Page 2 of 2 FirstFirst 12
Results 31 to 56 of 56

Thread: SCOTUS: Online/Internet shoppers can be forced (legally separated) to pay sales tax

  1. #31
    Gotta love that selling used stuff on ebay will now make me pay tax on it. Double theft!

    This is going to get messy fast for an average small online seller to figure out state and local taxes. Large retailers must be loving this
    “…let us teach them that all who draw breath are of equal worth, and that those who seek to press heel upon the throat of liberty, will fall to the cry of FREEDOM!!!” – Spartacus, War of the Damned

    BTC: 1AFbCLYU3G1dkbsSJnk3spWeEwpqYVC2Pq



  2. Remove this section of ads by registering.
  3. #32
    Quote Originally Posted by Swordsmyth View Post
    I'll trade this decision for everything Garland would have done to us.
    Yeah. I just thought he would read the law the same way I did and insist that the Constitution needed to be changed.



  4. Remove this section of ads by registering.
  5. #33
    Quote Originally Posted by kpitcher View Post
    Gotta love that selling used stuff on ebay will now make me pay tax on it. Double theft!

    This is going to get messy fast for an average small online seller to figure out state and local taxes. Large retailers must be loving this
    Enter Amazon stage left.

    "Hey no worries bro, we'll handle all that messy tax stuff for you if you just sell through Amazon exclusively instead."
    "Let it not be said that we did nothing."-Ron Paul

    "We have set them on the hobby-horse of an idea about the absorption of individuality by the symbolic unit of COLLECTIVISM. They have never yet and they never will have the sense to reflect that this hobby-horse is a manifest violation of the most important law of nature, which has established from the very creation of the world one unit unlike another and precisely for the purpose of instituting individuality."- A Quote From Some Old Book

  6. #34
    Quote Originally Posted by TheTexan View Post
    For online shopping, the obvious solution is a federal sales tax.

    We could even use it to fund UBI, so I don't have to work anymore. Just a thought.
    Hey hey, stop reading ahead. We haven't sufficiently $#@!ed up the state sales tax stuff yet to jump straight to offering the solution of a federal sales tax.
    "Let it not be said that we did nothing."-Ron Paul

    "We have set them on the hobby-horse of an idea about the absorption of individuality by the symbolic unit of COLLECTIVISM. They have never yet and they never will have the sense to reflect that this hobby-horse is a manifest violation of the most important law of nature, which has established from the very creation of the world one unit unlike another and precisely for the purpose of instituting individuality."- A Quote From Some Old Book

  7. #35
    To me this is an epic failure in logic, noting the following points and concerns:

    1. If I physically visit another state or made arrangements through a third-party to make a specified purchase in another state for me and then mail it to me, I would not be taxable for that purchase within my present state of residence; ergo, when I make such a purchase as a matter of personal convenience in other states or countries (foreign transactions), by Internet, mail, telephone, drone, etc., my intent is the same and I should not be financially or criminally punished for simply taking advantage of technological advancements.

    2. Such a method of state-to-state sales taxation is a creeping violation of our U.S. Constitution, A.I,S.10.

    3. States are fraudulently attributing their decreased revenues to out of state sales as being the primary cause (i.e., there is no way to accurately track this data, unless the companies in question are themselves covertly volunteering it to the government and with considerable detail.)

    4. All brick and mortars have their own Internet presence as well, if they are unwilling to compete with sites such as Amazon, Overstock, Newegg, or Ebay then that is their shortsighted strategic failure and they will continue failing.

    5. Individual states do not have a right of claim to the sum of potential sales revenue alternatively made through the purchases of their residents or visitors--therefore, they can claim no bona fide "losses."

    6. Individual states are still realizing revenue from purchases made through the Internet, which requires delivery, so thereby creating local jobs through increased aircraft, train, and courier traffic, fuel and vehicle maintenance expenses, packaging materials, etc.

    7. States foreign to the physical locality of the origin of the purchases provide them with no representation, i.e., this is the core of taxation without representation--regardless to whom the sales tax is being pinned upon, be it the consumer or not, the seller is the party being obliged to determine and pay the tax.

    8. This is an egregiously unreasonable burden to be foisted onto national/international businesses, them having to keep up to date on the ever changing and fickle taxation and reporting requirements of all 50-states.

    9. States are sovereign to themselves, excepting the grant of authority provided by them and their people to the federal government; a state cannot compel the residents of another state to act simply because one or more of its own residents interacted with them.

    10. This power will likely result in states imposing increasing out of state sales tax rates in a concerted effort to quash out or penalize all competition--and in effect sheltering brick and mortars. Additionally, it will result in a barrage of new state employment opportunities within state tax bureaus.

    11. The people pushing for this type of immoral taxation are the very same people who also support shipping American jobs overseas and illegal immigration--thus their true motives are very telling.
    Last edited by Weston White; 06-22-2018 at 03:16 AM.
    The object of life is not to be on the side of the majority, but to escape finding one’s self in the ranks of the insane.” — Marcus Aurelius

    They’re not buying it. CNN, you dumb bastards!” — President Trump 2020

    Consilio et Animis de Oppresso Liber

  8. #36
    Won't affect me any.

    NH for the win.

  9. #37
    Quote Originally Posted by dannno View Post
    Not stoked on this one, Gorsuch will shine through in other very important areas in the future tho - but either way you will save at least 10x more on income taxes than you will spend on internet sales tax (especially since Amazon already charges it for non-third party sellers). So you voting for Trump ended up being a net positive. Good job.
    Yeah the tax cuts are good. It's also a policy any other Republican nominee would have enacted.
    Support Justin Amash for Congress
    Michigan Congressional District 3

  10. #38
    Quote Originally Posted by EBounding View Post
    Yeah the tax cuts are good. It's also a policy any other Republican nominee would have enacted.
    Ya but would they go for phase 2?
    "He's talkin' to his gut like it's a person!!" -me
    "dumpster diving isn't professional." - angelatc
    "You don't need a medical degree to spot obvious bullshit, that's actually a separate skill." -Scott Adams
    "When you are divided, and angry, and controlled, you target those 'different' from you, not those responsible [controllers]" -Q

    "Each of us must choose which course of action we should take: education, conventional political action, or even peaceful civil disobedience to bring about necessary changes. But let it not be said that we did nothing." - Ron Paul

    "Paul said "the wave of the future" is a coalition of anti-authoritarian progressive Democrats and libertarian Republicans in Congress opposed to domestic surveillance, opposed to starting new wars and in favor of ending the so-called War on Drugs."

  11. #39
    Quote Originally Posted by Weston White View Post
    1. If I physically visit another state or made arrangements through a third-party to make a specified purchase in another state for me and then mail it to me, I would not be taxable for that purchase within my present state of residence
    You would be liable for use tax in your state of residence, although it might be very difficult for the state to enforce the liability.

    2. Such a method of state-to-state sales taxation is a creeping violation of our U.S. Constitution, A.I,S.10.
    The prohibition on taxing "imports" without Congressional approval found in I.10.2 applies only to shipments from a foreign country, not those from other States.

    5. Individual states do not have a right of claim to the sum of potential sales revenue alternatively made through the purchases of their residents or visitors--therefore, they can claim no bona fide "losses."
    They have the authority to impose use taxes upon their residents, but it's much easier to require out-of-state sellers to collect sales tax.

    7. States foreign to the physical locality of the origin of the purchases provide them with no representation, i.e., this is the core of taxation without representation--regardless to whom the sales tax is being pinned upon, be it the consumer or not, the seller is the party being obliged to determine and pay the tax.
    But they provide them with a customer base and, according to the courts, the privilege to do business within their respective jurisdictions. And taxation without representation happens all the time -- taxes are imposed on minors, estates, trusts, and corporations, none of whom can vote.

    8. This is an egregiously unreasonable burden to be foisted onto national/international businesses, them having to keep up to date on the ever changing and fickle taxation and reporting requirements of all 50-states.
    National and international businesses are big enough to have in-house legal and accounting expertise and/or software programs to address this. The real burden will be on very small internet businesses who don't have such help, although I suspect someone like Turbotax will come out with a software program tailored to small businesses that will make tracking all the states' tax rates very easy. In addition, as the majority opinion pointed out, there are "20 States that have adopted the Streamlined Sales and Use Tax Agreement. This system standardizes taxes to reduce administrative and compliance costs: It requires a single, state level tax administration, uniform definitions of products and services, simplified tax rate structures, and other uniform rules. It also provides sellers access to sales tax administration software paid for by the State. Sellers who choose to use such software are immune from audit liability."

    9. States are sovereign to themselves, excepting the grant of authority provided by them and their people to the federal government; a state cannot compel the residents of another state to act simply because one or more of its own residents interacted with them.
    It's a question of nexus. The majority opinion pointed out that the South Dakota statute exempted out-of-state sellers with less than $100,000 annual sales or 200 individual sales per year. Anything less might very well violate Due Process.

    10. This power will likely result in states imposing increasing out of state sales tax rates in a concerted effort to quash out or penalize all competition--and in effect sheltering brick and mortars.
    A State cannot discriminate against interstate commerce. Any increased sales tax rate would have to also apply to in-state sales.
    We have long had death and taxes as the two standards of inevitability. But there are those who believe that death is the preferable of the two. "At least," as one man said, "there's one advantage about death; it doesn't get worse every time Congress meets."
    Erwin N. Griswold

    Taxes: Of life's two certainties, the only one for which you can get an automatic extension.
    Anonymous

  12. #40
    Quote Originally Posted by Swordsmyth View Post
    You only show up to attack Trump when he is wrong
    Make America the Land of the Free & the Home of the Brave again



  13. Remove this section of ads by registering.
  14. #41
    Justice Anthony Kennedy wrote that the previous decisions were flawed.

    "Each year the physical presence rule against robbing banks becomes further removed from economic reality and results in significant revenue losses to the States bank robbers. [...]," he wrote [...]
    Fixed.

    Just how do you "lose" something you didn't have to begin with?

    (File in same drawer as "an increase in spending is a spending 'cut' if the increase is not as large as some other previously-only-notional-and-now-completely-irrelevant number" ...)
    The Bastiat Collection · FREE PDF · FREE EPUB · PAPER
    Frédéric Bastiat (1801-1850)

    • "When law and morality are in contradiction to each other, the citizen finds himself in the cruel alternative of either losing his moral sense, or of losing his respect for the law."
      -- The Law (p. 54)
    • "Government is that great fiction, through which everybody endeavors to live at the expense of everybody else."
      -- Government (p. 99)
    • "[W]ar is always begun in the interest of the few, and at the expense of the many."
      -- Economic Sophisms - Second Series (p. 312)
    • "There are two principles that can never be reconciled - Liberty and Constraint."
      -- Harmonies of Political Economy - Book One (p. 447)

    · tu ne cede malis sed contra audentior ito ·

  15. #42
    Quote Originally Posted by Sonny Tufts View Post
    You would be liable for use tax in your state of residence, although it might be very difficult for the state to enforce the liability.
    So far as this tax applies to non-privileged business activities, the ‘use tax’ is not constitutional, for states possess no sovereign power to control its residents as to their activities or arrangements occurring or taking place external to its borders (and frankly have no justifiable business seeking the business or sales records of foreign entities that its residents or visitors are party to)—e.g., imagine the utter lunacy of establishing a “vacation tax” upon residents that seek their fun and relaxation out of state.

    Quote Originally Posted by Sonny Tufts View Post
    The prohibition on taxing "imports" without Congressional approval found in I.10.2 applies only to shipments from a foreign country, not those from other States.
    1. This also pertains to establishing treaties, alliances, and entering into agreements or compacts with other states.
    2. While, true concerning what are imports and exports, it is indicative that states are not to meddle in the affairs of foreign entities, including other states.
    3. This is even further substantiated by the restriction on states from laying tonnage duties for the use of state operated ports.

    Quote Originally Posted by Sonny Tufts View Post
    They have the authority to impose use taxes upon their residents, but it's much easier to require out-of-state sellers to collect sales tax.
    No, no they do not. The tax is merely a runaround machination devised by progressive-minded control freaks. In fact its name is very telling, the ‘use tax’ is a tax upon items brought into the state after having been purchased outside of the state by its residents or visitors, so as to effect a “level” selling field for the merchants within the state (regardless if the items purchased are even available intrastate.) This tax is based on the faulty notion that governments are to be operated as for-profit corporations, which must continuously exceed financial projections. However, the sole basis of taxation is to provide revenue to respective government entities for the better good and protection of the whole public (as opposed to specific individuals and groups), not to “level” the field between competing states and the merchants thereof (in fact government is not obliged to shield business ventures of any kind), make the bottom line black, or punish, restrict, or encourage individual choice or behaviors, and the like (e.g., such as excessive taxes on tobacco, firearms, and fuel products.)

    Quote Originally Posted by Sonny Tufts View Post
    But they provide them with a customer base and, according to the courts, the privilege to do business within their respective jurisdictions. And taxation without representation happens all the time -- taxes are imposed on minors, estates, trusts, and corporations, none of whom can vote.
    Those examples hardly qualify as taxation without representation as it is meant.

    Quote Originally Posted by Sonny Tufts View Post
    A State cannot discriminate against interstate commerce. Any increased sales tax rate would have to also apply to in-state sales.
    State sales taxes are in-state sales as defined by such form of taxation; but sure they could, they would simply color it under a different name or legal theory/justification (just like states can prohibit commerce all together such fluoride removing water filters, mail-order ammunition, large capacity magazines, hooch, etc.), further still, individual states set their own tax rates, so they could work in cooperation with each other depending on the given pros and cons of their geography and commercial atmosphere; similarly to how each county sets their own sales tax rate—which will affect other serious concerns with this form of proposed taxation.

    Also, this is a method of double taxation, for the consumer is going to very likely be taxed on the same act by both their state of residence and the state of purchase, and further may have to additionally pay service fees, shipping fees, insurance, etc.

    So effectively, conglomerations and monopolies are going to become motivated to setup operations in states with no (or very little) sales taxes, creating a Delaware corporation effect.
    The object of life is not to be on the side of the majority, but to escape finding one’s self in the ranks of the insane.” — Marcus Aurelius

    They’re not buying it. CNN, you dumb bastards!” — President Trump 2020

    Consilio et Animis de Oppresso Liber

  16. #43
    Really, it is a great victory to be twice taxed for the same event? Say, let's just get the federal government in on this too, it can go from being a great victory to being a monumentally astonishing amazing victory. Seriously, WTF!
    The object of life is not to be on the side of the majority, but to escape finding one’s self in the ranks of the insane.” — Marcus Aurelius

    They’re not buying it. CNN, you dumb bastards!” — President Trump 2020

    Consilio et Animis de Oppresso Liber

  17. #44
    Quote Originally Posted by kpitcher View Post
    Gotta love that selling used stuff on ebay will now make me pay tax on it. Double theft!

    This is going to get messy fast for an average small online seller to figure out state and local taxes. Large retailers must be loving this
    Yes
    Do something Danke

  18. #45
    Quote Originally Posted by Weston White View Post
    So far as this tax applies to non-privileged business activities, the ‘use tax’ is not constitutional
    A state's authority to tax its citizens doesn't depend on their engaging in privileged activity.

    While, true concerning what are imports and exports, it is indicative that states are not to meddle in the affairs of foreign entities, including other states.
    It's not meddling when the states enter into the sales tax agreement voluntarily.

    Also, this is a method of double taxation, for the consumer is going to very likely be taxed on the same act by both their state of residence and the state of purchase
    Hopelessly wrong. If you pay sales tax in the state in which you made the purchase, you won't owe use tax when you bring it back to your home state. If you didn't pay sales tax, however (because sales tax isn't normally charged on items that are shipped out of state immediately after purchase), you will.

    Really, it is a great victory to be twice taxed for the same event? Say, let's just get the federal government in on this too, it can go from being a great victory to being a monumentally astonishing amazing victory. Seriously, WTF!
    States and the federal government tax the same thing all the time, especially in those states (such as California) that have their own income tax.
    We have long had death and taxes as the two standards of inevitability. But there are those who believe that death is the preferable of the two. "At least," as one man said, "there's one advantage about death; it doesn't get worse every time Congress meets."
    Erwin N. Griswold

    Taxes: Of life's two certainties, the only one for which you can get an automatic extension.
    Anonymous

  19. #46
    Quote Originally Posted by Sonny Tufts View Post
    A state's authority to tax its citizens doesn't depend on their engaging in privileged activity.
    Not exactly, such authority is wholly dependent upon context (e.g., California recognizes within its state constitution that the U.S. Constitution is the supreme law of the land and is thusly obliged to serve according to its erudite maxims), specifically, as to the inherent rights of individuals and their pursuit of life, liberty and happiness; there are very concerning ethical considerations due to the people being served by their just form of republican government.

    * Government officials don't just get to do whatever the hell they wish, simply because they were "elected" or because they believe themselves to be self-entitled from their purchasing of a juris doctor or political science degree from whatever overpriced and overvalued socialistic university.

    Quote Originally Posted by Sonny Tufts View Post
    It's not meddling when the states enter into the sales tax agreement voluntarily.
    Again, the federal constitution fairly clearly besets the states from doing such; else, we are no longer 50-sovereign states, but are just one large bloc-continent with a national government and its states existing in name only with borders, flags, seals, etc., which are merely ceremonial and nothing more (see how well this worked out for the Soviet Socialist Republics of Russia.)

    Quote Originally Posted by Sonny Tufts View Post
    Hopelessly wrong. If you pay sales tax in the state in which you made the purchase, you won't owe use tax when you bring it back to your home state. If you didn't pay sales tax, however (because sales tax isn't normally charged on items that are shipped out of state immediately after purchase), you will.
    No, that is not actually true (see below); regardless, it is the case in the most practical sense, as the intention of this is all is to collect taxes on Internet purchases, which includes taxes due to the state the purchases are made in--so the consumer is being doubly taxed, while the seller is effectively obliged to do work for both a state they have no direct association with in addition to the state they are operating from within.

    You must pay California use tax when you purchase out-of-state items by telephone, Internet, mail, or in person and both of the following apply:

    • The seller does not collect California sales or use tax.
    • You use, give away, store, or consume the item in this state.
    www.ftb.ca.gov/individuals/use-tax.shtml

    Quote Originally Posted by Sonny Tufts View Post
    States and the federal government tax the same thing all the time, especially in those states (such as California) that have their own income tax.
    Oh thank you for proving my point; however (notwithstanding the gross misapplication of individual income taxes), these are from distinct levels of government, nonetheless, the federal government holds supremacy on the matter, so states should not be levying taxes upon that which is already being taxed elsewhere.

    * Noting too that you are being taxed on a portion of money that was taxed and collected by another government and was never at any time in possession or control of the taxpayer and was of zero realized benefit to that taxpayer other than to owe taxes on it. E.g., if a person makes $75,000 a year, they are paying taxes on that whole sum to both the IRS and FTB, even though $25,000 of it was turned over to the IRS and $5,000 to the FTB, for example (these figures are not based on any actual tax percentages, just as a hypothetical.)
    Last edited by Weston White; 06-25-2018 at 11:55 AM.
    The object of life is not to be on the side of the majority, but to escape finding one’s self in the ranks of the insane.” — Marcus Aurelius

    They’re not buying it. CNN, you dumb bastards!” — President Trump 2020

    Consilio et Animis de Oppresso Liber

  20. #47
    Will this bring Circuit CIty and Blockbuster back? Can the tax be retro-active? Could state law rule that their current laws on the books include websites that don't have a physical presence even when the words don't explicitly say so?

  21. #48
    .... So next time I buy a $2500 generator online, they'll charge me $99 + Tax, and $2400 for shipping and handling?



  22. Remove this section of ads by registering.
  23. #49
    Quote Originally Posted by Weston White View Post
    No, that is not actually true (see below); regardless, it is the case in the most practical sense, as the intention of this is all is to collect taxes on Internet purchases, which includes taxes due to the state the purchases are made in--so the consumer is being doubly taxed, while the seller is effectively obliged to do work for both a state they have no direct association with in addition to the state they are operating from within.

    You must pay California use tax when you purchase out-of-state items by telephone, Internet, mail, or in person and both of the following apply:

    The seller does not collect California sales or use tax.
    You use, give away, store, or consume the item in this state.
    You neglected to read further and note how the use tax is calculated. Any sales tax paid to the state in which the purchase is made is subtracted from the use tax payable to California. There is no double tax because you will never pay more than the use tax you would owe if no sales tax had ever been collected by the seller.
    Last edited by Sonny Tufts; 06-24-2018 at 09:58 AM.
    We have long had death and taxes as the two standards of inevitability. But there are those who believe that death is the preferable of the two. "At least," as one man said, "there's one advantage about death; it doesn't get worse every time Congress meets."
    Erwin N. Griswold

    Taxes: Of life's two certainties, the only one for which you can get an automatic extension.
    Anonymous

  24. #50
    Quote Originally Posted by Sonny Tufts View Post
    You neglected to read further and note how the use tax is calculated. Any sales tax paid to the state in which the purchase is made is subtracted from the use tax payable to California. There is no double tax because you will never pay more than the use tax you would owe if no sales tax had ever been collected by the seller.
    Regardless, you are in fact being double-taxed, you are just being permitted to deduct the lesser amount, if applicable--which is a stipulation that could be amended at any time.

    Use the Tax Lookup Table... "File or Page Not Found" There is the California $#@!-tard bureaucrats for ya! (Guess they are all too busy watching gay porn in their gender neutral restrooms to do any actual work.)
    The object of life is not to be on the side of the majority, but to escape finding one’s self in the ranks of the insane.” — Marcus Aurelius

    They’re not buying it. CNN, you dumb bastards!” — President Trump 2020

    Consilio et Animis de Oppresso Liber

  25. #51
    Quote Originally Posted by Occam's Banana View Post
    Fixed.

    Just how do you "lose" something you didn't have to begin with?

    (File in same drawer as "an increase in spending is a spending 'cut' if the increase is not as large as some other previously-only-notional-and-now-completely-irrelevant number" ...)

    "You must spread some Reputation around before giving it to Occam's Banana again."
    Chris

    "Government ... does not exist of necessity, but rather by virtue of a tragic, almost comical combination of klutzy, opportunistic terrorism against sitting ducks whom it pretends to shelter, plus our childish phobia of responsibility, praying to be exempted from the hard reality of life on life's terms." Wolf DeVoon

    "...Make America Great Again. I'm interested in making American FREE again. Then the greatness will come automatically."Ron Paul

  26. #52
    Mi9 Retail, a leading global supplier of omni-channel retail software, today announced that its e-commerce solution is ready to support the legislative changes determined by the United States Supreme Court ruling, South Dakota v. Wayfair, on tax compliance requirements for online retailers. Mi9 Retail business partner Avalara delivers tax compliant solutions integrated with Mi9 e-Commerce that allow retailers to manage compliance in the face of ever-changing tax regulations. The Mi9 e-commerce solution also natively supports the tax parameters needed for online merchants when the new ruling is enforced.

    More at: http://markets.businessinsider.com/n...xes-1027331038
    Never attempt to teach a pig to sing; it wastes your time and annoys the pig.

    Robert Heinlein

    Give a man an inch and right away he thinks he's a ruler

    Groucho Marx

    I love mankind…it’s people I can’t stand.

    Linus, from the Peanuts comic

    You cannot have liberty without morality and morality without faith

    Alexis de Torqueville

    Those who fail to learn from the past are condemned to repeat it.
    Those who learn from the past are condemned to watch everybody else repeat it

    A Zero Hedge comment

  27. #53

  28. #54
    This South Dakota vs Wayfair decision is terribly anti- progress, anti-prosperity, anti-consumer.

    On the practical side, it increases the costs of providing goods to consumers. Just having to keep track of continuously changing sales tax laws of fifty separate states plus territories. Not merely varying rates, but also which goods the taxes apply to, many with differing rates for different goods. For instance Texas has one sales tax rate for ordinary deodorant and a different rate for anti-perspirant. Amongst the various jurisdictions, there is a flood of different product categories with varying rates – edible vs non-edible, large ticket, small ticket. Consumables, clothing vs books, containing certain ingredients for without, large appliances vs, household, and so forth.


    Then there is also keeping track of all the separate thresholds. South Dakota set a threshold of $100,000 or 200 transaction. Another might set the threshold at 50 transaction, while another at $250,0000 or 500 transaction.


    And there is the question of how the product is purchase. What if a Citizen from New York visits California and purchases an item there and has it shipped back to New York. It is likewise the purchase of an out of state product delivered to New York. How is the purchase any Are the California business now to keep tract of tax laws of every other jurisdiction if they offer shipping for their in person customers. What if the customer order by telephone? It is no different then internet. What if the New York Resident is in New Jersey or even Mexico at the time he places the internet order with the California business? Must the taxes be withheld?


    Then there is also how the state categorizes a sale “in the state”. For instance Wisconsin may require taxing all sales where the billing address is in the state. Minnesota may tax all sales where the product is shipped to an address in the state. And what if consumer in in Wisconsin orders a gift from a seller in California to ship to her aunt in Minnesota. Now the poor business has to withhold and file taxes for both Wisconsin and Minnesota.


    And the 50 states is just the beginning. Every municipality, county or other public incorporation that has a sales tax will want its piece of the racket too. The Supreme Court’s rational for allowing this monstrosity applies equally to every municipal or local sales tax. After all, “Each year the physical presence rule becomes further removed from economic reality and results in significant revenue losses to the [Municipalities].” These local governments are being “deprived” of their cut of the sales tax racket by the You think they are going to want to be left out of this bonanza. Some state will be the first to require collection of the local sales taxes as well, and others will follow. Now instead of keeping tract 50+ continuously changing tax jurisdictions, you’ll have to keep tract of and act as collection goon for thousands of different tax jurisdiction, with varying rates for a plethora of different products.


    And the business does not get paid to do all this collection racket, and accounting, and risk, and continuous legal upkeep for these rackets. The business must bear all the costs imposed y these obligations. The Amazons and Wal-Marts will certainly be able to created special accounting and legal departments and absorb the additional overhead. But many small, medium and less big businesses will be kept at bay by the increased costs, complexities, and risk.


    The incentive will be to move all online retailing overseas. We could see the explosion of online retail all going to China. Sure there will be customs tax on anything requiring it. But that at least is only one jurisdiction to keep track of. Plus that is paid by the recipient. The retailer need not keep track of or collect it. It’s just one more nail in the coffin of US competitiveness and trade.


    And there are serious legal fallacies in the Curt’s decision as well. First, the Court completely overturned long standing well-established precedent.


    What basis does a state have over some business with no presence in that state? Just because some consumer in the state decides to buy from a business in another state? If anything, the state could requires its own residents to keep track of and pay sales tax on goods they buy elsewhere.


    If a business is in California or Texas and has no physical presence in South Dakota, is South Dakota to be able to revoke its Texas or California business license. Will South Dakota send its revenue enforcement officers to go and arrest business officer in Texas or California? Shut down their business in other states? Where does South Dakota get jurisdiction to impose laws and enforcement inside other sovereign states?


    P.S. – TAXATION IS THEFT!
    "Let it not be said that we did nothing." - Dr. Ron Paul. "Stand up for what you believe in, even if you are standing alone." - Sophie Magdalena Scholl
    "War is the health of the State." - Randolph Bourne "Freedom is the answer. ... Now, what's the question?" - Ernie Hancock.

  29. #55
    Quote Originally Posted by Sonny Tufts View Post
    The Supreme Court created the physical presence test to begin with, and today's opinion simply undoes what the Court did decades ago.
    Indeed. That's the way I see it. This ruling pretty much puts us back where we started.

    My biggest concern is that Congress is now going to want to put their grubby hands all over laws to make the Fed government come up with a standardized national sales tax. I don't want to pay the same thing as California in sales tax here in Georgia. But to make it fair, it would have to be the same. (which I'm sure our state level critters at the GA general assembly would LOVE). I'm sure the Feds would want their cut of the sales tax, too, for their troubles.
    Last edited by nobody's_hero; 07-05-2018 at 10:38 AM.
    Quote Originally Posted by timosman View Post
    This is getting silly.
    Quote Originally Posted by Swordsmyth View Post
    It started silly.
    T.S. Eliot's The Hollow Men

    "One of the penalties for refusing to participate in politics is that you end up being governed by your inferiors." - Plato

    We Are Running Out of Time - Mini Me

    Quote Originally Posted by Philhelm
    I part ways with "libertarianism" when it transitions from ideology grounded in logic into self-defeating autism for the sake of ideological purity.

  30. #56
    Quote Originally Posted by enhanced_deficit View Post
    More $$s for States but this is going to hurt many small businesses online particularly.
    Hmm. Maybe. I would think they are also hurt by having a physical presence and paying taxes while a huge online company like Amazon can offer the same goods cheaper since they don't have to factor sales tax. People walk in your store, look at an item, and say, "Hmm. I can get that a lot cheaper online." And they walk out without buying anything (from you). Running a brick and mortar store these days is like 'trying it before buying it' and they ain't buying from you.

    Kind of like tariffs in a way. If I want to try to sell to you, I get punched in the face. But if you want to sell to me, you get a pat on the back. One of us is gonna lose the will to run a business, and it's probably gonna be the one who keeps getting punched in the face. Ideally, no one should be getting punches to the face or pats on the back and the best business would win.
    Last edited by nobody's_hero; 07-05-2018 at 10:50 AM.
    Quote Originally Posted by timosman View Post
    This is getting silly.
    Quote Originally Posted by Swordsmyth View Post
    It started silly.
    T.S. Eliot's The Hollow Men

    "One of the penalties for refusing to participate in politics is that you end up being governed by your inferiors." - Plato

    We Are Running Out of Time - Mini Me

    Quote Originally Posted by Philhelm
    I part ways with "libertarianism" when it transitions from ideology grounded in logic into self-defeating autism for the sake of ideological purity.



  31. Remove this section of ads by registering.
Page 2 of 2 FirstFirst 12


Similar Threads

  1. SCOTUS enacts Internet Sales Tax
    By Matt Collins in forum U.S. Political News
    Replies: 3
    Last Post: 06-21-2018, 12:31 PM
  2. Replies: 0
    Last Post: 09-06-2016, 11:46 AM
  3. Internet Sales Tax Case Ignored By SCOTUS
    By Matt Collins in forum U.S. Political News
    Replies: 1
    Last Post: 12-03-2013, 02:00 AM
  4. Replies: 37
    Last Post: 03-23-2013, 09:55 PM
  5. Bionic Mannequins Spy on Shoppers to Aid Sales( facial recognition cams)
    By CaptainAmerica in forum Individual Rights Violations: Case Studies
    Replies: 3
    Last Post: 12-01-2012, 07:26 AM

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •