet they still benefited.
But on average they benefit less than if these special tax deals were not offered all. It is a version of the prisoners dilemma. You can only "win" if you defect while everyone else cooperates. But if everyone defects, we all lose.
Personally, I think these tax breaks are unconstitutional, because they violate the equal protection clause. Why should one business get a special exemption, when others (including their competitors) do not?
Re: (Score:2)
And yet they still benefited.
But on average they benefit less than if these special tax deals were not offered all. It is a version of the prisoners dilemma. You can only "win" if you defect while everyone else cooperates. But if everyone defects, we all lose.
Personally, I think these tax breaks are unconstitutional, because they violate the equal protection clause. Why should one business get a special exemption, when others (including their competitors) do not?
I think you're the only person on the planet who thinks that "Equal protection" should mean "equal taxes". Do you want your taxes to equal what [Teresa Heinz/Mitt Romney/other-rich-person] has to pay? Or, should their taxes be equal to yours? That would be "equal", wouldn't it?
Now, I don't think that there should be equal taxes, and I don't think that there should be tax breaks for certain businesses. But you're going to need to find a different reason to legally prevent such tax breaks. For example, you
Re:Idiots gives suspended taxes (Score:4, Insightful)
I think you're the only person on the planet who thinks that "Equal protection" should mean "equal taxes".
"Equal protection" does not mean "equal taxes." It mean equal application of the law. If a company is given a tax break for "creating jobs", then the same tax break should be available to any company that meets the same criteria.
Re: (Score:2)
Well, that's not how the law works, you know, and I think it's unclear if it should be applied quite so strongly. For example, if I have a mill, why can I hire adults but not children, to work there and perhaps reach into operating machinery? That's discriminatory on the basis of age.
In practice, equal protection counts way more when discrimination on the basis of certain criteria occurs (eg race, gender) and not so much when it's otherwise innocuous business regulations.
Re: (Score:2, Insightful)
Yes, I would like my Taxes to be equal.
I'd like my tax bill for this year to equal Mitt Romney's 2011 rate: 14% of my total income.
I'd like my tax bill for this year to be equal to Teresa Heinz' 2003 rate: 12% of my total income.
I'd like my tax bill for this year to be equal to Warren Buffett's 2010 rate: 11% of my total income.
All of those would be less than what I pay now. And I'd bet that were there to be a single flat tax on all income received, to meet the same amount of revenue collected, my overa
Re:Idiots gives suspended taxes (Score:4, Insightful)
I don't believe there should be tax breaks or deductions for anything.
No one gets deductions for home mortgages, children, expenses, etc...nothing.
Simplify the tax code...you make $x this year...you pay 7% of that in. Simple.
I'd even go for the national sales tax in place of income tax...it would catch everything, and I believe..in the long run with either method, over all taxes would be lowered for everyone.
And besides, the govt shouldn't be in the business of trying to alter human behavior through taxes. Taxes should be there ONLY for the funding of vital govt services.
Re:Idiots gives suspended taxes (Score:4, Insightful)
National sales tax is a stupid idea. It makes goods bought in the USA cost more, and it does not take into account the benefit of living in the USA.
If I made $1,000,000, I have benefited by living in the USA to the tune of $1,000,000. The amount I owe the USA is some function of that. The infrastructure of the USA allowed me to earn that money, and the armies of the USA protects it.
However, if I only have to pay sales taxes for things I buy in the USA, I can:
-Buy things from other countries (this already happened before with yacht sales & luxury tax)
-Not buy as much stuff (Bad for the economy)
-Only buy what I need to live (Unfair for those that make less, as my spend will be a fraction of my income, while theirs may be all of their income)
However, flat-tax is great. Establish a poverty line, perhaps even a per-person allowance for caretakers. This should be the minimum amount required to live, and adjusted each year based off of the value of the dollar.
ALL income (even capital gains) above this line is taxed at the same level. No deductions for mortgages, charity, etc. Now, we're being fair.
Re: (Score:3)
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
Your idea of taxing the fundamentals of capitalism is dumb. We need to promote the exchange of goods and tax it as little as possible. What needs to be taxed more is hoarding of wealth. You can't assume that someone who spends very little money yet has assets valued in the billions should be paying as much tax for protecting those assets as someone who spends and has no assets or probably just a lot of debt to the people who own the assets they spend money for to use.
Oil companies are a perfect example. We
Re: (Score:3)
"Personally, I think these tax breaks are unconstitutional, because they violate the equal protection clause. Why should one business get a special exemption, when others (including their competitors) do not?"
Could not agree more. But with big business owning the politicians, not gonna change.
Eliminate all contributions and get rid of the "optional" campaign finance box on tax returns to make everyone use the same pool (and make Bribery/Influence-trading a Treason-level offense).
Re:Idiots gives suspended taxes (Score:5, Insightful)
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
Not only that, but there is another issue at stake in all of this also: if $BIG_COMPANY should get a tax exemption because it is good for the state, why is it not good for a $SMALL_COMPANY to get the same tax exemptions? If tax exemptions are good, then why not do away with them and just lower the taxes on everyone?
My wife had her own small business in the U.S. for about 8 years. Why was she supposedly paying more taxes than Amazon? I have yet to hear any politician answer that question.
Re: (Score:3)
Not only that, but there is another issue at stake in all of this also: if $BIG_COMPANY should get a tax exemption because it is good for the state, why is it not good for a $SMALL_COMPANY to get the same tax exemptions? If tax exemptions are good, then why not do away with them and just lower the taxes on everyone?
The most fair way to tax would be to tax companies based both on how much the community benefits the company, and what other options the community has to utilize the land and other resources the company is using.
A local restaurant or retail store is completely dependent on the community. It requires enough shoppers with enough disposable income to be in a certain location. They owe quite a lot to the community, and should pay higher taxes accordingly.
A huge warehouse or datacenter does not require shopper
Re: (Score:3)
The local restaurant does depend on the community, this is true. but the local restaurant also serves the direct community more than a warehouse or a data center. The data center could be taking up a large portion of land, which could be used for other things that directly affect the community more.
Re: (Score:2)
And some other area that didn't bid as highly didn't benefit.
Tax subsidies are a stupid political game. The only winners are the companies.
Re: (Score:2)
Agreed. And, yet, politicians still play it with the idea that they won't be suckers. This time.
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
So say you go with the deal. Now 6 months down the line Amazon has driven 50 more small businesses who employed 5000 people out of a job.
Pretty easy choice.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
It's because they have a 5/6/7% discount when competing against everybody else because everybody else still pays sales tax.
Re: (Score:2)
Amazon has been given unnatural advantage/monopoly in the marketplace of that State. This will drive the market out of equilibrium and when it settles down Amazon will have come out ahead and the rest of the market will have lost. This will mean jobs lost, jobs that would have been never being, and lower revenue for everyone else.
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
It sure is. Say "fuck you" to Amazon and other large corporations that push for a race to the bottom, and make policy that supports the growth of local small businesses that keep the wealth they created in the community rather than drain it away to far-off absentee owners ("stockholders").
The "let's kowtow to big business" strategy has failed so completely and so consistently that the choice would be easy...in a well-informed and non-corrupt political system.
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
Re: (Score:2, Insightful)
I still think the sales tax from Amazon would outweigh that easily. People buy everything online these days from $500 lawn mowers, to $2,000 speakers. There is a reason Amazon is making those deals, they know the business they pull in from states is that large.
Re: (Score:2)
So all politicians give out tax suspensions?
Zing!
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Not everyone in that "Tax Area" works for the company getting the break, and the state/City has to make up the lost revenue somewhere, guess who gets gouged?
Re: (Score:2, Interesting)
Is there a single constituent of any of these politicians pushing this Internet Tax bill, in fucking FAVOR of said bill?
I cannot imagine that many regular citizens would support this...so, how is it that this gets pushed into a bill, and likely..into law?
I can't imagine that any of these Senators/Representatives have been deluged with snail mail, email and petitions beggin them to COLLECT MORE TAXESS....?
Anyone?
Re:Idiots gives suspended taxes (Score:5, Insightful)
I support it...for businesses with high enough revenues. Small online shops are too small to bother with and the state tax calculations are too cumberson
States need tax revenues. Physical retail locations collect sales taxes, that provides tax revenues to the state. If online retail is able to bypass state taxes, that puts the retail locations at a disadvantage, and sales tax revenues drop for that state.
The State ends up with lower sales tax revenues, but they still need tax revenues. So they just end up raising my property taxes again, and physical retail continues to get screwed over. They're going to get their tax revenues one way or another because they have a budget to pay for, if high taxes are a problem we should fight them on their budget.
So in the meantime, we should just level the playing field with regards to collecting sales taxes. If physical retail should go out of business because it's inefficient, let it. But it shouldn't get pushed out of business by unfairly granting an advantage to online retailers. We're going to pay the same total amount of tax either way.
Re: (Score:3)
many people did not pay their assessments
So, what you're saying is that unlike sales taxes, where there is no requirement for the seller to collect them without physical presences, and buyers were never presented with a bill for those taxes, your HOA didn't collect money that was required to be paid, and was on a bill that people received. And, because of that, you raised fees for everybody.
This sounds to me like you just gave up trying to be fair because you weren't competent and decided to just collect more money from the honest people. So, yo
Re:Amazon's strategy (Score:4, Insightful)
Even if Amazon doesn't get special tax deals, it will still hurt smaller online retailers more. Due to their large size, Amazon is better situated to handle the extra overhead and cost these taxes will bring. Amazon has essentially been handed a blank check by investors to get by with extremely low profit margins, as evidenced with their stock price. This could be just the extra bump Amazon needs to put their competition out of business.
Re: (Score:2)
Re:Amazon's strategy (Score:4, Informative)
You are close ... Amazon's strategy is much more simple. When Amazon was just an online retailer with distribution centers in several states, it fought for no sales tax as it would (obviously) help Amazon's sales. The only places where Amazon had problems was in the few states where it had its distribution centers. Amazon's strategy NOW is to go beyond being a simple online sales organization to your daily sales store. Amazon is currently in the process of setting up local _same_ _day_ delivery. You will be able to place your order on Amazon for everything from books to groceries and in a great many cases, Amazon will deliver to your doorstep that same day. Amazon's already been doing this to a limited degree in Seattle and a few other locations. In order for Amazon to do this, they will have to have distribution centers in or near every major city which would in most cases require them to have to collect sales tax. Amazon doesn't want to be in a position where they have to collect sales tax and the other online retailers would not be collecting sales tax putting Amazon at a disadvantage. To even the playing field, Amazon is now not fighting _against_ online sales taxes but is now fighting _for_ online sales taxes.
Personally, I'm against online sales taxes. When you buy something online, you are already paying a "tax" of sorts and that is your _time_. That is a tax or cost to online purchases as it takes up to five days for your products to arrive. If you want your products that same day, you pay an extra (and real) tax by buying local.
What the politicians forget is that the online sales is a wash. If I don't pay sales taxes by buying from something from _their_ state, someone else is not paying sales taxes by buying from _my_ state. Meanwhile, in _both_ states, it creates increased sales and hence jobs which are filled by people who pay sales taxes, income taxes, property taxes, gas taxes, excise taxes (over half of what you pay for insurance is excise taxes btw), etc. etc. etc. It is to the states long term advantage to not charge sales taxes and create jobs. The online sales taxes is a short term solution where states will fill their coffers quickly but, it will reduce the number of jobs and hence taxpayers in the long term.
So, when online sales taxes get put in place and you are paying an extra 6-8% for your online orders, just remember to thank Amazon
Re:Amazon's strategy (Score:5, Funny)
Re:Amazon's strategy (Score:5, Insightful)
Personally, I'm against online sales taxes. When you buy something online, you are already paying a "tax" of sorts and that is your _time_. That is a tax or cost to online purchases as it takes up to five days for your products to arrive. If you want your products that same day, you pay an extra (and real) tax by buying local.
You keep using that word. I do not think it means what you think it means.
Re: (Score:2)
Disclosure: My wife is a 3rd party merchant through Amazon's Fulfillment By Amazon [amazonservices.com] (FBA) program. I guess I'm her "CIO".
The online retail space has been evolving over the past couple of years, as we all can tell. Since 1992, when the US Supreme Court ruled that sales tax could not be collected [wikipedia.org] from a state where there was no physical business presence, online retail has operated in an essentially un-taxed environment. You were always supposed to track online sales made to customers in your own state, bu
Re: (Score:3)
Amazon looks at this and says, if I'm going to be taxes as if I have a physical presence, then I might as well have a physical presence, and they have begun building "micro warehouses [huffingtonpost.com]" in major cities across the country. Now, you will be able to order online, get the vastly superior inventory storage options that a warehouse provides, and get same-day shipping to the customer, so the customer can have the item in hand by the end of the business day.
Best Buy could have had the best of both worlds by setting up something like "BestBuyOnline.com" as a completely separate company, with no point of presence anywhere but states with no sales tax (Alaska, Delaware, Montana, New Hampshire, and Oregon), and then have some sort of deal where the physical Best Buy stores act like Amazon's Locker [amazon.com] so that you can still order online and pick up in store. Instead, they have chosen to keep doing business as usual with 20-50% higher prices on many items and hope that
Sales Tax is for idiots (Score:3, Insightful)
We shouldn't even be looking at sales tax as a revenue source. The reason sales tax is so acceptable is that people don't notice it until it's too late. They don't realize how regressive it is. In fact, people are so oblivious to this tax that it's become the fashionable way to pay for multi-million dollar stadiums. That reason alone is why I buy things online. Because of all these projects, sales taxes in "major" metro areas are approaching 10% and exceed that for hotels, car rentals, bars and restaurants. That's money that's taxed after you've already paid income tax on it.
Would anyone here take a 10% cut in pay? Yet we gladly pass sales taxes that do the same thing.
The U.S. should go back to its roots and use tariffs as the only source of revenue.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
There is no sales tax on the things I spend the bulk of my income on: rent/real estate, investments, groceries, utilities, medical bills. I'd be surprised if more than 1% of my net income goes to sales tax. If sales tax is significantly affecting you, then you're spending a lot more money than you probably have to.
Yeah, let's go b
Re: (Score:3)
How about no tax *except* sales tax? That way you get taxed based on how extravagant a lifestyle you lead. Oh, and Wall St. transactions can have the same tax rate as everything else...
Amazon are crazy (Score:2)
The moment I have to pay sales tax on {stuff I get from Amazon} is the moment I stop being an Amazon customer - over 90% of my online purchases are with Amazon, and its not just the usual stuff that people buy online - I buy the sort of stuff that people would buy at walmart (soap, deodorant, batteries and other household goods at Amazon so I don't have to pay sales tax
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
You're not a customer that anybody wants. No business person in their right mind would lose any sleep over customers that have zero loyalty, and are just looking for the best price. That's Business 101, and it's absolutely true.
I think I'm going to disagree. I don't see any large business that grooms customer loyalty. I'm not talking about loyalty cards... I'm talking real loyalty. On top of that: because so few people have loyalty to businesses (they are hunting for the lowest cost bargain), most businesses want these kinds of customers. We've been using the phrase "race to the bottom" on Slashdot and I think that aptly describes the situation of loyalty between customer and business.
I'm sure someone can find a few examples w
Re: (Score:2)
The cheapest price is always a losing game. If that's all you have, then the second you are undercut by somebody for whatever reason, you're pretty much finished. It's a simple idea, but it's proven to be largely true time after time.
Re:Amazon are crazy (Score:4, Informative)
Re: (Score:2)
The moment I have to pay sales tax on {stuff I get from Amazon} is the moment I stop being an Amazon customer - over 90% of my online purchases are with Amazon, and its not just the usual stuff that people buy online - I buy the sort of stuff that people would buy at walmart (soap, deodorant, batteries and other household goods at Amazon so I don't have to pay sales tax
So this is your confession that you are committing tax fraud? Or do you actually pay the associated "use" tax that your state charges and you are just playing word games.
Re: (Score:2, Troll)
you, and people like you, ARE the problem.
yes, you don't have to pay "sales tax" on online purchases made from out of state merchants... but you DO have to pay a USE TAX [wikipedia.org]. afaik, every state with a sales tax on local purchases also has a corresponding use tax to collect the equivalent amount in use tax on untaxed (or under-taxed) out of state purchases.
use tax may be difficult for states to enforce because there are no reporting requirements (one of the things amaz
Re: (Score:2)
I buy the sort of stuff that people would buy at walmart (soap, deodorant, batteries and other household goods at Amazon so I don't have to pay sales tax
Then you are probably already not following the law. Most states require that you report any goods you buy where sales tax is due, but where the retailer did not collect sales taxes.
I'm going to assume you aren't reporting those purchases at the end of the year (I believe the statistics show most people don't) but that does not mean that it's not a requirement. This legislation is about making it possible for states to collect taxes that are already due in a manner that traditional brick-and-mortar alrea
This is going to be a mess... (Score:2)
I can't find the bills online (spent 5 minutes on senate.gov), so I can't see if the bill
Simple way around it... (Score:3)
Re: (Score:2)
Wrong focus (Score:3, Informative)
The problem isn't that "state taxes are too big for Amazon to figure out." They've got plenty of legal and tax representation.
The real issue is for SMALL sellers on the internet. Say, people who sell via etsy, or bands that sell albums direct to fans.
Now, suddenly, THOSE people need to understand and properly understand taxes for all 50 states, collect those taxes, and remit them to the proper time to the proper authorities. Oh, with all the necessary paperwork.
Re: (Score:3)
The problem isn't that "state taxes are too big for Amazon to figure out." They've got plenty of legal and tax representation.
The real issue is for SMALL sellers on the internet. Say, people who sell via etsy, or bands that sell albums direct to fans.
Now, suddenly, THOSE people need to understand and properly understand taxes for all 50 states, collect those taxes, and remit them to the proper time to the proper authorities. Oh, with all the necessary paperwork.
It's not just 50 states, its 50 states and each taxing jurisdiction in those states. City, county, local, and special taxing jurisdictions make sales and use tax incredibly complicated.
Re: (Score:3)
You forgot the other issue. Different products may be subject to different tax levels. For example, in one state, tea has sales tax. In another, tea has no sales tax. So you have to hold in your database not only all the varying rates, but the lists of what items are subject to what tax levels, and keep that database updated on probably a daily basis.
And yes, my tea vendor says Massachusetts has a tax on tea.
Simply: Bullshit (Score:3)
Rep. Steve Womack, R-Ark., (said) the legislation is a "bipartisan, bicameral, common-sense solution that promotes states' rights and levels the playing field for our Main Street businesses."
This, folks, is a politician.
When he sees that local businesses are being heavily taxed, and some other business model comes into existence that evades that tax, his efforts are to ensure that other business is ALSO heavily taxed. Make sure the misery is spread equally, instead of (perhaps) asking if there's anything that can be done to reduce the misery generally.
Specialization increases efficiency in a system, generally.
If products can be viewed electronically (remotely), and delivered by mail/courier, the 'public services' being used are minimal. The distribution center already pays property and relevant taxes. The carriers are paying taxes for gasoline and vehicles (which is already subsumed in their prices) which compensate for the public ways/facilities used. The homeowner is already paying property taxes for local law enforcement, etc. (Or the property owner, if it's a rental unit.) I and the retailer are both already further paying for the infrastructure allowing us to communicate.
The fact is that modern technology has made many goods more efficiently sold through remote-purchase and postal distribution. This is simply a (faster) recap of the paradigm-shift in commerce when traveling merchant caravans no longer bought everything on speculation to (hopefully) sell later down the trail. Likewise, big-box retailers kicked the crap out of local small retail/grocery stores generally (albeit that process isn't quite complete yet). Nobody today mourns the loss of the merchant caravan; and already the younger generations have no maudlin feelings about the local small general store.
Re: (Score:3)
Rep. Steve Womack, R-Ark., (said) the legislation is a "bipartisan, bicameral, common-sense solution that promotes states' rights and levels the playing field for our Main Street businesses."
This, folks, is a politician. When he sees that local businesses are being heavily taxed, and some other business model comes into existence that evades that tax, his efforts are to ensure that other business is ALSO heavily taxed. Make sure the misery is spread equally, instead of (perhaps) asking if there's anything that can be done to reduce the misery generally.
And, he's one that is gonna be really surprised when people still buy at Amazon instead of the "Main Street" business, because Amazon will have same-day delivery to most people not long after this law is in effect. When Amazon has cheaper prices, better service, easier shopping, and the item in your hands just as quickly (and maybe even faster if you have to deal with traffic, crowds, etc.), who would buy at a "Main Street" store?
I seriously need to buy a lot of Amazon stock before this goes into law.
You just don't get it... (Score:4, Interesting)
The real problem is voracious government entities that will NEVER be satisfied with how much they take from you. NEVER.
You want fairness? Get rid of the sales tax on the brick and mortar stores. What? We can’t do that need that money! For the children! To buy civilization!
We are WAY past “buying civilization”. The only question discussed by any parasitic government entity is how quickly to kill the host.
And yes, the host is dying. The U.S. is over 100 trillion in the crapper with admitted debt and unfunded government liabilities according to the Dallas Federal Reserve president. We can’t grow our way out of a 100 trillion (and rapidly growing because of massive spending) problem. The U.S. at least, is screwed.
Re:You just don't get it... (Score:4, Funny)
Enforcement (Score:3, Interesting)
How will this shiny new tax be collected and enforced?
One option is to put the onus on the retailers to maintain a database of all the different sales tax rates in the country, so they can collect the appropriate amount on the purchase. At least in New York, sales taxes vary by county -- the State takes 4% and the county takes anywhere from 3-5%. That's 62 lines on the spreadsheet, just for New York. I think NYC adds a point or two as well. This would have to be correlated with a ZIP code table, so the retailer would know which ZIPs are in which jurisdictions. It's tedious, but not impossible. Perhaps the IRS could spend some of our money to draw up the tables and maintain them.
Another avenue is to put the onus on the buyer to calculate and remit the appropriate taxes to the authorities. If I were a sociopath, I'd like this method better. It doesn't burden the retailers and it provides a delicious means of social control, not to mention a wealth of interesting information on what people are buying. Let's take a non-Amazon company as an example, since Amazon has bought exemptions from State sales taxes:
NewEgg is contacted by the NY Department of Taxation and Finance and ordered to turn over their NY sales records. No warrant is required, since the request is for tax compliance purposes. DTF runs the records through their computer system and looks up the tax records of each NewEgg customer. If the customer didn't report the sale, they're in big trouble. If it's a significant amount that they didn't report, or there's a pattern of non-compliance, off to private prison with you!
Cue the naysayers saying I'm a paranoiac and Our Glorious Overlords would never do something so fiendish...
Tax rate (Score:2)
So what percentage of tax will I need to charge customers who pay anonymously for online services and download products where I don't even know what country they are in?
R-Arkansas (Score:3, Insightful)
Surprise! The Congressman representing (3rd District, encompassing Bentonville, where Wal-Mart's HQ is located) the largest brick-and-mortar retailer in the world is pushing for sales tax on sales made by their main competitors.
Re: (Score:2)
It's amazing it took this long (Score:2)
Would you expect your grocery store to suddenly stop charging you tax? Because that's what's happening with Amazon's groceries. Shipping doesn't make up for it, that goes to fedex and ups. It's been a loophole for a while now, and a lot of people have taken advantage, while brick and mortar stores have suffered. The latter may not be the worst thing, customer service at Best Buy is a lot better now, but I can buy a surfband modem on amazon for $80, and at bestbuy for $120, after tax in my area that come
Unconstitutional. Period. (Score:3)
(A) States have no legal authority to tax transactions that take place in other States, and
(B) an Internet transaction is deemed to have taken place at the seller's place of business, and
(C) the Federal government has no legal authority to collect taxes on behalf of the States.
Item (B) came about because of the rise of mail-order businesses, well over 100 years ago. The internet brings NOTHING new to the table... it just means a bit more business is being done remotely. (In case you hadn't noticed, the rise of the Internet has created a corresponding fall in traditional mail order business. It has not made as big an impact on sales taxes as many people would have you believe.)
If a mail-order (or Internet) business has a "physical presence" in your State, then it is not unreasonable to conclude that the business transaction took place in your State. Thus, sales tax is applicable. But if it doesn't, then the sale took place in the seller's state and your state can't charge sales tax.
And the reason (B) says that the transaction takes place in the seller's state, is because doing it the other way around is not practically possible; EVERY business would have to keep track of all Federal, State, and local tax laws, everywhere in the United States. Even today, there is no practical way to overcome this. Small businesses simply could not operate.
There is NOTHING that Congress has legal authority to do to change this situation, except amend the Constitution. They simply cannot give States additional taxation power, and they cannot give themselves power to tax on behalf of the States, without amending the Constitution.
This is not mere theory. These are past SCOTUS rulings and the stated reasoning behind them.
(NOTE: most if not all States have a separate tax, called a "Use Tax", that taxes the use of an item that is purchased out-of-state. But that is a separate issue. A Use Tax is not a Sales Tax... the transaction is not being taxed, the use of the item is. So it is legal. The problem is that States have no way to know what purchases you have made out-of-state, unless you tell them. Which makes it an enforcement nightmare. In my experience, many people do not even know that Use Taxes exist... unless they buy a car in a different state.)
Re:Yay! (Score:5, Interesting)
Because local sales taxes, property taxes, state and federal income taxes, capital gains taxes, and all of the additional fees that people forget are actually just taxes isn't enough, apparently. And of course, the justification is always "well, but when you buy a video game that is shipped from another state, it has to travel over our roads -- so our state incurs an expense, even if the business you did business with is 2,000 miles away".
Of course, they conveniently ignore the fact that the companies doing the delivery of your product (UPS, FEDEX, DHL, etc) already pay taxes for doing business in that state for transporting your good. And buy gas, with included gas taxes for road usage. So, really, what individual states are demanding is additional revenue for incurring absolutely no cost or wear and tear. It's a money grab by a bunch of irresponsible pigs who can't handle what they're already given to budget with.
The big box stores go right along with it, because they're tired of the online competition. That's their only motivation. Somehow, they have this idea that if I have to pay taxes to Amazon for a product they'll deliver to my doorstep in 24-48hrs that I'll change my mind and drive a few miles to go buy the same thing for at least as much and for the same amount of sales tax in their store. Pretty shitty logic. It's less hassle to just go the online route, even with taxes. In fact, I'm more likely to do it just to spite the big box brick and mortar stores.
Anyway, it's a lost cause. It'll be taxed, because the pigs want it taxed. And it won't help anything, because the more money they get, the more they spend. It's just really depressing when you consider how much money you're handing over every April and how little will be done with it, compared to how much of an impact it could make to you. For the taxes I just paid this time around, I could have put a kid through four years of a good state college and had enough left over for them to buy a car. Or I could have helped my mother with her retirement after decades of working in a thankless and harrowing job with no real retirement opportunities or benefits. I could have covered her salary for three and a half years, making retirement a possibility for her. Instead, it'll probably go toward 20% of a drone purchase or installing two speed bumps. And that sort of waste is why people are so disgruntled with paying taxes. If they felt the work and money they are just handing over was being respected and used wisely, they'd feel that sense of "hey, it's my civic duty". When it's just being used as a free pot of money by a bunch of irresponsible pigs, you just feel like you're getting fucked.
Re: (Score:2)
The other problem I have is with your taxes comment. Lots of Americans seem to equate paying taxes with flushing mon
Re: (Score:3)
Lots of Americans seem to equate paying taxes with flushing money in the toilet
From where many of us are standing, there isn't much difference to us personally.
Libertarian utopia where you never paid taxes you'd wish the current system was back.
Libertarians are not anarchists. We acknowledge that some government is necessary and proper and that government requires taxes to pay for it. That being said, we most definitely prefer a smaller government that does fewer things and therefore costs less money, but whether the government is large or small every American ought to be angry when taxes are wasted.
Know those roads you drive in that hopefully don't have giant potholes in them? Your taxes paid for that.
Out here in California the roads are chock full of potholes because t
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:3)
Of course I'd like for government to be less wasteful. Who wouldn't? Preferring Obama to the only viable alternative doesn't mean one wants the government to spend money to little effect.
Also, the idea of Obama's having a "spell" is something you, or someone who influences your thinking, invented out of laziness.
Re:Main Street Businesses (Score:5, Insightful)
People tend to romanticize "Mom & Pop" stores. But having worked in a Mom & Pop grocery store growing up, I'm under no such illusions. The people I worked for were just as greedy and treated their workers just as shitty as Walmart or any of the big box stores. There is nothing inherently noble or morally superior about being a small business on Main Street. It just means you're small, and also on Main Street.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Re:Main Street Businesses (Score:5, Interesting)
You worked for the wrong people then. Most of my relatives are from small towns, and several owned stores and one family a restaurant. On my mom's side, the whole town believed in doing what is best for your neighbor, and if you couldn't afford something you needed, say, at the hardware store, the owner would help you out or cut the price to something you could afford. Probably has something to do with them being Mennonite, but I grew up with that mentality - do something good for your neighbor, and they will do something good for you. Note this is not on the commune - these were former communal Mennonites, but they still got together to build each other's barns and stuff.
Re: (Score:2)
The people I worked for were just as greedy and treated their workers just as shitty as Walmart or any of the big box stores. There is nothing inherently noble or morally superior about being a small business on Main Street.
This is a terrible collision of logic and statistics that presents a view which is technically correct but misleading in almost every meaningful way when seen in the context of history. You're saying that because small businesses (referring to them as Mom and Pop stores is definitely over-romanticizing) are made of the same greedy people as big businesses and because they are businesses, they will treat their workers just as poorly. To reduce: A is always true and B is always true, therefore C is possible
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:3, Informative)
Re: (Score:3)
The difference is that most local retail stores bring in their goods by truck - frequently their own trucking system like Walmart. They get economies of scale for their delivery charges. If I purchase something on line, depending on the retailer, I may have a very large shipping and handling charge to transport each single item.
They shouldn't get to play the "It's unfair competition on prices. Because you don't pay sales tax we're dying," card.
If the government wants to enforce an extremely regressive form
Re:Capitalism (Score:5, Insightful)
Re: (Score:2)
B. There's this stuff called "software" that is really good at tracking numbers automatically.
Re:Capitalism (Score:5, Insightful)
A. It's called a cost of doing business. B. There's this stuff called "software" that is really good at tracking numbers automatically.
So, how much is it going to cost me to get that software? Who is going to update it every time one of those many municipalities changes their tax laws? How much will that cost me? Do you have a clue how complicated it is to keep track of the sales tax laws all throughout the U.S., with different municipalities charging sales tax on different things? Not everything is taxable in every municipality and what is taxable, or not taxable varies from location to location. In addition, How do I keep track of what tax jurisdiction a customer is in (hint, zip codes won't do the trick)?
Sure, you can say, "That's a cost of doing business," of course when you say that what you are saying is "I don't mind stacking the deck in favor of big business."
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Quickbooks may only cost $300 retail, but if you want that payroll tax calculator functionality, it is another $29 a month (plus $1.50 per employee per month). What do you think they are going to charge for the sales tax package (which is significantly more complicated tha
Re: (Score:2)
B. There's this stuff called "software" that is really good at tracking numbers automatically.
A popular myth. While the statement is literally true, what people are interested in isn't (supposedly) "tracking the numbers", it's "maximizing profit". And we've gotten really, really good at calculating "profit" from incomplete sets of numbers and conditions. Bean-counter blindness, if you will. If your accountants don't factor in the number of customers that the toxic effluents of your factory kill off, you may be suffering from this ailment, for example.
Myself, I could live with 50-odd sets of rate and
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Re:Capitalism (Score:4, Insightful)
and get the tax rules based on zipcode.
FAIL. Zip codes do not follow municipal boundaries. If you use zip code to determine what tax rate to apply, you will get it wrong a significant percentage of the time. Just because someone has a particular city zip code does not mean that where they live is subject to the tax rate of that city.
Re: (Score:3)
Item X costs $10. Mom & Pop R Us needs to collect sales tax by law. You pay 10$ + tax, ~11$ Online mega merchant doesn't. You pay $10. Therefore, you go online cause it's cheaper. Mom & Pop suffer.
You missed the part where mega merchant charges you $3 for shipping.
Re: (Score:2)
You missed the part where mega merchant charges you $3 for shipping.
"Free Shipping on Orders over $25".
Re: (Score:3)
Item X costs $10.
Mom and Pop store doesn't have item, but can get it in a week; Trip #1 wasted
When it eventually shows up, you pay $10 + tax ~ $11
Online megastore sells item X for $5
Online megastore has item in stock
Online megastore has 50 closely similar items in stock in case you don't exactly need item X
Online megastore will ship overnight for a small charge, or two days for free if you buy $25 total on your order
Online megastore lets you order at 2AM instead of rushing to Mo
Re: (Score:2)
Why not just eliminate sales (use) taxes entirely?