So why is the internet sales tax coming up now?

[Anti Federalist]

Ben Franklin first started the idea of "mail order" goods.

Wards, Sears, Hammacher Schlemmer and JC Penny have, or had, been doing business this way for over a century.

Why now is the idea of forcing the taxation of these sales just coming to a head?

Technology and big data?

The fact that government is broke?

Product to consumer government control?

[Matt Collins]

State governments see it as easy revenue, and Amazon doesn't want to be forced to collect taxes for it's customers when most online retailers do not.

[Natural Citizen]

Why now is the idea of forcing the taxation of these sales just coming to a head?

Technology and big data?



This is one of the main reasons and it is broad. Across a wide range of politics and infrastructure and certainly the security model that surely needs a reconfig in that infrastructure in order to firmly plant their existence in it. Nobody has mentioned these outliers here at all. On one hand I'm surprised but on the other, not really. This stuff is only being hand fed to the base a little at a time instead of the whole shabang. I know that I've certainly bit my tongue many times when I've really felt like calling some representatives out on some things that they benefit from not being placed into context/debate. Important things that the citizens actually do not benefiit from in scope and could avoid. Of course this would mean that some representatives in the field wouldn't get a free pass and would obviously sting a bit.

The time is coming though. Bet on that.

[cindy25]

pressure from Walmart, and other monapoly retailers. their market share is no longer growing and they want to put more small business out of business

[HOLLYWOOD]

George Carlin, "Because they want more for themselves and less for you. They want it all, so they can give it to their criminal friends on Wall Street. You know what? They'll get, they'll get it all! As long as Americans remain willfully ignorant."

Tonight these mother fucken leeches of Congress are sipping on 30 year old scotch or Opus wine, laughing at how stupid Americans just sit there as these DC Con men take it right out of your pockets.

[sailingaway]

because some states have started making Amazon collect sales tax and they want everyone to have to do it. Mind you it will put small sellers out of business to even research all the state laws.

[fr33]

Because taxation is theft and thieves gonna thief.

[Brian4Liberty]

Ben Franklin first started the idea of "mail order" goods.

Wards, Sears, Hammacher Schlemmer and JC Penny have, or had, been doing business this way for over a century.

Why now is the idea of forcing the taxation of these sales just coming to a head?

Technology and big data?

The fact that government is broke?

Product to consumer government control?

All of the above?

Surprised you left this off of the list:

The final battles of Federalism over States rights. To be followed by globalism.

[Warrior_of_Freedom]

Don't understand how my state can supposedly now collect sales tax for a good I purchase from another state. Or is it the other way around? If I live in NY and buy something from Texas, do I pay Texas or NY sales tax?

[Anti Federalist]

All of the above?

Surprised you left this off of the list:

The final battles of Federalism over States rights. To be followed by globalism.

+rep

[jclay2]

I love it how the fairness equalizer never comes in the form of removing taxes.

[Lindsey]

So I already pay sales and use tax quarterly. If online retailers start collecting the sales tax, that means I can stop paying the use tax, right?

[Keith and stuff]

So I already pay sales and use tax quarterly. If online retailers start collecting the sales tax, that means I can stop paying the use tax, right?

Yeah, you either pay a sales tax or use tax on an item. Well, unless you live or shop in DE, NH, OR or MT.

[LibForestPaul]

i live in NY and purchase from NH ... NY tax?
i live in NH and purchase from NY ...NY tax?

[JorgeStevenson]

If you purchase something from out of state, the tax rate you pay will be based on your home jurisdiction. It's technically the same "use tax" that you already are required to pay.

That being said, it seems extremely strange that people push this as "marketplace fairness" when the following 2 transactions, which are substantially the same thing, are taxed completely differently:

(a) I live in VA, purchase from an online retailer in MD, and the product is delivered by UPS to my house for use in VA.
(b) I live in VA, drive to MD to make a purchase, and then bring it back to VA for use in VA.

These are basically the same thing. The only difference is who is performing the shipping and handling. Yet they are taxed differently. In scenario A, I owe VA "use tax" equal to the sales tax that I would have paid had I bought from a Virginia business. In scenario B, I owe MD sales tax and do not owe "use tax" to VA.

The result of this inequity will be that the Maryland internet retailer will need to know the correct tax amounts for each jurisdiction it ships to, whereas the Maryland B&M will not have to worry about "use tax" at all. This creates an advantage for B&M stores. The existing system was actually much more equitable - neither the B&M nor the online retailer had to worry about the "use tax", and they both had to charge sales tax when making sales locally.

And then there's the whole issue with withholding tax being the same thing as unpaid labor - if businesses are required to withhold a tax, then they are required by law to help the government collect taxes that are not owed by the business, which effectively means they are working for the government without payment. Instead of hiring tax collectors, the government forces businesses to do it for them. How is it "fair" to put a business out of business for refusing to collect a tax that is owed by someone else? It's "see something, say something" on steroids. So expanding any withholding tax has its own set of "fairness" issues as well.

It's fine to say you support the "marketplace fairness" act because it's a tax that we technically already owe. But let's skip all the "fairness" rhetoric - it's definitely not fair.

[Warlord]

Because the State's are greedy fat pigs.

Oh but it's fair they say!

Yeah, it's fair to pay for all their big, socialist programs rather than let them reform their bloated governments.

Also it will suck more money out of the private economy and be massively damaging. Believe me, the fuedalist system here has taught me a lot about how taxation works; everyone wants their cut from the tribal elder, to the province governor to sons of bitch Karzai himself.

If you think your tax forms are bad now try dealing with dozens of different groups each hungry for a bite of the apple.

[fisharmor]

I heard something disturbing and totally believable this morning....
So we've gotten to the point where even a US Representative campaign costs a million bucks to run. Senate races cost much more.

On the "Yes" side of the internet sales tax you have Wal-Mart (446 billion in 2012), Best Buy (50.7 billion), etc.
On the "No" side you have Amazon (61.09 billion), ebay (14.07 billion), etc.

Just looking at the resources each side has to devote to the issue, the brick-and-mortar places probably seriously outweigh the online places.
It's probable that the brick-and-mortars are going to win, and they're going to get the sales tax.

However, in the meantime, they've created a knock-down, drag-out fight between the two - and both sides are highly likely to lobby senators and representatives.

There's also the point that this is just a gigantic distraction from joblessness, wars, rising cost of living, etc.... but those other issues don't pay the bills, do they?


I live in VA

Another Virginian. Woot!

[Warlord]

Tax Hike Bob is one of the ones who is demanding this to pay for his roads in VA and is using his buddy Eric Cantor to get his way in the House.

He's a greedy son of a bitch.

We need more roads in Afghanistan and the US taxpayer is our cashcow not his!

[angelatc]

Ben Franklin first started the idea of "mail order" goods.

Wards, Sears, Hammacher Schlemmer and JC Penny have, or had, been doing business this way for over a century. Why now is the idea of forcing the taxation of these sales just coming to a head? Technology and big data? The fact that government is broke? Product to consumer government control?

This isn't a new tax. Most of the companies you listed have been collecting this tax for quite a while. This law gives retailers the responsibility to enforce the laws of a myriad of different taxing municipalities. The consumers have long been required to pay these taxes, but the states had no way to enforce the law.

[MoneyWhereMyMouthIs2]

All of the above?

Surprised you left this off of the list:

The final battles of Federalism over States rights. To be followed by globalism.


No doubt it will cause a certain contingent to start asking for a national sales tax to streamline collection for smaller businesses, to be redistributed back to the local jurisdictions. Of course, it will probably be 2x expensive, and now the camel will have it's nose under the tent. No longer will local jurisdictions be determining sales tax rates.

Local control comes down to this... the further a thief is from you, the less you can do about it.

[MoneyWhereMyMouthIs2]

On the "No" side you have Amazon (61.09 billion)


It's my understanding amazon is squarely on the "Yes" side.

[donnay]

Senate Passes Wal-Mart Backed Bill for Taxes on Web Sales
7 May 2013, by Richard Rubin (Bloomberg)
http://www.bloomberg.com/news/2013-05-06/senate-passes-wal-mart-backed-bill-for-taxes-on-web-sales.html

Excerpt:

The U.S. Senate voted to let states collect taxes on out-of-state Internet and catalog sales, sending the proposal to the House, where the issue is dividing Republicans.

The measure, passed yesterday on a 69-27 bipartisan vote, would end the era of tax-free Internet shopping.

It is backed by Wal-Mart Stores Inc. (WMT) and other retailers that say it’s unfair that out-of-state sellers don’t have to collect sales taxes on purchases

“It’s a rare opportunity for us to have Republicans and Democrats together on the floor to support a bill that has the endorsement of business and labor and local officials all across the United States,”

said Senator Richard Durbin of Illinois, the chamber’s second-ranking Democrat and a co-sponsor of the proposal.

States lose an estimated $23 billion annually in forgone revenue from uncollected sales taxes.

During yesterday’s debate, senators offered examples of consumers who examine products in stores and then shop online for those same items to avoid paying sales tax.

The measure exempts businesses with less than $1 million a year in out-of-state sales.

Republicans were almost evenly divided with 21 voting in favor of the measure, including Richard Shelby of Alabama, John Thune of South Dakota and John Hoeven of North Dakota.

Twenty- two Republicans voted no, including Minority Leader Mitch McConnell of Kentucky, Marco Rubio of Florida and Charles Grassley of Iowa.

[angelatc]

If you purchase something from out of state, the tax rate you pay will be based on your home jurisdiction. It's technically the same "use tax" that you already are required to pay.

That being said, it seems extremely strange that people push this as "marketplace fairness" when the following 2 transactions, which are substantially the same thing, are taxed completely differently:

(a) I live in VA, purchase from an online retailer in MD, and the product is delivered by UPS to my house for use in VA.
(b) I live in VA, drive to MD to make a purchase, and then bring it back to VA for use in VA.

These are basically the same thing. The only difference is who is performing the shipping and handling. Yet they are taxed differently. In scenario A, I owe VA "use tax" equal to the sales tax that I would have paid had I bought from a Virginia business. In scenario B, I owe MD sales tax and do not owe "use tax" to VA.


I think you're wrong. Looking at Virginia's tax laws you do indeed owe a use tax for items that you purchased out of state. Here's a link to the form you're supposed to submit. http://www.tax.virginia.gov/taxforms/Business/Sales%20and%20Use%20Tax/ST-7,%20ST-7A,%20ST-6B.pdf

And that's the rub. They have no way (yet) of forcing you to pay that tax. So this new law forces retailers to collect the taxes. It's a nightmare. It's not just that there are 10,000 different taxing jurisdictions in the nation, but each and every one of them has a different set of laws and forms and exemptions.

I've grown weary of trying to navigate Maryland's laws. I can't find their sales tax laws for non-residents, but I do now know that if you bought a boat in Maryland that isn't going to be used in Maryland you don't need to pay the tax.

I did multi-state sales and use tax filings for 3 states, but this isn't any of 3 of them.

[LibForestPaul]

No doubt it will cause a certain contingent to start asking for a national sales tax to streamline collection for smaller businesses, to be redistributed back to the local jurisdictions. Of course, it will probably be 2x expensive, and now the camel will have it's nose under the tent. No longer will local jurisdictions be determining sales tax rates.

Local control comes down to this... the further a thief is from you, the less you can do about it.

correct VAT coming soon to solve the internet tax.

[LibertyEagle]

Which is why we need to be putting more of our attention on our local and state governments, instead of just federal. We have no hope of fixing this from the top down.