If you can read this, either the style sheet didn't load or you have an older browser that doesn't support style sheets. Try clearing your browser cache and refreshing the page.

(The Big Story) NewsFlash US Senate passes Internet Sales Tax Bill. Why? Because fark you, that's why   (bigstory.ap.org) divider line 573
    More: NewsFlash, Senate, internet, senate passes, sales taxes, D-Ill, United States  
•       •       •

16646 clicks; posted to Main » on 06 May 2013 at 10:06 PM (1 year ago)   |  Favorite    |   share:  Share on Twitter share via Email Share on Facebook   more»


Want to get NewsFlash notifications in email?

573 Comments   (+0 »)
   
View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest

Archived thread

First | « | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | 9 | 10 | 11 | 12 | » | Last | Show all
 
2013-05-06 11:06:28 PM  

Gonz: And, if you want to play that out, this will be... less regressive. It'll still be according-to-Hoyle regressive, of course. But it's not like the urban poor have been making out like bandits by avoiding online sales tax. It shifts a slight bit of tax burden to middle and upper-middle class, primarily suburban, consumers. It's not really going to bother the 1%, it's not going to really be an issue for the bottom 20%. For the rest of us- we get to pitch in and pay our share for civilization. Fair enough.


i.imgur.com
 
2013-05-06 11:06:31 PM  
i wonder how this affects amazon marketplace sellers (like my self)

i am not a mega seller and only do ~30k a year in sales

will i now have to deal with sales tax laws and fill out 50 different forms a month concerning my sales all the states because i use Amazon as a store front or will marketplace sellers be considered business separate from amazon
 
2013-05-06 11:07:01 PM  
Here's the thing I have never understood about sales tax:  It's a tax on the merchant, not the consumer, yet many states require by law that merchants charge the consumer for sales tax.  The merchant would actually be violating the law if they didn't charge said sales tax, but still paid the state their 1%-10% tax*.  That just doesn't make sense to me.  Why the fark does the state care if the customer is charged that tax, as long as they get the taxes from the merchant, who's supposed to be the one paying the tax to begin with?

*Obviously, a merchant could adjust their pricing so that the final cost of a given product was MSRP without sales tax, but if they don't specifically and explicitly charge "sales tax" on the transaction, they'd still be in violation of the law.
 
2013-05-06 11:07:08 PM  
I am actually OK with this.  To me it is no different than having to pay tax when you go to another state and purchase something.
 
2013-05-06 11:07:52 PM  
Bookmarking www.amazon.mx
 
2013-05-06 11:08:41 PM  

wsupfoo2: Rindred: So, if I buy something online. The vendor/store isn't in my state. The company that I have my credit card with doesn't reside in my state. The company that processes the credit card to pay the vendor doesn't reside in my state. Question: what entitles my state to even one penny of that transaction? If I cross a state border and buy a sandwich, I don't pay my home state sales tax on it. This isn't the same thing how?


If you had something shipped to you, you made a transaction in the state you live in.  The value was recieved wherever it was shipped.  Why is it different than buying it in a local store who has to charge sales tax?  If you crossed state lines, you would have made a transaction in another state where you received the goods.  We tax where the transaction value was received.  Why is that hard?

If you want to argue the concept of a sales tax, fine, you have a point.  But to argue that the method of purchase determines whether its taxable by anyone is absurd.


Presumably, I paid for shipping and therefore it's free on board wherever it's shipped from, and the transaction occurred there. Accounting is fun!
 
2013-05-06 11:09:08 PM  
And the House will shoot it down.  Sunrise, sunset.
 
2013-05-06 11:09:09 PM  

Mock26: I am actually OK with this.  To me it is no different than having to pay tax when you go to another state and purchase something.



It actually is different.  The bill does not pay the taxes of states you are buying from.  It applies your state tax (if applicable) to internet purchases you make.
 
2013-05-06 11:09:22 PM  
Yay. More taxes. Vote em all out. One more reason.
 
2013-05-06 11:09:51 PM  

TV's Vinnie: I really cannot fathom why the Amazon bigshots want this bill so bad. If it happens, their sales are gonna plummet.


There is already plenty of data that proves it won't have any affect on Amazon's sales.  And Amazon has always held the position that they want to see something nationwide than on a piece meal city by city or state by state basis.
 
2013-05-06 11:09:52 PM  

tallguywithglasseson: Supporters say the bill makes it relatively easy for Internet retailers to comply. States must provide free computer software to help retailers calculate sales taxes, based on where shoppers live. States must also establish a single entity to receive Internet sales tax revenue, so retailers don't have to send it to individual counties or cities.

Weird, that's right in TFA.


Even better, the software has to do remittance.  Sellers won't even have to mail checks.

Every farking thing that states require sellers to do will be done by software that states must provide for free and maintain themselves.  Sellers are immunized against  liability for state errors in software or tax rate databases. Every state's software must handle sales taxes for all states, so a seller will need only one software package.  It will all be done with the click of a button.

Farking whiners haven't even looked at what they're whining about.
 
2013-05-06 11:09:54 PM  
Obama:  I will not raise taxes on the middle class.

Well, I guess he lied.  But the libtards don't wanna hear it.  They voted for him twice because black.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UJVMWjTQh_Y
 
2013-05-06 11:10:01 PM  

optikeye: Seriously? Do you save every receipt from a online purchase; a book or a dongle or something rather incidental.


You should see his porn receipts. I wouldn't audit him either. PissGuzzlingGrannies? Really?
 
2013-05-06 11:10:22 PM  

IronTom: basemetal: I thought you guys liked taxes....

That was when the $250k and up were paying them.  This here tax affects everybody who buys stuff on the internet.


You believed them?  Shiat son, they need 50% of everyones income down to the people who make about $70,000 a year just to support current spending. Because when you take a rich persons income, they find other ways to be comfortable with their asset and revenues drop over time.

You realize that each head of household who qualifies for benefits from the government can collect between $27k and $60k per year in benefits?   http://www.weeklystandard.com/blogs/over-60000-welfare-spentper-house h old-poverty_657889.html

And in my local area a child in poverty is eligible for additional benefits in the form of state spending in the amount of $30,000 per year. This includes education (three meals a day in come cases) healthcare (chips) daycare, and access to SSDI, TANF, HUD, etc that may be duplicated under the above number.

But either way a single mother with 4 kids has a household which is benefitting from about $200,000 per year in government spending. Thats not cash in her pocket, but that is what we spend on the various programs she beneftis from.

On the other side of the coin is those of us who pay taxes...... our median income is about $45,000 per year, and we pay taxes out of that amount.

The numbers are all available on various government websites. Just take a calculator or spread sheet and add it up your self. Taxpayers are the working poor and we support a huge bloated welfare state. Its got to change.
 
2013-05-06 11:10:31 PM  

BarkingUnicorn: Remote sellers are not being taxed.  They are collecting taxes from in-state buyers and remitting that money to the buyer's state.


I don't get why, as a resident of a state with no sales tax, I should have to invest in infrastructure not otherwise required by my state on behalf of a state I have nothing to do with except that I'm shipping them a product.

If they want to collect this tax they should just make UPS/USPS/FedEx collect a use tax upon delivery.  That seems a little more fair, since UPS/USPS/FedEx are already doing business in the states that collect a sales/use tax.
 
2013-05-06 11:10:50 PM  
Amazon likes it because they're planning on setting up distribution centers in (almost) every state anyway. They'd rather not be known as the one online retailer where you always pay sales tax.

Best Buy, Target, etc., like it for the obvious reasons.
But the price breaks you get by "showrooming" go well above some tax consideration. Most of the big brick & mortar stores still face some significant challenges.

Me, I don't give a shiat. Seems fair I guess... but of course I won't kick and scream if the House doesn't act on it.

//and here I thought you flat-tax tea-tards were big sales tax fans
 
2013-05-06 11:11:35 PM  

jgi: Hugely anti-small business legislation. Amazon can cope with this. Small businesses may find it to be a huge paperwork burden. $1M in gross sales in a year is not a lot if you sell high price, low margin items. The negative side of this bill isn't that we all have to pay sales tax on online purchases. The negative side is that the large corporations win again.


It is no different than a small business that does not do internet sales having to deal with state taxes from in-store purchases.
 
2013-05-06 11:11:40 PM  

Gonz: tjfly: IronTom: basemetal: I thought you guys liked taxes....

That was when the $250k and up were paying them.  This here tax affects everybody who buys stuff on the internet.

Obama: "I can make a firm pledge. Under my plan, no family making less than $250,000 a year will see any form of tax increase. Not your income tax, not your payroll tax, not your capital gains taxes, not any of your taxes."
Lying SOB.

So the President controls your state taxes?


He also broke his promise on $250,000, they lowered it to 200,000 after the election and then added obamacare which primarily hits the middle class.
 
2013-05-06 11:11:47 PM  
Good.

Now if they would only create an online news tax to help print journalism and we can save even more traditional businesses from online competition.
 
2013-05-06 11:11:49 PM  
meh, seems fair I guess.
Still sucky
 
2013-05-06 11:12:13 PM  

BafflerMeal: Mock26: I am actually OK with this.  To me it is no different than having to pay tax when you go to another state and purchase something.


It actually is different.  The bill does not pay the taxes of states you are buying from.  It applies your state tax (if applicable) to internet purchases you make.


...which already should have been happening under previously-existing law.
 
2013-05-06 11:12:30 PM  

Teufelaffe: Here's the thing I have never understood about sales tax:  It's a tax on the merchant, not the consumer,



Nope. It's a tax on the purchaser. The merchant is just collecting it. As to the rest of your post, it's essentially about full disclosure of pricing to the consumer.
 
2013-05-06 11:13:35 PM  

Amos Quito: FROM EACH
according to his ability

TO EACH
according to his need


 /You're not selfish, are you?


I think 16 trillion dollars in national debt and 140 trillion in unfounded liabilities... Seems there's a bit too much "need"...
 
2013-05-06 11:13:42 PM  

BarkingUnicorn: tallguywithglasseson: Supporters say the bill makes it relatively easy for Internet retailers to comply. States must provide free computer software to help retailers calculate sales taxes, based on where shoppers live. States must also establish a single entity to receive Internet sales tax revenue, so retailers don't have to send it to individual counties or cities.

Weird, that's right in TFA.

Even better, the software has to do remittance.  Sellers won't even have to mail checks.

Every farking thing that states require sellers to do will be done by software that states must provide for free and maintain themselves.  Sellers are immunized against  liability for state errors in software or tax rate databases. Every state's software must handle sales taxes for all states, so a seller will need only one software package.  It will all be done with the click of a button.

Farking whiners haven't even looked at what they're whining about.


I'm definitely not trying to argue here; I'm just uneducated. What is the software that states provide for these taxes? And are states required to update it every year?

My only reference for the horrible horrible injustice of this bill is a few friends that ran a small business and biatched about tax laws, accountability, and software. They were stupid though, so I wouldn't be surprised if there was something simple that they just missed out on.
 
2013-05-06 11:13:44 PM  

Teufelaffe: Here's the thing I have never understood about sales tax:  It's a tax on the merchant, not the consumer, yet many states require by law that merchants charge the consumer for sales tax.  The merchant would actually be violating the law if they didn't charge said sales tax, but still paid the state their 1%-10% tax*.  That just doesn't make sense to me.  Why the fark does the state care if the customer is charged that tax, as long as they get the taxes from the merchant, who's supposed to be the one paying the tax to begin with?

*Obviously, a merchant could adjust their pricing so that the final cost of a given product was MSRP without sales tax, but if they don't specifically and explicitly charge "sales tax" on the transaction, they'd still be in violation of the law.


Can you cite where it is illegal in some states to not charge the consumer the tax?
 
2013-05-06 11:13:54 PM  

Mock26: jgi: Hugely anti-small business legislation. Amazon can cope with this. Small businesses may find it to be a huge paperwork burden. $1M in gross sales in a year is not a lot if you sell high price, low margin items. The negative side of this bill isn't that we all have to pay sales tax on online purchases. The negative side is that the large corporations win again.

It is no different than a small business that does not do internet sales having to deal with state taxes from in-store purchases.


Which state or municipality has the lowest sales tax?

Anyone want to go in with me and form a legal entity that exists in the best spot in the country to pay the least tax under this bill?  We can be an umbrella company for everyone who pays us a small fee and then they can collect mush lower internet sales tax......
 
2013-05-06 11:14:22 PM  

AdolfOliverPanties: This is another example of why we are farked.
Politicians do not do what constituents want.
They do what big money wants, or they do something that will allow them to take in more of our cash so they can spend it on shiat constituents don't want.


Just because you don't want it, doesn't mean all constituents don't want it, this bill actually helps the mom and pop shops and other small businesses compete with online vendors that don't collect sales tax. This isn't purely a big money bill, it is a treat all businesses equally bill.
 
2013-05-06 11:14:23 PM  

BarkingUnicorn: lenfromak: TV's Vinnie: I really cannot fathom why the Amazon bigshots want this bill so bad. If it happens, their sales are gonna plummet.

It's the smaller online vendors who will be unable to handle the crazy quilt of sales taxes and their associated states' tax software that's somehow supposed to work seamlessly with their own, and subsequently fail, leaving the big boys like Amazon standing and, again, profiting.

Stop making a fool of yourself and go  read the bill before discussing it.

http://www.marketplacefairness.org/



Will they be taxing the shipping (UPS, FedEx, USPS) portion of the bill as well?
 
2013-05-06 11:14:24 PM  

tjfly: IronTom: basemetal: I thought you guys liked taxes....

That was when the $250k and up were paying them.  This here tax affects everybody who buys stuff on the internet.

Obama: "I can make a firm pledge. Under my plan, no family making less than $250,000 a year will see any form of tax increase. Not your income tax, not your payroll tax, not your capital gains taxes, not any of your taxes."
Lying SOB.


Last time I checked, there is no Federal sales tax, even if this passes.  Take it up with your state.  If you live in a state that has a sales tax, you were supposed to be paying it for online purchases all this time.  No more free rides.
 
2013-05-06 11:14:35 PM  
Well, that's okay, subby.

Since I won't have any more money after they pass the tax than I do right now, this means I'll just have to spend less to offset the difference.

Do the folks in the Senate not get that? In order to pay this new tax, I will have to reduce my spending to offset it. IN OTHER WORDS, YOU'RE FORCING ME TO SPEND LESS MONEY PRE-TAX IN ORDER TO PAY YOUR STUPID TAX. YOU'RE TAKING MONEY OUT OF THE POCKETS OF ONLINE MERCHANTS, NOT ONLINE CONSUMERS, BY PASSING THIS TAX. IS THAT REALLY WHAT YOUR BUSINESS CONSTITUENTS WANTED?

(*tap-tap*) Hello? Is this thing working?
 
2013-05-06 11:15:04 PM  

davidphogan: BarkingUnicorn: Remote sellers are not being taxed.  They are collecting taxes from in-state buyers and remitting that money to the buyer's state.

I don't get why, as a resident of a state with no sales tax, I should have to invest in infrastructure not otherwise required by my state on behalf of a state I have nothing to do with except that I'm shipping them a product.


You won't have to.  Nothing will change for you.  It's the other way around:

1.  If you live in a state with sales tax
2.  online retailers of a certain size will have to collect whatever the tax would be in your state
3.  If said taxes are collected, the business must then remit the taxes to your state.

If you live in a state with no sales tax, nothing will really change for you.  If you live in a state with a sales tax, then it would be applied to all internet purchases by the business you are buying from
 
2013-05-06 11:15:33 PM  
Well, I guess when you oppose every tax ever, you'll eventually happen to oppose a bad tax. It's still surreal to see the Grover Norquist bunch on the correct side of an issue.

/yes, I realize that finding Grover on my side should give me doubts about my position
 
2013-05-06 11:15:34 PM  

davidphogan: I don't get why, as a resident of a state with no sales tax, I should have to invest in infrastructure not otherwise required by my state on behalf of a state I have nothing to do with except that I'm shipping them a product.


wat
 
2013-05-06 11:16:56 PM  

NotoriousFire: BitwiseShift:
Very concerned about not getting Texas Sales Tax Exemption Certificate not honored by some web seller in East B*ttFark. What an excellent bureacracy the Senate wants to create.


What? Texas has a sales tax...

"The Texas state sales and use tax rate is 6.25%, but local taxing jurisdictions (cities, counties, special purpose districts, and transit authorities) may also impose sales and use tax up to 2% for a total maximum combined rate of 8.25%. " http://www.window.state.tx.us/taxinfo/sales/faq_collect.html


His post references TEXAS SALES TAX EXEMPTION. Many businesses purchase from retailers, such as Sam's and Costco, to resell the product. They also buy online. That initial purchase is exempt from Sales Tax.
 
2013-05-06 11:17:15 PM  

archichris: Mock26: jgi: Hugely anti-small business legislation. Amazon can cope with this. Small businesses may find it to be a huge paperwork burden. $1M in gross sales in a year is not a lot if you sell high price, low margin items. The negative side of this bill isn't that we all have to pay sales tax on online purchases. The negative side is that the large corporations win again.

It is no different than a small business that does not do internet sales having to deal with state taxes from in-store purchases.

Which state or municipality has the lowest sales tax?

Anyone want to go in with me and form a legal entity that exists in the best spot in the country to pay the least tax under this bill?  We can be an umbrella company for everyone who pays us a small fee and then they can collect mush lower internet sales tax......


It's not so much where you set up, it's more that you'd have to ban people from certain states from buying from your store.
 
2013-05-06 11:17:19 PM  
It's good that a business won't get taxed below one million dollars in sales, but will they take into account the overhead? Equipment, employees, materials... Not everyone is selling cheap crap. And this isn't the 60's.

thinkingscifi.files.wordpress.com
 
2013-05-06 11:17:41 PM  

tallguywithglasseson: Supporters say the bill makes it relatively easy for Internet retailers to comply. States must provide free computer software to help retailers calculate sales taxes, based on where shoppers live. States must also establish a single entity to receive Internet sales tax revenue, so retailers don't have to send it to individual counties or cities.

Weird, that's right in TFA.


Free software and a single place to mail the check still doesn't cover the cost of cutting each of those checks, the extra time the accountant spends making sure those checks are sent for the right amount to the right place, the integration of said software into the existing payment system, or any number of other costs that businesses will now be incurred, even if they operate out of a location that doesn't have any local sales tax.  Hell, I can go into Washington State and show my Oregon ID and not pay sales tax there, either, cause they're nice like that.

I personally am not an internet retailer, and I still won't pay sales tax even after this goes into effect, but I have a few friends that have internet based businesses who will be effected by this.  Since I do IT consulting for one of them, and she was talking to me about the costs if this goes into effect that she'll have to account for, I guess I do have an opinion about this.

It's gonna make me some money, and that is good.  But it's at the expense of my friend so that other states can make her collect their money for them, which I don't like so much.
 
2013-05-06 11:18:14 PM  
Anyone want to bet whether or not the congresscritters are exempt from paying internet sales tax?
 
2013-05-06 11:19:16 PM  

Grimble Crumble: Anyone want to bet whether or not the congresscritters are exempt from paying internet sales tax?


sure. I bet that they are not exempt. I'll take money orders, please.
 
2013-05-06 11:19:47 PM  
Man, this is really going to drive up the prices on my Silk Road purchases.
 
2013-05-06 11:20:47 PM  
realresults-realscience.info

WHAT???

You thought this would be a "State" thing?

LOL!

Pay up, peasants.
 
2013-05-06 11:21:57 PM  

davidphogan: BarkingUnicorn: Remote sellers are not being taxed.  They are collecting taxes from in-state buyers and remitting that money to the buyer's state.

I don't get why, as a resident of a state with no sales tax, I should have to invest in infrastructure not otherwise required by my state on behalf of a state I have nothing to do with except that I'm shipping them a product.

If they want to collect this tax they should just make UPS/USPS/FedEx collect a use tax upon delivery.  That seems a little more fair, since UPS/USPS/FedEx are already doing business in the states that collect a sales/use tax.


You're not just "shipping them a product," you're getting revenue in return.  It's perfectly fair for you to pay a bit to support the market that supports you.  All of the software necessary to comply will be free to you.

If you think you can do business entirely on a COD basis, you are a farking imbecile.
 
2013-05-06 11:23:09 PM  

farkinglizardking: BarkingUnicorn: tallguywithglasseson: Supporters say the bill makes it relatively easy for Internet retailers to comply. States must provide free computer software to help retailers calculate sales taxes, based on where shoppers live. States must also establish a single entity to receive Internet sales tax revenue, so retailers don't have to send it to individual counties or cities.

Weird, that's right in TFA.

Even better, the software has to do remittance.  Sellers won't even have to mail checks.

Every farking thing that states require sellers to do will be done by software that states must provide for free and maintain themselves.  Sellers are immunized against  liability for state errors in software or tax rate databases. Every state's software must handle sales taxes for all states, so a seller will need only one software package.  It will all be done with the click of a button.

Farking whiners haven't even looked at what they're whining about.

I'm definitely not trying to argue here; I'm just uneducated. What is the software that states provide for these taxes? And are states required to update it every year?

My only reference for the horrible horrible injustice of this bill is a few friends that ran a small business and biatched about tax laws, accountability, and software. They were stupid though, so I wouldn't be surprised if there was something simple that they just missed out on.


http://www.marketplacefairness.org/
 
2013-05-06 11:23:35 PM  
While I understand the argument of price advantage due to lack of tax, this is often counter-balanced by shipping and handling costs or memberships such as Prime (which applies only to some, if a majority, of objects). However, the charge of tax to a retailer not located in the area is ridiculous because those taxes are meant to provide services which make the area appealing to conduct business in, directly and indirectly.
 
2013-05-06 11:23:53 PM  

davidphogan: tallguywithglasseson: Supporters say the bill makes it relatively easy for Internet retailers to comply. States must provide free computer software to help retailers calculate sales taxes, based on where shoppers live. States must also establish a single entity to receive Internet sales tax revenue, so retailers don't have to send it to individual counties or cities.

Weird, that's right in TFA.

Free software and a single place to mail the check still doesn't cover the cost of cutting each of those checks, the extra time the accountant spends making sure those checks are sent for the right amount to the right place, the integration of said software into the existing payment system, or any number of other costs that businesses will now be incurred, even if they operate out of a location that doesn't have any local sales tax.  Hell, I can go into Washington State and show my Oregon ID and not pay sales tax there, either, cause they're nice like that.

I personally am not an internet retailer, and I still won't pay sales tax even after this goes into effect, but I have a few friends that have internet based businesses who will be effected by this.  Since I do IT consulting for one of them, and she was talking to me about the costs if this goes into effect that she'll have to account for, I guess I do have an opinion about this.

It's gonna make me some money, and that is good.  But it's at the expense of my friend so that other states can make her collect their money for them, which I don't like so much.


stdext::hash_map<const std::string&, double> StateToHowMuchCheddarWeOweEm;

void AddMuddafugginTaxes (const std::string& StateAbbr, double TaxOnThisPurchase)
{
StateToHowMuchCheddarWeOweEm[StateAbbr].second += TaxOnThisPurchase ;
}

run a report at the end of the month. Cut the check. Send to the states.
 
2013-05-06 11:23:59 PM  

Mike_LowELL: - Benghazi
- Dijon Mustard
- ACORN
- Internet Sales Tax

Just adding another item to the list of reasons Taxbongo should be impeached.  Don't mind me.

Just like liberals don't mind showering.  LOL!!!  Get owned, stupid libs.  Get owned.


tjfly: IronTom: basemetal: I thought you guys liked taxes....

That was when the $250k and up were paying them.  This here tax affects everybody who buys stuff on the internet.

Obama: "I can make a firm pledge. Under my plan, no family making less than $250,000 a year will see any form of tax increase. Not your income tax, not your payroll tax, not your capital gains taxes, not any of your taxes."
Lying SOB.


This Senate version of the bill was introduced by a Republican. So was the House version.  But don't let that stop you from blaming this bill on Obama
 
2013-05-06 11:24:36 PM  

shifty lookin bleeder: Teufelaffe: Here's the thing I have never understood about sales tax:  It's a tax on the merchant, not the consumer,


Nope. It's a tax on the purchaser. The merchant is just collecting it. As to the rest of your post, it's essentially about full disclosure of pricing to the consumer.


Actually, you're both wrong/right.  Some states impose a "vendor privilege tax" (i.e., a tax for the privilege of selling goods within that state) on the vendor, others impose a "consumer sales tax" on the purchaser.  And some states just charge a tax on retail transactions with equal liability for both merchant and customer.

Source
 
2013-05-06 11:24:52 PM  

EvilIguana966: This is probably unconstitutional.  Essentially, they want to force retailers to pay a tax determined by a government that they have no representation in.  If the state that the business is located in wishes to levy a tax on online retailers located in their state when they sell to out of state customers, that is their choice.  I'd support them doing it like that.

I live in Pennsylvania.  If I buy something from California, the price of that product should have the California sales tax added to it.  The California business can petition their representatives if they feel the tax rate is unfair, or they can relocate to a lower tax jurisdiction, so their rights are being upheld.  On the other hand, if they are forced to pay the Pennsylvania sales tax, they have no redress because they have no representative in the body that is levying the tax on them.


No. The store isn't paying the tax, the consumer is. The store is merely collecting the tax and sending it to the state. The only problem I have with the law, as I understand it, is the bit about redress for failing to comply. That, and one state being able to put a lein on a business's properties in another state.
 
2013-05-06 11:24:56 PM  
Is this really a bad thing? The system before wasn't particularly fair, as it illustrates why voluntary tax payment is a hilariously stupid concept.
 
2013-05-06 11:25:25 PM  

TV's Vinnie: I really cannot fathom why the Amazon bigshots want this bill so bad. If it happens, their sales are gonna plummet.


Because only amazon and their ilk can keep a massive database of hundreds of thousands of sales tax districts, including data items that change weekly or even daily. Amazon can simply hire a staff full time to take care of it. Other internet retailers will be forced to shut down.

If they're going to do this, the number needs to be much, much higher. I fully agree with eBay's 10 million AND 50 employees tick-stick. Anything else creates a 'doughnut hole' where either you are either so dinky no one knows you exist, or you're amazon.

Such action effectively shuts everyone else out of the market, because they cannot possibly hire a full-time staff for data compliance with the profits from only 1kk in sales, making the law de facto 'all internet sales online are capped at 1 million, except for amazon.'

An alternative addendum, that I've seen, places the burden for compliance squarely on the states, requiring THEM to reconfigure their laws for internet sales tax to be feasible (i.e. eliminating 'special sales tax zones' and similar, where between 200 and 400 oak street there is  a special 1% tax on paperclips or something else equally ridiculous.) and provide free software to the government to, in turn, give to retailers. This way the retailers would always know what the sales tax rate is for each product in each zip+4.
 
Displayed 50 of 573 comments

First | « | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | 9 | 10 | 11 | 12 | » | Last | Show all

View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest


This thread is archived, and closed to new comments.

Continue Farking
Submit a Link »
On Twitter





In Other Media


  1. Links are submitted by members of the Fark community.

  2. When community members submit a link, they also write a custom headline for the story.

  3. Other Farkers comment on the links. This is the number of comments. Click here to read them.

  4. Click here to submit a link.

Report