Do you have adblock enabled?
 
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
    More: NewsFlash, Senate, internet, senate passes, sales taxes, D-Ill, United States  
•       •       •

16718 clicks; posted to Main » on 06 May 2013 at 10:06 PM (4 years 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
 
2013-05-06 08:57:11 PM  
de money
 
2013-05-06 08:59:46 PM  
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.
 
2013-05-06 09:10:24 PM  
Can it pass in the House? I kinda don't care if it does or not, I know the states will just make it up elsewhere.
 
2013-05-06 09:11:20 PM  
You already have to pay tax on the items you buy from out of state vendors that do not collect sales tax if those items would be taxable in your state. Use tax, not sales tax is what it is called. I file my return and pay the tax quarterly as required by my state of residence, Florida.

If you live in Deleware, Montana or Oregon you have no state sales or use tax. All others should be paying their use tax as the law requires unless the vendor collects it.

This will not raise your tax burden one cent. It will however create an accounting nightmare for the sellers and many smaller sellers will simply close. Those that remain open will have higher tax compliance costs and will pass those costs along to the consumer.

If you people had paid your taxes all along like you're supposed to you wouldn't be facing this problem. Quill v. North Dakota was not litigated to save you from paying the tax you rightfully owe, it was litigated so Quill and retailers similarly situated wouldn't be required to comply with tax laws in jurisdictions in which they have no nexus.

TLDR version - you already owe these taxes, you don't pay them. Now they want businesses to collect them because you won't pay voluntarily and prices will go up. Pay your taxes deadbeats.
 
2013-05-06 09:11:56 PM  
I don't have a problem with this.  It'll cut down on really blatant tax evasion, that's it.  And smaller companies won't have to "deal with 9,000 tax codes" or anything like that.  Some vendor will see a business opportunity to run all that stuff for a small surcharge and all the small businesses will just contract through them.
 
2013-05-06 09:12:50 PM  
Good.
 
2013-05-06 09:15:39 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.


I haven't studied the issue thoroughly here, but neither of those two things seem to apply. Big money would rather transactions be tax free so the price is lower and they, in theory, sell more. And the politicians that passed this (at the national level) will never see any of this money, so they don't get to spend it.

Their constituents might not like it, but it doesn't seem like they had big money or their own spending proclivities in mind either.
 
2013-05-06 09:25:46 PM  
This will probably increase sales at the military exchange website as it's always sales tax free.
 
2013-05-06 09:27:52 PM  

Thoguh: I don't have a problem with this.  It'll cut down on really blatant tax evasion, that's it.  And smaller companies won't have to "deal with 9,000 tax codes" or anything like that.  Some vendor will see a business opportunity to run all that stuff for a small surcharge and all the small businesses will just contract through them.


Smaller companies won't have to deal with it at all. It excuses all companies with less than one million in online sales.
 
2013-05-06 09:35:43 PM  

feckingmorons: You already have to pay tax on the items you buy from out of state vendors that do not collect sales tax if those items would be taxable in your state. Use tax, not sales tax is what it is called. I file my return and pay the tax quarterly as required by my state of residence, Florida.

If you live in Deleware, Montana or Oregon you have no state sales or use tax. All others should be paying their use tax as the law requires unless the vendor collects it.

This will not raise your tax burden one cent. It will however create an accounting nightmare for the sellers and many smaller sellers will simply close. Those that remain open will have higher tax compliance costs and will pass those costs along to the consumer.

If you people had paid your taxes all along like you're supposed to you wouldn't be facing this problem. Quill v. North Dakota was not litigated to save you from paying the tax you rightfully owe, it was litigated so Quill and retailers similarly situated wouldn't be required to comply with tax laws in jurisdictions in which they have no nexus.

TLDR version - you already owe these taxes, you don't pay them. Now they want businesses to collect them because you won't pay voluntarily and prices will go up. Pay your taxes deadbeats.


Realistically, you realize, almost no one actually pays the the use tax.  The chances of getting caught for not doing it are infinitesimally small, and for more expensive items, it's one of the biggest draws to purchasing online.  This will, in effect, be an additional tax for most online purchases for most people.
 
2013-05-06 09:40:07 PM  

Thoguh: It'll cut down on really blatant tax evasion, that's it.


The only people I can think of who are currently "evading" taxes are eBay sellers who sell to in-state buyers and don't add on tax. For eBay, this is a big hassle, but for Amazon, it frees them to set up an even better distribution system.
 
2013-05-06 09:41:26 PM  
Why should you pay less?    You got no choice give us your money.  Give us the money we used to 'let' you keep, at such a loss to us.
 
2013-05-06 09:44:51 PM  
Raise your hand if you answered $0 when your state tax return asked the dollar amount of out of state or online purchases that you owed taxes on.

*raises hand*

Now, how many of you were willing to pay those taxes, but just had no f*cking clue how to go about figuring out exactly what you need to pay, therefore you broke the law and evaded the taxes because you know you'll never get caught?

*raises hand*

This is why I'm OK with business collecting them. Because if you leave it up to me, sh*t isn't going to get done. I'm lazy and unorganized. But I am willing to pay it if it doesn't involve another step in filing my tax returns, and possibly getting audited.
 
2013-05-06 09:46:31 PM  
Also, I uhhhh.... I live in Texas. Yeah, Texas.

My name is Judy and I was just giving an example and definitely didn't just admit to tax evasion.
 
2013-05-06 09:49:05 PM  

feckingmorons: You already have to pay tax on the items you buy from out of state vendors that do not collect sales tax if those items would be taxable in your state. Use tax, not sales tax is what it is called. I file my return and pay the tax quarterly as required by my state of residence, Florida.

If you live in Deleware, Montana or Oregon you have no state sales or use tax. All others should be paying their use tax as the law requires unless the vendor collects it.

This will not raise your tax burden one cent. It will however create an accounting nightmare for the sellers and many smaller sellers will simply close. Those that remain open will have higher tax compliance costs and will pass those costs along to the consumer.

If you people had paid your taxes all along like you're supposed to you wouldn't be facing this problem. Quill v. North Dakota was not litigated to save you from paying the tax you rightfully owe, it was litigated so Quill and retailers similarly situated wouldn't be required to comply with tax laws in jurisdictions in which they have no nexus.

TLDR version - you already owe these taxes, you don't pay them. Now they want businesses to collect them because you won't pay voluntarily and prices will go up. Pay your taxes deadbeats.


Catalog sales have traditionally been excluded from the state and local sales taxes. (with the exception that the sale company has a physical store in your state). (and I should say most states as some paper catalogs add taxes to certain states).

It seems this law is redefining what a 'physical store' is..meaning a internet store that takes over the internet is subject.

My question would be does the company that collects such state taxes on internet sells actually give those to the state and what gaggle of oversight to look at those sales would be in place. If I order a item and pay 20 cents in state tax---is that state tax actually going to the state each year? Would this also conflict with interstate commerce----would your hammocks you purchased in Mexico be subject to federal tax? After you reach the duty free limit? Or do you ignore that and just go on through customs?


It would be intresting to see if called up the store on the phone instead of using 'internet' which law would apply?
 
2013-05-06 09:49:28 PM  
I thought you guys liked taxes....
 
2013-05-06 09:51:28 PM  

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.
 
2013-05-06 09:51:56 PM  

feckingmorons: You already have to pay tax on the items you buy from out of state vendors that do not collect sales tax if those items would be taxable in your state. Use tax, not sales tax is what it is called. I file my return and pay the tax quarterly as required by my state of residence, Florida.

If you live in Deleware, Montana or Oregon you have no state sales or use tax. All others should be paying their use tax as the law requires unless the vendor collects it.

This will not raise your tax burden one cent. It will however create an accounting nightmare for the sellers and many smaller sellers will simply close. Those that remain open will have higher tax compliance costs and will pass those costs along to the consumer.

If you people had paid your taxes all along like you're supposed to you wouldn't be facing this problem. Quill v. North Dakota was not litigated to save you from paying the tax you rightfully owe, it was litigated so Quill and retailers similarly situated wouldn't be required to comply with tax laws in jurisdictions in which they have no nexus.

TLDR version - you already owe these taxes, you don't pay them. Now they want businesses to collect them because you won't pay voluntarily and prices will go up. Pay your taxes deadbeats.


Bullcrap.  Software and apps exist now to do the calculations and filing for you.  Way esier for the seller to do this than for individual purchasers.

All this does is help to ever so slightly level the playing field between brick and mortar retailers and online only stores.  those cheap prices come at the expense of retail jobs, property taxes and commerical rents.

And the warehouse jobs are notoriously bad even when compared to other warehouse jobs.
 
2013-05-06 09:56:19 PM  
So does this mean they're gonna start going after other tax evasion? Or is it like the airport thing where it's still more important to not inconvenience the upper class?
 
2013-05-06 10:07:53 PM  

homeschooled: Raise your hand if you answered $0 when your state tax return asked the dollar amount of out of state or online purchases that you owed taxes on.


PA and DE state governments advertise to Marylanders about traveling north for tax-free shopping. If it's evasion, it's government sanctioned.
 
2013-05-06 10:08:42 PM  
How did JC Penney and Sears do it before in the age of catalog ordering?
 
2013-05-06 10:10:06 PM  
Does TF cost $5.30 now?
 
2013-05-06 10:10:49 PM  
There goes the Dow tomorrow. Again.
 
2013-05-06 10:10:49 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.


Not me. No sales tax in Oregon. Neener, neener.
 
2013-05-06 10:10:58 PM  
Goddamned Republicans.
 
2013-05-06 10:11:37 PM  
Democrats passed it.  Because paying more for everything is a great idea.
 
2013-05-06 10:11:40 PM  
Good. More Federal and State jobs paid for by these taxes will lead to greater prosperity for all. I swear to God I heard that somewhere.
 
2013-05-06 10:12:09 PM  
It will never pass the House just calm down everyone. There won't be an internet sales tax imposed in most states in the near future.
 
2013-05-06 10:13:09 PM  

The Muthaship: Goddamned Republicans.


You lost me there.
 
2013-05-06 10:13:21 PM  

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


I like society and civilization and all the wonderful trappings that come along with it.

Like roads and bridges and, yes, parks.
 
2013-05-06 10:13:22 PM  
Good luck having this pass the House.
 
2013-05-06 10:13:53 PM  
This should get more responses than a gun control thread.

/goes for popcorn.
 
2013-05-06 10:14:15 PM  
Bill Gates and Warren Buffet were on CNBC this morning expressing their pleasure over this new tax.  They can afford it.
 
2013-05-06 10:14:22 PM  
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?
 
2013-05-06 10:14:29 PM  

Popcorn Johnny: Does TF cost $5.30 now?


It'll cost me $.5.50

/thank you Cook County
 
2013-05-06 10:14:44 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.


But this is what the inbred hillbilly constituents of republican legislators want.  they ain't got no high fallutin' com-puters or fancy pants credit cards.  They cash their paychecks at wal-mart and do their shopping right there like real 'muricans, con sarn it!
 
2013-05-06 10:14:51 PM  
We need to pass a bill that requires brick and mortar retailers to hold onto a product for two days (i.e. shipping time) before a customer can pick up their item in order to create equality between retailers & etailers.

/equality my ass
 
2013-05-06 10:15:21 PM  
Just about all my online shopping is through amazon and since I live in Seattle I've been paying tax on virtually all my online shopping for many years.
 
2013-05-06 10:15:33 PM  
I'm okay with this, sorta.

They should make it apply to businesses that do more than $10 Million in sales or 50 employees, just like mail order businesses, rather than $1 million or 50 employees.
 
2013-05-06 10:15:35 PM  

feckingmorons: You already have to pay tax on the items you buy from out of state vendors that do not collect sales tax if those items would be taxable in your state. Use tax, not sales tax is what it is called. I file my return and pay the tax quarterly as required by my state of residence, Florida.

If you live in Deleware, Montana or Oregon you have no state sales or use tax. All others should be paying their use tax as the law requires unless the vendor collects it.

This will not raise your tax burden one cent. It will however create an accounting nightmare for the sellers and many smaller sellers will simply close. Those that remain open will have higher tax compliance costs and will pass those costs along to the consumer.

If you people had paid your taxes all along like you're supposed to you wouldn't be facing this problem. Quill v. North Dakota was not litigated to save you from paying the tax you rightfully owe, it was litigated so Quill and retailers similarly situated wouldn't be required to comply with tax laws in jurisdictions in which they have no nexus.

TLDR version - you already owe these taxes, you don't pay them. Now they want businesses to collect them because you won't pay voluntarily and prices will go up. Pay your taxes deadbeats.


Damn right.  Personally I buy all my stuff from Best Buy, anyway, because it has far less stuff than amazon does at twice the price, and I get to take it home right then.  Amazon should have to pay tax on top of the shipping costs because it isn't fair.
 
2013-05-06 10:15:37 PM  

Funk Brothers: It will never pass the House just calm down everyone. There won't be an internet sales tax imposed in most states in the near future.


fark YES I HATE REVENUE WHO NEEDS IT ANYWAY WE'RE GODDAMN FLUSH SOMEBODY START FIXING BRIDGES
 
2013-05-06 10:15:49 PM  

Thoguh: I don't have a problem with this.  It'll cut down on really blatant tax evasion, that's it.  And smaller companies won't have to "deal with 9,000 tax codes" or anything like that.  Some vendor will see a business opportunity to run all that stuff for a small surcharge and all the small businesses will just contract through them.


Or every single credit card gateway company will do it as part of their service.  This will be transparent to businesses.
 
2013-05-06 10:16:09 PM  
Why?  Equal taxation, that's why.
 
2013-05-06 10:16:20 PM  

Triumph: homeschooled: Raise your hand if you answered $0 when your state tax return asked the dollar amount of out of state or online purchases that you owed taxes on.

PA and DE state governments advertise to Marylanders about traveling north for tax-free shopping. If it's evasion, it's government sanctioned.


This is also true of NJ advertising tax-free clothing to New Yorkers.
 
2013-05-06 10:16:33 PM  
This is good news for web developers in foreign countries who will be hired for a fraction of the cost of U.S. web developers to update various merchants' stores to be compliant with the new tax regulations if this becomes law!
 
2013-05-06 10:17:14 PM  
So canadians are still free to buy online from US companies without having to pay taxes then?
 
2013-05-06 10:17:43 PM  

themindiswatching: Good luck having this pass the House.


Not sure if serious.
 
2013-05-06 10:17:50 PM  
Yeah, this shouldn't affect the people who the article seems to say it's going to affect - it's only for businesses that pull in a cool mil in online sales per year. Most small businesses I know are never going to even get into the ballpark for that kind of game.
 
2013-05-06 10:18:10 PM  
If local governments didn't waste so much money they wouldn't be in this situation.
 
2013-05-06 10:18:11 PM  

AverageAmericanGuy: How did JC Penney and Sears do it before in the age of catalog ordering?


farm7.staticflickr.com

See about 3/4 of the way down?
 
2013-05-06 10:18:22 PM  

AirForceVet: This will probably increase sales at the military exchange website as it's always sales tax free.


I foresee a boom in e-commerce shops hosted in Native American reservations.

They'll get back the land that was stolen one dollar at a time, just like with casinos and cigarettes. I don't have any serious qualms about that.
 
2013-05-06 10:18:25 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.


Exactly. Don't tax the losers.
 
2013-05-06 10:18:25 PM  
Raising prices on goods isn't a good way to stimulate the economy...this is another example of how politicians do the exact the opposite to stimulate growth.
 
2013-05-06 10:18:26 PM  

Vodka Zombie: basemetal: I thought you guys liked taxes....

I like society and civilization and all the wonderful trappings that come along with it.

Like roads and bridges and, yes, parks.


And you like paying for them in the most regressive way possible?
 
2013-05-06 10:18:29 PM  

AdolfOliverPanties: Politicians do not do what constituents want.


Dunno, mang, have you ever listened to the average vote spiel on politics?  If you listen to what the internet denizens in any thread wants, they want quality, free entertainment and more pay at work because Windows 8 doesn't le network itself.

I wouldn't listen to them, either.
 
2013-05-06 10:18:35 PM  
BestBuy.com and Target.com are giddy about this, but I'm still not going to shop at either sites. I buy things on Amazon, not because they don't charge sales tax, but because Amazon is a million times easier to navigate, the shipping is a million times better, and the review system is actually decent. I'd stab my own dick with a snail fork before buying anything from either of those two sites.
 
2013-05-06 10:18:41 PM  
Sorry brick and mortar stores, you are still just showrooms or I need it now stores. My large purchases will still be done mostly online because it costs less.

\yes, I have to and do pay the sales tax where I live for online purchases
 
2013-05-06 10:18:42 PM  
 
2013-05-06 10:19:12 PM  
I always get a kick out of the people who think shipping is a cost. If you're selling goods online and you're not making money on shipping you're doing it wrong.
 
2013-05-06 10:20:13 PM  

dopekitty74: So canadians are still free to buy online from US companies without having to pay taxes then?


Yes, but you'll still end up paying taxes to Canada Customs. And of course, the extra bonus of them wasting an extra day or so, and charging you an additional $10 fee for the privilege.
 
2013-05-06 10:20:22 PM  
As someone who deals with sales tax for my company on a regular basis, this will make my job a lot easier since more companies will actually charge the proper tax on our purchases.

For others it sucks, though really it's more of a stricter way to enforce tax laws already in place than it is a creation of a new tax. Depending on your state you're technically breaking the law by not paying use tax on your out-of-state purchases, but you were also unlikely to get caught. This lessens that a bit.
 
2013-05-06 10:20:32 PM  

dopekitty74: So canadians are still free to buy online from US companies without having to pay taxes then?


What?
 
2013-05-06 10:20:58 PM  
Who's to say Chicago or New York won't say hey fark it I want a cut also
 
2013-05-06 10:21:04 PM  
Amazon and every other sizeable business would relocate to Delaware or some other state without a sales tax. That's asking for a national sales tax. A bad bad bad bad idea, if  you ask me.

Fortunately, this will die in the House. Which sort of makes me think maybe its a good idea, except I think in this case the republitards are right in not trying to enforce an unenforceable (or at least idiotic) law.
 
2013-05-06 10:21:14 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.


Like functional, modern infrastructure.
 
2013-05-06 10:21:24 PM  

Vodka Zombie: basemetal: I thought you guys liked taxes....

I like society and civilization and all the wonderful trappings that come along with it.

Like roads and bridges and, yes, parks.


I'm with  Vodka Zombie on the roads and bridges, but I also like the thought of all the Fark Independents™, tax protestors, and self-made millionaires (what with their bootstraps and nobody never giving them nothin') having to pay taxes like good little citizens.

And when I say enjoy, I mean "aroused by." Yeah, that's right, let me hear you scream, you middle-class biatches. Get ready to take all eleven marginal percent right up your tight little tax hole.
 
2013-05-06 10:21:30 PM  
Not sure what the big deal is with this. You buy stuff, you pay sales tax. That's life
 
2013-05-06 10:21:38 PM  
YEAs ---69

Alexander (R-TN)
Baldwin (D-WI)
Bennet (D-CO)
Blumenthal (D-CT)
Blunt (R-MO)
Boozman (R-AR)
Boxer (D-CA)
Brown (D-OH)
Burr (R-NC)
Cantwell (D-WA)
Cardin (D-MD)
Carper (D-DE)
Casey (D-PA)
Chambliss (R-GA)
Coats (R-IN)
Cochran (R-MS)
Collins (R-ME)
Coons (D-DE)
Corker (R-TN)
Cowan (D-MA)
Donnelly (D-IN)
Durbin (D-IL)
Enzi (R-WY)
Feinstein (D-CA)
Fischer (R-NE)
Franken (D-MN)
Gillibrand (D-NY)
Graham (R-SC)
Hagan (D-NC)
Harkin (D-IA)
Heinrich (D-NM)
Heitkamp (D-ND)
Hirono (D-HI)
Hoeven (R-ND)
Isakson (R-GA)
Johanns (R-NE)
Johnson (D-SD)
Kaine (D-VA)
King (I-ME)
Klobuchar (D-MN)
Landrieu (D-LA)
Leahy (D-VT)
Levin (D-MI)
Manchin (D-WV)
McCain (R-AZ)
McCaskill (D-MO)
Menendez (D-NJ)
Mikulski (D-MD)
Murphy (D-CT)
Murray (D-WA)
Nelson (D-FL)
Portman (R-OH)
Pryor (D-AR)
Reed (D-RI)
Reid (D-NV)
Rockefeller (D-WV)
Sanders (I-VT)
Schatz (D-HI)
Schumer (D-NY)
Sessions (R-AL)
Shelby (R-AL)
Stabenow (D-MI)
Thune (R-SD)
Udall (D-CO)
Udall (D-NM)
Warner (D-VA)
Warren (D-MA)
Whitehouse (D-RI)
Wicker (R-MS)


NAYs ---27

Ayotte (R-NH)
Barrasso (R-WY)
Baucus (D-MT)
Coburn (R-OK)
Crapo (R-ID)
Cruz (R-TX)
Flake (R-AZ)
Grassley (R-IA)
Hatch (R-UT)
Heller (R-NV)
Inhofe (R-OK)
Johnson (R-WI)
Kirk (R-IL)
Lee (R-UT)
McConnell (R-KY)
Merkley (D-OR)
Murkowski (R-AK)
Paul (R-KY)
Risch (R-ID)
Roberts (R-KS)
Rubio (R-FL)
Scott (R-SC)
Shaheen (D-NH)
Tester (D-MT)
Toomey (R-PA)
Vitter (R-LA)
Wyden (D-OR)


Not Voting - 4

Begich (D-AK)
Cornyn (R-TX)
Lautenberg (D-NJ)
Moran (R-KS)
 
2013-05-06 10:21:50 PM  
Remember, They aren't tracking YOUR dildo.

Just A dildo.
 
2013-05-06 10:21:54 PM  
Must be the will of the American people.
 
2013-05-06 10:22:13 PM  
I really cannot fathom why the Amazon bigshots want this bill so bad. If it happens, their sales are gonna plummet.
 
2013-05-06 10:22:26 PM  

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?


Presumably you're using the item in your state, unlike the sandwich. That's the difference. Sales tax and use tax generally go hand-in-hand.
 
2013-05-06 10:22:35 PM  
So once this passes and brick and mortar stores still get trounced by the internet what will be the excuse be next time?  How about local sales tax?
 
2013-05-06 10:22:38 PM  

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.
 
2013-05-06 10:22:39 PM  
can't say I'm happy about it... but I can't really complain either. It was bound to happen. how many big retailers have closed their doors since becoming nothing more than a place for people to look at an item before ordering it online for less?
 
2013-05-06 10:22:42 PM  
There's nothing wrong with a sales tax on discretionary purchases. It's one of the few ways to impose a flat tax without screwing lower-income households. BUT...this sounds like a logistical nightmare for small business who want to sell online.The fair solution would be to impose a federal sales tax on online purchases, and distribute the revenue among the states according to each state's total online purchases.
 
2013-05-06 10:22:47 PM  
It just farking amazes me that things like minor gun control, equal pay for women, and healthcare do not pass, but a tax on everything passes without a problem...man you guys really need to start getting pissed about the way they run this place.
 
2013-05-06 10:22:48 PM  
FTA: "Supporters say the current tax disparity is turning some traditional stores into showrooms, where shoppers pick out items they like, then buy them on the Internet to avoid sales taxes."

NOT FAIR!!!!

3.bp.blogspot.com

Times change.

What, you expected people to buy buggy whips forever?
 
2013-05-06 10:23:02 PM  
Brought to you by your small business, brick and mortar minded, friends at ....

Wal-Mart.

This whole thing was because Wally world decided Amazon was getting to much of their pie.

farking Assholes.
 
2013-05-06 10:23:12 PM  
How about this: the house and senate can only pass 4 laws per year and must eliminate 2?
 
2013-05-06 10:23:45 PM  
Hmmm. Which party controls the senate?
...
The party of "Me First" plutocrats, consisting of both nominal democrats and nominal republicans!
 
2013-05-06 10:23:58 PM  
FTFA: "As a result, many online sales are tax-free, giving Internet retailers an advantage over brick-and-mortar stores."

Ummm...yeah...no...

Internet retailers offer an overall less expensive price because they do not have to staff multiple physical locations and pay all the bills that come with traditional brick-and-mortar sales locations.

I have never purchased a single item online simply to save a few bucks from sales tax...I've purchased stuff online because it is usually 20%-30% less.
 
2013-05-06 10:24:23 PM  

A Shambling Mound: I always get a kick out of the people who think shipping is a cost. If you're selling goods online and you're not making money on shipping you're doing it wrong.


A lot of stuff from secondary sellers on Amazon is $0.01. If this actually passed, even more stuff would be priced that way, with $7.99 shipping.
 
2013-05-06 10:24:27 PM  
Okay, sounds good.

Why doesn't the federal government set up a public server that returns taxes that must be collected when given an address, then another division that accepts the taxes from companies, which them disburses the tax funds to the correct states, cities, what have you?
Would make some jobs to handle all that.
 
2013-05-06 10:24:37 PM  

jeffowl: Vodka Zombie: basemetal: I thought you guys liked taxes....

I like society and civilization and all the wonderful trappings that come along with it.

Like roads and bridges and, yes, parks.

And you like paying for them in the most regressive way possible?


As opposed to progressive income taxes on the wealthy?
 
2013-05-06 10:25:02 PM  

chitlenz: Brought to you by your small business, brick and mortar minded, friends at ....

Wal-Mart.

This whole thing was because Wally world decided Amazon was getting to much of their pie.

farking Assholes.


Small businesses will appreciate the fact that Walmart initiated this, if in fact they did (I have no idea if what you're saying is factual or not).

They don't have the legal team available to lobby for it. But, if you think about it, it will help them quite a bit.
 
2013-05-06 10:25:05 PM  
Nobody worry.  I just got an email stating that Bill Gates (and you know he's got a mountain of money) will pay the sales tax on my Internet purchases for the next 20 years if I forward the email to 10 of my friends.  Apparently Microsoft has some new email tracking system, and when I just tested it out, guess what?  No sales taxes on my purchase.  So send me an email (my username @ gmail) with photos of your genitals and I'll forward the email from Bill Gates to you.
 
2013-05-06 10:25:50 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.


IIRC they're facing multiple lawsuits from state governments to recover lost state sales taxes -- this would make all those go away.
 
2013-05-06 10:26:04 PM  
Wait.

Toomey voted against this thing?
Between this and his sponsoring the background checks bill, maybehe's not insane after all.
 
2013-05-06 10:26:16 PM  

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?


It's entitled to the tax because you live there, use its roads, its schools, its police force, its fire departments, its state parks, and countless other services.  At some point, the elected representatives all got together and figured out that a small percentage tacked onto a business transaction would be the best way to fund the many services the residents demanded.  Now that the nature of business transactions have changed because of technology, those tax laws need to be adjusted to continue to pay for services that the public still wants.
 
2013-05-06 10:26:39 PM  
FTFA: "Supporters say the current tax disparity is turning some traditional stores into showrooms, where shoppers pick out items they like, then buy them on the Internet to avoid sales taxes."

Wrong again.  Walk into Best Buy and see a 60" Sharp TV for $1899, hop online and it can be found for $1329 with free 2 day shipping.  Sales Tax has nothing to do with it.
 
2013-05-06 10:27:01 PM  

fusillade762: t me. No sales tax in Oregon. Neener, neener.


FTA...Under the legislation, the sales taxes would be sent to the state where the shopper lives.

So, if an Oregon online business sold items to someone living in a state that has a sales tax, the online retailer would be required to collect the sales tax and send it to that state.

And this is going to be particularly hard on small online retailers. However, businesses with less than $1 million in online sales would be exempt.
 
2013-05-06 10:27:26 PM  

Do the needful: AverageAmericanGuy: How did JC Penney and Sears do it before in the age of catalog ordering?

[farm7.staticflickr.com image 471x640]

See about 3/4 of the way down?


Huh. Neat.
 
2013-05-06 10:27:40 PM  

ArgusRun: Bullcrap.  Software and apps exist now to do the calculations and filing for you.  Way esier for the seller to do this than for individual purchasers.


I live in a state with no sales tax.  Why should I need to calculate sales tax on purchases in states I don't do business in?
 
2013-05-06 10:27:56 PM  
So, I guess Amazon's web services will soon include a tax calculator. The trick will be dealing with the special rules for categories like clothing.
 
2013-05-06 10:27:59 PM  
www.charlock.org
 
2013-05-06 10:28:00 PM  

Nuclear Monk: It's entitled to the tax because you live there, use its roads, its schools, its police force, its fire departments, its state parks, and countless other services


that's a lot of dildoes
 
2013-05-06 10:29:19 PM  
I run my Internet sales business in Delaware, home of tax free shopping, so I'm getting a kick.
 
2013-05-06 10:29:35 PM  
I'd rather have this than my income taxes going up. At least everyone pays this.
 
JVD
2013-05-06 10:29:36 PM  
Fark you government. Fark you.
 
2013-05-06 10:30:21 PM  

Bathia_Mapes: fusillade762: t me. No sales tax in Oregon. Neener, neener.

FTA...Under the legislation, the sales taxes would be sent to the state where the shopper lives.

So, if an Oregon online business sold items to someone living in a state that has a sales tax, the online retailer would be required to collect the sales tax and send it to that state.

And this is going to be particularly hard on small online retailers. However, businesses with less than $1 million in online sales would be exempt.


There are some states that have an origin-based tax. If you buy from a vendor in an origin-based state and you're in a destination-based state, it can get a little weird.

Here's a list, can't vouch for its accuracy on every state but I can promise you that NY and NJ are correct.
 
2013-05-06 10:30:42 PM  

dopekitty74: So canadians are still free to buy online from US companies without having to pay taxes then?


Great question and possible business opportunity.

1. Move to Canada
2. Buy shiat off the interweb
3. Profit?
 
2013-05-06 10:31:01 PM  
This is where the people who think everyone needs to pay their fair share figure out they'd rather not pay their fair share.
 
2013-05-06 10:31:22 PM  

Bathia_Mapes: fusillade762: t me. No sales tax in Oregon. Neener, neener.

FTA...Under the legislation, the sales taxes would be sent to the state where the shopper lives.

So, if an Oregon online business sold items to someone living in a state that has a sales tax, the online retailer would be required to collect the sales tax and send it to that state.

And this is going to be particularly hard on small online retailers. However, businesses with less than $1 million in online sales would be exempt.



Yes, but if one is a resident of OR no tax will be calculated or added.  No sales tax on anything.  At all.
 
2013-05-06 10:31:48 PM  
Maine requires me to pay online sales tax, whether I bought anything or not. 0.008% of my income is their default. Last year I bought a computer and some tools/books online, all for schooling. They got most of my refund back on that deal.
 
2013-05-06 10:31:56 PM  
AH HA HA HA HA HA HA!
HA HA HEE HEE HA.
You stupidos keep on voting for those republicans and democrats, now.
 
2013-05-06 10:32:48 PM  

clancifer: Good.


www.charlock.org
 
2013-05-06 10:32:51 PM  
Wow, Jeff Flake knew the internet. Did all the yays know how the nets works?
 
2013-05-06 10:33:02 PM  
Supporters say the current tax disparity is turning some traditional stores into showrooms, where shoppers pick out items they like, then buy them on the Internet to avoid sales taxes.

No, we sometimes do that because the internet almost always offers significantly better deals. If the discrepancy were $5, $10 or even $20 I'd rather pay the difference and the tax and have the item in my hands that day (the shipping savings would likely counteract the tax anyway). But when you're charging $189 for an item newegg.com sells for $99, what do you expect?

That the internet undercuts you isn't my problem. The way things exist now, the bricks and the bytes co-exist. You just want a stronger piece of the pie and are appealing to state governments' need of revenue to get it.
 
2013-05-06 10:33:36 PM  

ArkAngel: Thoguh: I don't have a problem with this.  It'll cut down on really blatant tax evasion, that's it.  And smaller companies won't have to "deal with 9,000 tax codes" or anything like that.  Some vendor will see a business opportunity to run all that stuff for a small surcharge and all the small businesses will just contract through them.

Smaller companies won't have to deal with it at all. It excuses all companies with less than one million in online sales.


Just give it time. All taxes get bigger and more invasive, never the other way around.
 
2013-05-06 10:33:51 PM  

feckingmorons: This will not raise your tax burden one cent. It will however create an accounting nightmare for the sellers and many smaller sellers will simply close. Those that remain open will have higher tax compliance costs and will pass those costs along to the consumer.


I pretty much agree with the rest of your post (and have tried to be diligent with paying my use tax), but this i'm not totally sure of. At least the summary I saw of the law said that if a state wants to collect sales tax from online vendors, they have to provide a free service that will specify the tax.

Now, "free" is not actually going to be "free", but I'd be surprised if the implementation costs are <i>than</I> onerous.
 
2013-05-06 10:34:31 PM  
"States lost a total of $23 billion last year because they couldn't collect taxes on out-of-state sales, according to a study done for the National Conference of State Legislatures."

Yes some study. Multiplying Internet sales by ten percent. The study probably cost 8 million dollars.
 
2013-05-06 10:35:39 PM  
I'm glad my senator voted against it.

/Montana
 
2013-05-06 10:36:01 PM  

FROM EACH
according to his ability

TO EACH
according to his need



 /You're not selfish, are you?
 
2013-05-06 10:36:16 PM  

cmunic8r99: YEAs ---69 etc...



I've never been prouder of my OK state senators.

Mainly because I normally can't wait to vote in some decent senators.

/even a broken clock...
 
2013-05-06 10:36:44 PM  

evaned: Now, "free" is not actually going to be "free", but I'd be surprised if the implementation costs are <i>than</I> onerous.


Whee HTML!

Also, I meant "that onerous", not "than".
 
2013-05-06 10:36:58 PM  

Stoj: "States lost a total of $23 billion last year because they couldn't collect taxes on out-of-state sales, according to a study done for the National Conference of State Legislatures."

Yes some study. Multiplying Internet sales by ten percent. The study probably cost 8 million dollars.


Brought to you by the same folks who say that the NCAA tournament costs businesses eleventybillion dollars in lost revenue due to lower worker productivity.
 
2013-05-06 10:37:01 PM  

feckingmorons: You already have to pay tax on the items you buy from out of state vendors that do not collect sales tax if those items would be taxable in your state. Use tax, not sales tax is what it is called. I file my return and pay the tax quarterly as required by my state of residence, Florida.

If you live in Deleware, Montana or Oregon you have no state sales or use tax. All others should be paying their use tax as the law requires unless the vendor collects it.

This will not raise your tax burden one cent. It will however create an accounting nightmare for the sellers and many smaller sellers will simply close. Those that remain open will have higher tax compliance costs and will pass those costs along to the consumer.

If you people had paid your taxes all along like you're supposed to you wouldn't be facing this problem. Quill v. North Dakota was not litigated to save you from paying the tax you rightfully owe, it was litigated so Quill and retailers similarly situated wouldn't be required to comply with tax laws in jurisdictions in which they have no nexus.

TLDR version - you already owe these taxes, you don't pay them. Now they want businesses to collect them because you won't pay voluntarily and prices will go up. Pay your taxes deadbeats.


Sweet cupping cakes, US tax law is a mess.
 
2013-05-06 10:37:24 PM  
On the one hand, I don't want to pay more.
On the other hand, it's a whole 6% more (it uses state sales tax, right?) and I should probably be paying it anyways.
 
2013-05-06 10:37:35 PM  
The problem I have with this is that it does not address (at least as far as I can tell) mail order operations in states with no no sales tax. I remember years ago I used to buy old coins from an outfit in New Hampshire and never had to pay sales tax for that reason.
 
2013-05-06 10:39:01 PM  
homeschooled:
Raise your hand if you answered $0 when your state tax return asked the dollar amount of out of state or online purchases that you owed taxes on

What the hell is a state income tax return?
www.united-states-flag.com

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.

Since Congress told the airports to spend wildly until they run out this summer, that's their one bill this year. They should quit while they're ahead.
 
2013-05-06 10:39:22 PM  

feckingmorons: You already have to pay tax on the items you buy from out of state vendors that do not collect sales tax if those items would be taxable in your state. Use tax, not sales tax is what it is called. I file my return and pay the tax quarterly as required by my state of residence, Florida.

If you live in Deleware, Montana or Oregon you have no state sales or use tax. All others should be paying their use tax as the law requires unless the vendor collects it.

This will not raise your tax burden one cent. It will however create an accounting nightmare for the sellers and many smaller sellers will simply close. Those that remain open will have higher tax compliance costs and will pass those costs along to the consumer.

If you people had paid your taxes all along like you're supposed to you wouldn't be facing this problem. Quill v. North Dakota was not litigated to save you from paying the tax you rightfully owe, it was litigated so Quill and retailers similarly situated wouldn't be required to comply with tax laws in jurisdictions in which they have no nexus.

TLDR version - you already owe these taxes, you don't pay them. Now they want businesses to collect them because you won't pay voluntarily and prices will go up. Pay your taxes deadbeats.


I was with you until you turned it into an attack on people you know nothing about. You can make a point without being a judgemental arse.
 
2013-05-06 10:39:45 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.


Amazon's betting that quick delivery times will overcome a sales tax.  They're actually trying out same day delivery in some places, and you need warehouses near metro areas (ie. in the same state) and subject yourself to physical presence laws to do that.  Small internet companies can't compete on affordable speedy delivery.  Forcing them into the tax too puts Amazon at an advantage.
 
2013-05-06 10:40:20 PM  
I'm actually OK with this. If we're going to have sales tax, it shouldn't unevenly favor internet vendors.

If we have to get revenue form someplace new, this is a decent choice. Pollution taxes would be another good choice.
 
2013-05-06 10:41:08 PM  
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
 
2013-05-06 10:41:17 PM  
Motherfarkers!

It still doesn't solve anything. That money only goes to suits who get to decide what all of us need the most. Probably war.

F.
 
2013-05-06 10:41:23 PM  
So instead of getting six games for twenty bucks in the last steam sale, I'd have to pay twenty and a buck forty? Well this is worse than the holocaust indeed.
 
2013-05-06 10:41:29 PM  
I'm already taxed by Amazon so it doesn't change anything for me. I'll continue to use them for free delivery to my door, saving me gas and time.
 
2013-05-06 10:42:25 PM  
Just one step closer to a national sales tax.
 
2013-05-06 10:43:10 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.


They have the infrastructure in place to put on their big girl panties and deal with it. They also have the scale of economy to keep their pricing competitive. They know many of their competitors do not have either, but generate enough sales that they will have to cope, or go under.
 
2013-05-06 10:43:14 PM  
I wonder where Reid will buy his magic underwear now if he has to pay tax for the online purchases.
 
2013-05-06 10:43:15 PM  
24.media.tumblr.com
 
2013-05-06 10:43:21 PM  

optikeye: Catalog sales have traditionally been excluded from the state and local sales taxes. (with the exception that the sale company has a physical store in your state). (and I should say most states as some paper catalogs add taxes to certain states).

It seems this law is redefining what a 'physical store' is..meaning a internet store that takes over the internet is subject.


The bill applies to all out-of-state sellers, not just online sellers.  In theory, it applies to international sellers but good luck with that.
 
2013-05-06 10:43:38 PM  
Am I supposed to be somehow outraged by this? Because trying to calculate and pay your in-state tax for online purchases separately to your state is a real serious pain in the ass for me and many others. I guess since sales taxes are inherently regressive its a sorta bad thing, but I can't get outraged. Sorry.
 
2013-05-06 10:43:48 PM  
As has been said, this isn't an additional tax. Taxes are not going up. Instead, taxes that are due will actually be collected, instead of ignored as they always have been.

But alas, it will be spun as such...
 
2013-05-06 10:43:59 PM  
If I were Amazon, I'd just set up a lot of Amazon lockers on Indian reservations. No state taxes on the res, people can pick up their packages while they pick up their tax free cigarettes.
 
2013-05-06 10:44:05 PM  

dickfreckle: Supporters say the current tax disparity is turning some traditional stores into showrooms, where shoppers pick out items they like, then buy them on the Internet to avoid sales taxes.

No, we sometimes do that because the internet almost always offers significantly better deals. If the discrepancy were $5, $10 or even $20 I'd rather pay the difference and the tax and have the item in my hands that day (the shipping savings would likely counteract the tax anyway). But when you're charging $189 for an item newegg.com sells for $99, what do you expect?

That the internet undercuts you isn't my problem. The way things exist now, the bricks and the bytes co-exist. You just want a stronger piece of the pie and are appealing to state governments' need of revenue to get it.


lots of "THIS"

Brick and Mortar stores are for when I want a thing NOW. interwebs are for when I can afford to wait.
Next day delivery is expensive.
 
2013-05-06 10:44:17 PM  

mikemoto: The problem I have with this is that it does not address (at least as far as I can tell) mail order operations in states with no no sales tax. I remember years ago I used to buy old coins from an outfit in New Hampshire and never had to pay sales tax for that reason.


It's based on the delivery address of the sale. E.g. a New Hampshire company selling to a resident of New York has to collect and remit New York state sales tax.  A New York company selling to a New Hampshire resident doesn't collect any tax because NH doesn't have a sales tax.
 
2013-05-06 10:44:18 PM  

semiotix: Vodka Zombie: basemetal: I thought you guys liked taxes....

I like society and civilization and all the wonderful trappings that come along with it.

Like roads and bridges and, yes, parks.

I'm with  Vodka Zombie on the roads and bridges, but I also like the thought of all the Fark Independents™, tax protestors, and self-made millionaires (what with their bootstraps and nobody never giving them nothin') having to pay taxes like good little citizens.

And when I say enjoy, I mean "aroused by." Yeah, that's right, let me hear you scream, you middle-class biatches. Get ready to take all eleven marginal percent right up your tight little tax hole.


Fap fap fap fap fap
 
2013-05-06 10:44:47 PM  
Good. No reason online sales should be exempt anyways. Pathetic it took this long.

And .. Newsflash? .. Really? It's not like there's any other breaking news today or anything, right?
 
2013-05-06 10:45:28 PM  
De welfare baby mamas be needin dat money yo, get up off it now. Black Jesus needs to punish da honkeys an feed his people.
 
2013-05-06 10:45:44 PM  
It's not about "fairness", silly.

It's about State and local governments who spent like irresponsible pissed-off housewives during the Housing Bubble, ran their credit cards WAAAY over the limit, and now, post housing BUST, are faced with the ugly hangover.

For those that still think that the Dinosaur "brick and mortar" stores are treated unfairly, figure in shipping costs: Buy a widget from Vermont and have it shipped to your home in Oregon - what does that  cost?

A lot more than the sales tax, you can be sure.

/Free shipping you say?
//Free lunch, I say
///Wanna buy a bridge?
 
2013-05-06 10:45:54 PM  
We live in 'Because F U times'.
 
2013-05-06 10:45:56 PM  
In every Walmart thread, there are countless comments about how people should shun the evil empire and support their local mom and pop stores. Why are you all so upset about this then?
 
2013-05-06 10:46:13 PM  

ArkAngel: It excuses all companies with less than one million in online sales.


Total sales, not just online sales.
 
2013-05-06 10:46:45 PM  

Thoguh: I don't have a problem with this.  It'll cut down on really blatant tax evasion, that's it.  And smaller companies won't have to "deal with 9,000 tax codes" or anything like that.  Some vendor will see a business opportunity to run all that stuff for a small surcharge and all the small businesses will just contract through them.


That's because you're a pinhead. Taking your earnings which you are heavily taxed on you purchase a soft cover copy of "How Not to be a Pinhead for Dummies" and you pay tax on it. When you decide to sell the USED book you couldn't understand you will have to collect Taxes on the sale and submit them to the government. This double-dipping ain't right. And if the twatwaffle that bought the book wants to return it for refund your eBay and PayPal account won't happily show Uncle Sam IRS the tax was returned, that would be too easy. So now the tax will come directly out of your pocket and you will suffer a loss on your sale return. Ain't right.
 
2013-05-06 10:46:50 PM  
Go fark yourselves Congress.
 
2013-05-06 10:47:27 PM  
This has an interesting implication for tax payers in Massachusetts. Sales tax is supposed to be paid on internet purchases, but they're just claimed on the tax form when you file. Here, there is a tax that you can pay that basically says "give us this amount of money, and we'll call it even on all of those internet purchases you're not claiming." It was some small amount that I went ahead and paid, because I don't feel like being audited.

If/when this passes, though, there's no need for that tax, because sales tax will be collected on internet purchases. I just wonder if the state will realize this, and not try to bully taxpayers into paying for it twice.
 
2013-05-06 10:48:07 PM  
"Supporters say the current tax disparity is turning some traditional stores into showrooms, where shoppers pick out items they like, then buy them on the Internet to avoid sales taxes."

Its not to avoid sales tax. 

(1) Prices are lower in general, anyway
(2) I dont have to carry shiat home
(3) I dont get up-selled on accessories or warranties
(4) Better/easier return policies

sales tax is roughly the 5-th best advantage of online shopping.
 
2013-05-06 10:48:29 PM  

mikemoto: The problem I have with this is that it does not address (at least as far as I can tell) mail order operations in states with no no sales tax. I remember years ago I used to buy old coins from an outfit in New Hampshire and never had to pay sales tax for that reason.


So, for small stores..call them with your order. As a catalog sale--not an internet sale. Use the internet to look at the items and give a  phone call.

Al Gore put the internet sales exemption in back in the mid 90's....and it was renewed a few times. Now, that was up again it was removed.

Catalog sales from out of state catalog things have always been traditionally exempt in most states the catalog place didn't have a brick and mortar store or warehouse. Or some states that collected catalog sales taxes.
I think AZ, CA, OR, come to mind from mail order stuff.
 
2013-05-06 10:50:16 PM  
albuquerquehalsey:

Now THAT is funny. Well played sir.
 
jgi
2013-05-06 10:50:26 PM  
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.
 
2013-05-06 10:51:03 PM  

Popcorn Johnny: In every Walmart thread, there are countless comments about how people should shun the evil empire and support their local mom and pop stores. Why are you all so upset about this then?


i.imgur.com

Meh. I was just going to buy a cheap casket. And only because there isn't a Ralph's around here.
 
2013-05-06 10:51:19 PM  

feckingmorons: If you live in Deleware, Montana or Oregon you have no state sales or use tax.


I live in Montana. Get farked, ya bastards.
 
2013-05-06 10:51:35 PM  
Once again an old and outdated industry is crying to the federal government to step in and stop other people from competing with them.
 
2013-05-06 10:51:50 PM  
Why does subby hate democracy? The people want to pay more taxes.
 
2013-05-06 10:52:52 PM  

feckingmorons: You already have to pay tax on the items you buy from out of state vendors that do not collect sales tax if those items would be taxable in your state. Use tax, not sales tax is what it is called. I file my return and pay the tax quarterly as required by my state of residence, Florida.


You are a sucker.
 
2013-05-06 10:52:55 PM  

albuquerquehalsey: [24.media.tumblr.com image 303x488]


media.tumblr.com

White people problems, you say?
 
2013-05-06 10:53:06 PM  

Fuggin Bizzy: feckingmorons: If you live in Deleware, Montana or Oregon you have no state sales or use tax.

I live in Montana. Get farked, ya bastards.


If you live in Montana or any other state with no sales tax, this shouldn't affect you at all. So congrats!
 
2013-05-06 10:53:20 PM  
We live in 'Because FU, that's why' times.
 
2013-05-06 10:54:19 PM  
I'm sure this will solve illinois' financial problems.
 
2013-05-06 10:54:21 PM  

12349876: TV's Vinnie: I really cannot fathom why the Amazon bigshots want this bill so bad. If it happens, their sales are gonna plummet.

Amazon's betting that quick delivery times will overcome a sales tax....


Psh, Amazon is the largest online retailer, they're the ones best able to adjust to the new regulations and they'll still be able to offer a bigger selection and lower prices than any traditional retailer. This legislation will create additional barriers to competition for Amazon without truly affecting their ability to compete with brick and mortar stores and save Amazon from having to fight this battle through the courts over the next few years.
 
2013-05-06 10:54:27 PM  
www.charlock.org
 
2013-05-06 10:54:38 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.


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.
 
2013-05-06 10:54:43 PM  

BarkingUnicorn: ArkAngel: It excuses all companies with less than one million in online sales.

Total sales, not just online sales.


Whoops, I was mistaken.  "Remote sales," not total sales or just online sales.
 
2013-05-06 10:55:03 PM  

DrPainMD: Why does subby hate democracy? The people want to pay more taxes.


People are stupid
 
2013-05-06 10:55:21 PM  

Somacandra: I guess since sales taxes are inherently regressive its a sorta bad thing, but I can't get outraged.


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.
 
2013-05-06 10:55:46 PM  

Warlordtrooper: Once again an old and outdated industry is crying to the federal government to step in and stop other people from competing with them.


How is the equal application of tax laws inhibiting competition?  As it is now, e-tailers have a government sponsored competitive advantage. That's what's anti-competitive.
 
2013-05-06 10:55:51 PM  
Right.

They can tax this but they can't farking legalize, regulate and tax online poker.
 
2013-05-06 10:56:37 PM  
- 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.
 
2013-05-06 10:57:29 PM  
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.
 
2013-05-06 10:57:35 PM  

Two Hearted: BestBuy.com and Target.com are giddy about this, but I'm still not going to shop at either sites. I buy things on Amazon, not because they don't charge sales tax, but because Amazon is a million times easier to navigate, the shipping is a million times better, and the review system is actually decent. I'd stab my own dick with a snail fork before buying anything from either of those two sites.


I can't really tell if you're trolling or not. Kind of funny, in any case.
 
2013-05-06 10:57:42 PM  

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/
 
2013-05-06 10:57:50 PM  

Jesterling: [www.charlock.org image 651x433]


pretty much
 
2013-05-06 10:58:14 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.


This is exactly it.

And why not stimulate production among common people and eliminate the barriers that really SHOULD just be to prevent monopolies. Grade on a curve... Perhaps Bezos doesn't want the competition.
 
2013-05-06 10:58:54 PM  

ArkAngel: Thoguh: I don't have a problem with this.  It'll cut down on really blatant tax evasion, that's it.  And smaller companies won't have to "deal with 9,000 tax codes" or anything like that.  Some vendor will see a business opportunity to run all that stuff for a small surcharge and all the small businesses will just contract through them.


Smaller companies won't have to deal with it at all. It excuses all companies with less than one million in online sales.


Just give it time. All taxes get bigger and more invasive, never the other way around.


Taxes NEVER go down....


www.cbpp.org:
 
2013-05-06 10:58:56 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.


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.
 
2013-05-06 10:59:27 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.

Well, good thing the democrats only want to raise taxes on the "rich".
 
2013-05-06 10:59:29 PM  

feckingmorons: You already have to pay tax on the items you buy from out of state vendors that do not collect sales tax if those items would be taxable in your state. Use tax, not sales tax is what it is called. I file my return and pay the tax quarterly as required by my state of residence, Florida.

If you live in Deleware, Montana or Oregon you have no state sales or use tax. All others should be paying their use tax as the law requires unless the vendor collects it.

This will not raise your tax burden one cent. It will however create an accounting nightmare for the sellers and many smaller sellers will simply close. Those that remain open will have higher tax compliance costs and will pass those costs along to the consumer.

If you people had paid your taxes all along like you're supposed to you wouldn't be facing this problem. Quill v. North Dakota was not litigated to save you from paying the tax you rightfully owe, it was litigated so Quill and retailers similarly situated wouldn't be required to comply with tax laws in jurisdictions in which they have no nexus.

TLDR version - you already owe these taxes, you don't pay them. Now they want businesses to collect them because you won't pay voluntarily and prices will go up. Pay your taxes deadbeats.


Seriously? Do you save every receipt from a online purchase; a book or a dongle or something rather incidental.
And claim that toal  up and pay taxes on those when you fill out fed and state taxes?
I can't even remember what I bought online last year--I'm sure it wasn't much. But I certainly didn't log it for reference in April 14. I'm pretty sure..almost 100 percent sure, you purchased "Something" online you forgot to log in your perfect little world for tax reporting. Or you might have forgotten to claim a import form for a incidental thingy from Mexico to customs.
Might have been a couple of bucks--but then again we're haggling over the price at that point for what you might have done.
 
2013-05-06 10:59:30 PM  

1000 Ways to Dye: I'm okay with this, sorta.

They should make it apply to businesses that do more than $10 Million in sales or 50 employees, just like mail order businesses, rather than $1 million or 50 employees.



 . . . typical Leftist, "Eat the Rich" mentality
 
2013-05-06 10:59:38 PM  

DrPainMD: feckingmorons: You already have to pay tax on the items you buy from out of state vendors that do not collect sales tax if those items would be taxable in your state. Use tax, not sales tax is what it is called. I file my return and pay the tax quarterly as required by my state of residence, Florida.


You are a sucker.



Your statement, it is redundant.
 
2013-05-06 11:00:26 PM  
Not to be an a$$ (okay, so I am going to be one):

Idiots complaining this will be a "compliance nightmare" for small business, you've been suckered. Years ago, at least 10, there were companies selling fully indexed tax databases in combinations of states, counties, and so on. You could buy a nationwide list on cd, or online, and even subscriptions for a discount.

You think this is going to cause a problem? Excuse me while I laugh at your ignorance.
 
2013-05-06 11:00:41 PM  
It seems this is unlikely to affect a lot of small businesses, but is highly likely to create a clusterfark of accounting work for any online business that generates more than $1 mil in profits. Trying to create an online purchasing system to calculate tax rates for different states, in addition to shipping costs, will just make the whole online purchasing process more difficult. But maybe that is the ultimate goal...

And will this boil down to state legislatures? I lived in a county in Florida that added a 1% county tax on top of the state tax. Will individuals purchasing in specific counties eventually be held to these regulations?

/this post got away from me...
 
2013-05-06 11:00:42 PM  

DrPainMD: feckingmorons: You already have to pay tax on the items you buy from out of state vendors that do not collect sales tax if those items would be taxable in your state. Use tax, not sales tax is what it is called. I file my return and pay the tax quarterly as required by my state of residence, Florida.

You are a sucker.


Depends. He's doing what everyone's supposed to be doing if their state has sales tax, but like I said you're unlikely to get caught if you don't in most states. Not sure how strict Florida is with it.

Let's say I bought a couple of things in NJ (7% sales tax statewide) that I end up using here in NY (8.625% sales tax in my county, rate varies by county). Technically I'm supposed to pay the difference. Are they going to look closely into my purchases and charge me? Very unlikely. But I wouldn't blame anyone for paying.

/haven't actually done that so don't come after me, NYSDTF
 
2013-05-06 11:00:44 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.


Remote sellers are not being taxed.  They are collecting taxes from in-state buyers and remitting that money to the buyer's state.
 
2013-05-06 11:00:56 PM  
A lot states, red ones especially, need revenue.  The sequester is killing them.  This is going to mean exactly jack diddley in terms of hurting sales, and it will raise much needed revenue.
 
2013-05-06 11:01:09 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.


Chief Justice Roberts and the Commerce Clause would like to have a word with you.
 
2013-05-06 11:01:49 PM  

GameSprocket: So, I guess Amazon's web services will soon include a tax calculator. The trick will be dealing with the special rules for categories like clothing.


Or items you can eat
 
2013-05-06 11:02:21 PM  
Any business with under $1million in internet sales is exempt? I hope that this is correct.
 
2013-05-06 11:02:40 PM  
www.littlestuffedbull.com
 
2013-05-06 11:02:57 PM  
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.
 
2013-05-06 11:03:01 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.


So the President controls your state taxes?
 
2013-05-06 11:03:02 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.


I know that sounds good, but it doesn't work that way.
 
2013-05-06 11:03:34 PM  
i86.photobucket.com


Since I live in BFE Michigan I shop on-line mostly because I can't get something locally and not because I'm looking for a tax free shopping experience. And when I do try to find a deal on-line on something I could get locally it would have to be a hell a lot more then 6% cheaper anyway when you factor in shipping cost and wait times.
 
2013-05-06 11:03:48 PM  

Popcorn Johnny: In every Walmart thread, there are countless comments about how people should shun the evil empire and support their local mom and pop stores. Why are you all so upset about this then?


I think the small businesses on the internet would be the most harmed... the big guys can have accountants and lawyers and programmers redo their method of processing in a matter of days... for little guys, they may simply be unable to afford the tax complexities of each and every state they might be shipping to, it could just be the end of them.
 
2013-05-06 11:03:50 PM  
The democrat's answer to brick & mortar businesses getting screwed...... Screw the internet businesses too!

That'll help the economy.  Just farking brilliant.
 
2013-05-06 11:04:33 PM  
Cook County board members are gonna be up all night figuring out how to soak me on this, so I got THAT going for me.

"We've devised a new formula, much like the property tax formula. Basically we total OUR bills from last year, then divide by the number of Internet capable devices we estimate are in the county. Your bill will be that number times all of your devices plus $50."
 
2013-05-06 11:04:37 PM  

Whodat: Any business with under $1million in internet sales is exempt? I hope that this is correct.


Any business with less than one million in out-of-state sales, via the internet or otherwise.
 
2013-05-06 11:04:59 PM  
fark Harry Reid in the ass with a sharp stick!
 
2013-05-06 11:06:16 PM  

Whodat: Any business with under $1million in internet sales is exempt? I hope that this is correct.



Yes, but it is Gross sales.  Not net profit.  Keep that in mind.  The bill is not talking about profit exemptions for small businesses.

A business only needs to churn one million dollars to be in the system, even if it takes home much less.
 
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.
 
2013-05-06 11:26:33 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 constituents want something doesn't necessarily mean they're right.  Most users still operate under the idea that the Internet is some amorphous entity that popped into existence one day and why the hell should I have to pay money to watch cat videos?  I don't like paying taxes, but you have to admit there's a problem when brick-and-morter stores operate under one set of rules while internet businesses operate under an advantageous other set of rules.  Amazon has made a killing (literally in the case of retailers) exploiting that difference.  I'm all for moving towards digital downloads and online sales, but you can't expect the government to fund its mandates if a huge section of its tax base dries up.  So you have to choose.  Either treat everyone by the same set of rules, or accept that states will have to tighten their belts even more as Amazon gobbles up retailers.
 
2013-05-06 11:27:02 PM  

Vangor: the charge of tax to a retailer


Sales taxes are assessed on the consumer, not the retailer.  The retailer collects it and submits it to the state to which it is owed.
 
2013-05-06 11:27:25 PM  
Sounds like a good idea...taxes.  Let's see if we can drive commerce completely overseas...we've already done so with manufacturing.  I can't figure out who would've lobbied for this, but I am sure the senators are getting paid well.
 
2013-05-06 11:28:12 PM  

Mock26: 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?


Bah, it's a lot harder to find with this bill having passed, but I was able to find this reference on the Finance Dept page about sales tax on the site for Jeneau:

All merchants are required to collect sales tax at the time of purchase...

In the past I've found a couple of state gov sites that said similar things, but right now the Googles are chock-full of stuff about this bill, so I can't seem to find them now.
 
2013-05-06 11:28:26 PM  
i0.kym-cdn.com

The purpose of the tax break was to encourage Internet sales. Internet retailers are doing well, so we end the tax break. We now move on with life.

People get some advantage and then whine like spoiled brats when they no longer get special treatment.

If anyone is asking why Amazon is supporting this, it's because they have distribution centers in many states. They also had problems in the past with affiliate programs and taxes. They want a level playing field with other internet retailers.
 
2013-05-06 11:28:51 PM  

Sim Tree: 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.


Right, because it's not like software to handle tax accounting automatically is something that exists.
 
2013-05-06 11:28:52 PM  

Mentat: 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 constituents want something doesn't necessarily mean they're right.  Most users still operate under the idea that the Internet is some amorphous entity that popped into existence one day and why the hell should I have to pay money to watch cat videos?  I don't like paying taxes, but you have to admit there's a problem when brick-and-morter stores operate under one set of rules while internet businesses operate under an advantageous other set of rules.  Amazon has made a killing (literally in the case of retailers) exploiting that difference.  I'm all for moving towards digital downloads and online sales, but you can't expect the government to fund its mandates if a huge section of its tax base dries up.  So you have to choose.  Either treat everyone by the same set of rules, or accept that states will have to tighten their belts even more as Amazon gobbles up retailers.


Amazon still maintains its advantage due to its partnerships and ability to quote you from a number of vendors, rather than just what they charge for what they actually have in stock. Amazon is the shiat, with or without sales tax. If you have a fulfillment center in your state (which is likely) you are already paying sales tax on Amazon.
 
2013-05-06 11:29:31 PM  
Did a FWCer sent this?
 
2013-05-06 11:29:58 PM  

feckingmorons: You already have to pay tax on the items you buy from out of state vendors that do not collect sales tax if those items would be taxable in your state. Use tax, not sales tax is what it is called. I file my return and pay the tax quarterly as required by my state of residence, Florida.


Of ll the things that never happened, this never happened the most.
 
2013-05-06 11:30:41 PM  

Monkeyfark Ridiculous: 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


It is a bit unnerving, ain't it? I can understand the Elmer Fudd moment of having a carrot-chomping visitor kibitzing while I'm seconds from cornering that screwy rabbit....
 
2013-05-06 11:31:19 PM  

MyToeHurts: fark Harry Reid in the ass with a sharp stick!


you have to get past his Magic Underwear.

although maybe the sharp stick would help with that.
 
2013-05-06 11:31:19 PM  

Harbinger of the Doomed Rat: "vendor privilege tax"


that's different than a transactional sales tax that I was referring to.  I have no idea whether this legislation addresses that type of tax.
 
2013-05-06 11:32:17 PM  

shifty lookin bleeder: Vangor: the charge of tax to a retailer

Sales taxes are assessed on the consumer, not the retailer.  The retailer collects it and submits it to the state to which it is owed.


technically, no. You could never pay a dime in "sales tax" as a line item on a receipt but the retailer you purchase from is responsible for making sure he is paying the state and local sales taxes on all his sales. Usually this tax is passed along to the consumer but there is no requirement for anyone to do that explicitly or implicitly AFAIK. This is why you can often avoid paying taxes by making cash purchases. Sort of a wink and a nod to the retailer. He won't report it as revenue and therefore not pay income or sales taxes on it and in exchange, you avoid the pass along tax.
 
2013-05-06 11:33:06 PM  

Sim Tree: 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.


Amazon provides this as a service to other retailers so everyone will be okay.
 
2013-05-06 11:33:42 PM  
Let's not pretend this is about protecting small businesses. This is about helping Amazon crush Ebay.
 
2013-05-06 11:33:50 PM  

ArkAngel: Thoguh: I don't have a problem with this.  It'll cut down on really blatant tax evasion, that's it.  And smaller companies won't have to "deal with 9,000 tax codes" or anything like that.  Some vendor will see a business opportunity to run all that stuff for a small surcharge and all the small businesses will just contract through them.

Smaller companies won't have to deal with it at all. It excuses all companies with less than one million in online sales.


I'm really really REALLY glad that exemption made it in, because from what the ebay lobby group was crying about, it almost didn't. They're still crying about 10 million dollar sales levels, as well...
 
2013-05-06 11:34:32 PM  
I love that there are apparently people out there that actually believe that people buy online so they can evade the sales tax. For me, it isn't that at all. A lot of my online purchases are textbooks. Even if tax is added, I'm still way ahead buying them on Amazon rather than the university bookstore. The other stuff I buy is random crap I need around the house, but don't necessarily need right this minute, and am too damn lazy to go looking for. Like today, I accidentally dropped my 4 cup Pyrex measuring cup on the tile floor. After sweeping up the mess, I went to Amazon and one-click purchased a new one that will be here on Wednesday (yay Prime!). Even with tax added I would have done so, because I would have saved the trouble of having to go looking for a 4 cup Pyrex measuring cup.
 
2013-05-06 11:34:44 PM  
Boohoo, my unregulated Wild West of underpriced delivery goods is coming to an end.

Seriously though, how was this not already passed a decade ago?
 
2013-05-06 11:35:00 PM  
This thread has made me very glad I live in a big city without a lot of big box stores, where I don't mind paying $1.14 more to buy an item in an actual store, because many of the local stores are locally owned and run by people who know and care about what they're doing.
 
2013-05-06 11:35:32 PM  
Why should ebay charge sales tax? Wouldn't that be like forcing people to charge sales tax when they have a garage sale or sell something on craigslist?
 
2013-05-06 11:35:39 PM  
What they really need to do is standardize the sales tax.  I'm not talking about a flat tax, (that tries to raise all revenue with a sales tax), just a sales tax that is the same everywhere.   That means that for the consumer it's easy, and it means that there isn't an incentive for the businesses to play games.  Then, just have them send a check to the IRS.  The IRS can keep the federal portion and pass the rest on to the states.  The states can take their cut and pass the rest on to the towns.  Everyone gets paid, and as long as everyone is using a computer to keep track of it it's not really any more complicated for anyone.
 
2013-05-06 11:35:49 PM  

BarkingUnicorn: 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.


That's how the Amish do it. Also many Quakers. I've seen it in action - works pretty well. Of course, you have to make certain sacrifices in order to live like the Amish, but it's far from impossible.
 
2013-05-06 11:36:17 PM  

tjfly: 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."


To be fair, he hasn't signed the bill.  Yet.
 
2013-05-06 11:38:47 PM  
One more nail in the coffin of the Post Office.  People still use the Post Office, right?
 
2013-05-06 11:38:49 PM  
everyone hates taxes and everyone hates potholes

I don't ever buy anything anyway
 
2013-05-06 11:38:53 PM  

skullkrusher: shifty lookin bleeder: Vangor: the charge of tax to a retailer

Sales taxes are assessed on the consumer, not the retailer.  The retailer collects it and submits it to the state to which it is owed.

technically, no. You could never pay a dime in "sales tax" as a line item on a receipt but the retailer you purchase from is responsible for making sure he is paying the state and local sales taxes on all his sales. Usually this tax is passed along to the consumer but there is no requirement for anyone to do that explicitly or implicitly AFAIK. This is why you can often avoid paying taxes by making cash purchases. Sort of a wink and a nod to the retailer. He won't report it as revenue and therefore not pay income or sales taxes on it and in exchange, you avoid the pass along tax.


Actually, yes, it's a consumer tax and most state statutes say that explicitly.  And the rest of what you write would be crimes in most states with a sales tax, but I won't say anything if you don't.
 
2013-05-06 11:39:05 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.


Nah, here's the thing.  People don't pay their use taxes.  If you buy something without being charged sales tax, it's up to you to do it.  If you're like me, you just look at the bill, smile, and move on with your life.

But here's the thing: your hometown still has bills to pay.  As much as I'd like to stand up behind my buddies who want a FairTax system, but AFAIK if Jeff Bezos wanted to send a big "fark you" to Tennessee, all he'd have to do without a law like this is close down any and all TN warehouses.  Now, back to your hometown: they have this shortfall.  This very measurable shortfall.  So they've been trying to cover part of the tax burden with a consumption tax, which means they get to tax the people who don't live in their town but use their roads and services.  Now, they could raise taxes on residents, but they're likely to raise hell.  What do?

And being a rural Southern Illinoisan, Chicagoans moving down here both crack me up and fill me with rage, because imho they represent what's wrong with America.  People claim they want the low taxes, but they still have that sense of entitlement!  These folks fill their coffers up there, retire, come down here and sing the praises of our low cost of living, and move to a part of the area that has low low low property taxes...and then they're shocked, SHOCKED I TELL YOU, that they don't have the same exact quality of life they had up there.  The grocery store doesn't have the same selection!  Everybody looks poor!  The road in front of my house looks like a minefield!  Why is there corn blocking the view of oncoming traffic?  Why the hell are there so many tractors on the road?  Can't someone do something about all the potholes and tractors on the road???  Why is the road crew just two rednecks with a dumptruck???!?  What do you mean my $200/year property taxes don't cover the cost of an asphalt road?  How the hell am I supposed to drive my Vette on this road?

And yeah, there are people who have multiple acres here, and property taxes that low.  Mine is a lot higher than that, for an acre, but I can drive my hybrid down the road without losing a tire, so I don't biatch too loud.

Anyway...yeah, people expect their services, but nobody wants to pay for them.  And big businesses didn't want this.
 
2013-05-06 11:39:51 PM  
I don't see this helping brick-and-mortar retail at all.  There are several reasons why online shopping is easier:  you don't have to go to a store, you don't have to deal with some asshole's idea of management or the ill-paid people who work there, the time you save by not standing in line listen to a sad spiel about warranties and the like, and you can always get exactly what you want.  Sure, you have a wait, but that often beats BAMs by a damn sight.

All this is going to do is make BAMs feel better for a month while they realize people are still shopping online.   The lack of sales tax is nice, but that's not the only reason people shop online.  BAMs have serious management problems that start with how they view the consumer and their workforce (read: with contempt) and it shows.  Online retailers probably aren't much better, but it's easier for me to cut through the shiat and just get what I want.
 
2013-05-06 11:40:11 PM  
/* Ok, THIS was farking funny, +1 internet for you */

stdext::hash_map<const std::string&, double> StateToHowMuchCheddarWeOweEm;
void AddMuddafugginTaxes (const std::string& StateAbbr, double TaxOnThisPurchase)
{
StateToHowMuchCheddarWeOweEm[StateAbbr].second += TaxOnThisPurchase ;
}
 
2013-05-06 11:41:29 PM  

Triumph: Thoguh: It'll cut down on really blatant tax evasion, that's it.

The only people I can think of who are currently "evading" taxes are eBay sellers who sell to in-state buyers and don't add on tax. For eBay, this is a big hassle, but for Amazon, it frees them to set up an even better distribution system.


I occasionally sell items on eBay, so I'm watching this pretty closely getting a kick.
 
2013-05-06 11:41:48 PM  

Sim Tree: 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.


Amazon won't have to keep that database, because the bill requires states to do so (freely) if they want the revenue source. There will be an integration cost to said systems, but you're looking at one per state at most and there is no ongoing cost:

"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. "
 
2013-05-06 11:42:01 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......


Go for it.  If you can legally do so then do it.  A good friend of mine is moving to Florida because they have no income tax.  He will save about $75,000 a year by moving down there.  Sure, it is still Florida, but $75,000 buys you a lot of trips out of state.  And, it is perfectly legal.
 
2013-05-06 11:44:30 PM  

umad: Why should ebay charge sales tax? Wouldn't that be like forcing people to charge sales tax when they have a garage sale or sell something on craigslist?


How many people have a garage sale where they sell $1 million worth of stuff in a year?

Garage sale/craigslist sellers won't be hit. It's the people who run their businesses by selling on ebay which this will affect.
 
2013-05-06 11:44:37 PM  

shifty lookin bleeder: Vangor: the charge of tax to a retailer

Sales taxes are assessed on the consumer, not the retailer.  The retailer collects it and submits it to the state to which it is owed.


Sorry, I mean "to a retailer" in order to differ between retailers which must collect state taxes and those which do not.
 
2013-05-06 11:45:55 PM  

chitlenz: /* Ok, THIS was farking funny, +1 internet for you */

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


Imma sell that function and make millions. Apparently this is a heretofore insurmountable obstacle for an online retailer to overcome
 
2013-05-06 11:45:57 PM  

evaned: How many people have a garage sale where they sell $1 million worth of stuff in a year?


Al Gore?
 
2013-05-06 11:46:13 PM  

legion_of_doo: We need to pass a bill that requires brick and mortar retailers to hold onto a product for two days (i.e. shipping time) before a customer can pick up their item in order to create equality between retailers & etailers.

/equality my ass


oooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooo I really like this idea!!!
LOL

plus, by not driving to the brick and mortar shiat hole, I am doing my part to reduce traffic and pollution.
can we put an extra tax on brick and mortar for causing extra pollution??
HAHA HAHAHAH HAHA
/farkem
 
2013-05-06 11:46:19 PM  

thorthor: dopekitty74: So canadians are still free to buy online from US companies without having to pay taxes then?

Great question and possible business opportunity.

1. Move to Canada
2. Buy shiat off the interweb
3. Profit?


If youre in canada you cant buy anything from walmart.com or amazon.com if you dont have a US postal code
 
2013-05-06 11:46:53 PM  
The first thing we do, we kill all the tax lawyers.
 
2013-05-06 11:47:18 PM  

shifty lookin bleeder: Actually, yes, it's a consumer tax and most state statutes say that explicitly. And the rest of what you write would be crimes in most states with a sales tax, but I won't say anything if you don't.


second part, most certainly illegal. First part, I don't think so. As long as a retailer is paying his sales taxes, everyone's happy whether those taxes are specifically tacked on and broken out on a consumer's receipt
 
2013-05-06 11:47:54 PM  
Mock26:
Go for it.  If you can legally do so then do it.  A good friend of mine is moving to Florida because they have no income tax.  He will save about $75,000 a year by moving down there.  Sure, it is still Florida, but $75,000 buys you a lot of trips out of state.  And, it is perfectly legal.

Your friend would save $75K a year in State income tax?

/bullshiat
 
2013-05-06 11:47:57 PM  
This is the worst thing ever, right?  Whenever Fark freaks out about something, it's always the worst thing ever.
 
2013-05-06 11:48:35 PM  

tjfly: 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.


Obama is only a lying SOB to people who were already lying on their state tax returns.

(Well, OK, the truth is a bit more complicated in some states. But to at least a fairly large extent, that's true.)
 
2013-05-06 11:51:11 PM  
Of course the million dollar sales exemption won't expand with inflation, so when our currency is devalued further, all the more online businesses will get farked in the future.
 
2013-05-06 11:51:55 PM  

ontariolightning: thorthor: dopekitty74: So canadians are still free to buy online from US companies without having to pay taxes then?

Great question and possible business opportunity.

1. Move to Canada
2. Buy shiat off the interweb
3. Profit?

If youre in canada you cant buy anything from walmart.com or amazon.com if you dont have a US postal code


Oh. Shows how much I don't know about taxes or Canada. Thanks for clearing that up.
 
2013-05-06 11:52:20 PM  

ontariolightning: thorthor: dopekitty74: So canadians are still free to buy online from US companies without having to pay taxes then?

Great question and possible business opportunity.

1. Move to Canada
2. Buy shiat off the interweb
3. Profit?

If youre in canada you cant buy anything from walmart.com or amazon.com if you dont have a US postal code


Heh. I sell on Amazon Marketplace, and I've seen how that works. I can think of at least three things I've shipped that have been paid for with a Canadian credit card, and shipped to a PO box in a town in North Dakota that is within 20 miles of the border.
 
2013-05-06 11:52:56 PM  
People get some advantage and then whine like spoiled brats when they no longer get special treatment.


That's a great argument. Hopefully all this fairly earned money will be spent well. I'm guessing that it will be. How else will the government fix my roads and allow the fda and usda get away with anything that has to do with meddling in illicit consumerism and aiding the existence of soul crushing and market destroying monopolies.
 
2013-05-06 11:53:23 PM  
Yeah, and do you know what they'll do next? The brick stores will complain that it's unfair online stores are open 24/7, so a law has to be passed that no online transactions can happen between 9 pm and 10 AM.

I say we pass a law that requires all stores in states that collect online taxes be open 24/7 for the convienence of the consumer.

It's only fair, after all.