Do we support the Internet Sales Tax?

[Bones2484]

I don't see him referring to Amazon and other big companies at all.

And how many times does this need to be said?

To start collecting online taxes through the bill, states will need to ... pass legislation that creates a central authority for tax collection, provides free tax software to online sellers, and limits the liability businesses would face if they make mistakes based on bad information from a software provider or state official.

[Symmetry]

Doesn't the US already have a central authority for tax collection?

[PLAYER57832]

By the way, the taxation without representation also applies to the customers. I don't live in California and am not presently traveling in that state. Why should I be forced to pay their sales taxes?

Off hand, if you BUY something there, why shouldn't you be paying sales taxes?

At any rate, in this case.. you won't be paying CA taxes, you will be paying the taxes your own state requires.

[Bones2484]

Doesn't the US already have a central authority for tax collection?

Not for the collection of online sales tax.

[Night Strike]

I don't see him referring to Amazon and other big companies at all.

And how many times does this need to be said?

To start collecting online taxes through the bill, states will need to ... pass legislation that creates a central authority for tax collection, provides free tax software to online sellers, and limits the liability businesses would face if they make mistakes based on bad information from a software provider or state official.

"Free" doesn't exist. It's ironic...the sales taxes being collected will be used to fund the "free" programs used to collect them. Why not skip the bigger government and let people keep more of their own money?

[AndyDufresne]

"Free" doesn't exist. It's ironic...the sales taxes being collected will be used to fund the "free" programs used to collect them. Why not skip the bigger government and let people keep more of their own money?

Yeah!



--Andy

[BigBallinStalin]

I didn't say that I support the specific taxes involved, just that I support enforcing the collection of the taxes that exist.

Right, I understand that, but why?

Why wouldn't I?

The purpose of a sales tax is to allegedly pay for government-controlled and/or owned enterprises (e.g. streets). The internet doesn't have streets, the transaction costs are gladly undertaken by various financial intermediaries, and it's not like the businesses which make the deliveries do not pay their taxes for using the government-owned streets.

It's an unnecessary tax whose main purpose is to restrict competition, thereby enriching the embedded businesses.

[BigBallinStalin]

Personally, it just makes sense to me to charge sales tax on internet sales. Why should the internet be able to avoid that sort of thing these days? To not charge them sales tax is essentially a harm against brick-and-mortar stores, as people will go to the places that charge less (including sales tax).

Because the internet business may not have a footprint in that location, so it's not using local resources.

You mean, like the roads used for delivery?

Did you know that companies which deliver packages pay for taxes, permits, and fees on the trucks?

EDIT: fastposted by NS, who is correct to point the above out.

[BigBallinStalin]

Personally, it just makes sense to me to charge sales tax on internet sales. Why should the internet be able to avoid that sort of thing these days? To not charge them sales tax is essentially a harm against brick-and-mortar stores, as people will go to the places that charge less (including sales tax).

Because the internet business may not have a footprint in that location, so it's not using local resources.

The internet business isn't paying the freaking tax! It's collecting it from someone who uses local resources.

TGD, a tax is a deadweight loss which cuts into consumer and producer surplus, so it doesn't matter who does the collecting.

[Woodruff]

Personally, it just makes sense to me to charge sales tax on internet sales. Why should the internet be able to avoid that sort of thing these days? To not charge them sales tax is essentially a harm against brick-and-mortar stores, as people will go to the places that charge less (including sales tax).

Because the internet business may not have a footprint in that location, so it's not using local resources.

I can't think of a single internet business that doesn't use local resources. There probably are some...but all of them that I can think of still have to deliver their product, at the VERY least.

[Woodruff]

Personally, it just makes sense to me to charge sales tax on internet sales. Why should the internet be able to avoid that sort of thing these days? To not charge them sales tax is essentially a harm against brick-and-mortar stores, as people will go to the places that charge less (including sales tax).

Because the internet business may not have a footprint in that location, so it's not using local resources.

The internet business isn't paying the freaking tax! It's collecting it from someone who uses local resources.

And then you're going to say "yeah, but now they need to know the sales tax rate in Bumfuck, Nebraska." That is an minute cost for internet companies, if any cost at all given that most of them already have sales tax software.

Bumfuck, Nebraska rocks, I'll have you know. I'm pretty sure I grew up there.

[Baron Von PWN]

I didn't say that I support the specific taxes involved, just that I support enforcing the collection of the taxes that exist.

Right, I understand that, but why?

Why wouldn't I?

The purpose of a sales tax is to allegedly pay for government-controlled and/or owned enterprises (e.g. streets). The internet doesn't have streets, the transaction costs are gladly undertaken by various financial intermediaries, and it's not like the businesses which make the deliveries do not pay their taxes for using the government-owned streets.

It's an unnecessary tax whose main purpose is to restrict competition, thereby enriching the embedded businesses.

The consumer is using those resources though and they are the one paying the tax.

[PLAYER57832]

I don't see him referring to Amazon and other big companies at all.

And how many times does this need to be said?

To start collecting online taxes through the bill, states will need to ... pass legislation that creates a central authority for tax collection, provides free tax software to online sellers, and limits the liability businesses would face if they make mistakes based on bad information from a software provider or state official.

"Free" doesn't exist. It's ironic...the sales taxes being collected will be used to fund the "free" programs used to collect them. Why not skip the bigger government and let people keep more of their own money?

Becuase not taxing gives internet sources an advantage over brick and mortar stores.

ALSO, and this was brought up by greekdog in other threads, we technically ARE required to pay taxes now, its just they are so difficult to collect from individuals that most people just don't. This makes it easier to obey the law to pay what are actually existing taxes, rather than actually creating new laws or taxes.

[PLAYER57832]

Personally, it just makes sense to me to charge sales tax on internet sales. Why should the internet be able to avoid that sort of thing these days? To not charge them sales tax is essentially a harm against brick-and-mortar stores, as people will go to the places that charge less (including sales tax).

Because the internet business may not have a footprint in that location, so it's not using local resources.

The internet business isn't paying the freaking tax! It's collecting it from someone who uses local resources.

TGD, a tax is a deadweight loss which cuts into consumer and producer surplus, so it doesn't matter who does the collecting.

I see, so you think roads and infrastructure just magically appear, then?

Pretending costs don't exist is an old game, and one that always fails in the long run.

[tzor]

Because not taxing gives internet sources an advantage over brick and mortar stores.

Counter balanced by the fact that if you go to a brick and mortar store you don't have to pay for shipping.

Look, I'm all for paying taxes. I just want to approach this logically and logically this fails for me.

I drive to a store. I purchase an item. I take it home. I pay the taxes at the POINT OF SALE.
I drive to a store. I purchase an item. I drive to UPS and have them ship the item. I pay taxes at the POINT OF SALE.
I drive to a store. I purchase an item. I have them ship the item. I still pay taxes at the POINT OF SALE.

So the destination point doesn't make any sense and doesn't come into play in either case.

What about ordering on the phone (QVC)?
What about ordering on the internet?

Why are these five scenarios different? Why does physical presence count and virtual presence fail to count?

Oh I almost forgot.

I drive to a store. I purchase an item. But the store doesn't have the item; it's in a warehouse in a different taxing jurisdiction. They ship to me from that location. I still pay taxes at the POINT OF SALE.

[Juan_Bottom]

The free software sways me to the left on this.

But Tzor's argument is keeping me from sliding far enough to support it.

I just can't see why I should pay sales tax for something that uses 0 government services. I'm not using roads, drainage ditches, or anything. It's a point and a click.
I understand that the interwebz are cutting into state tax collections,.. but then maybe those taxes aren't so vital if the usage of the services they're supposed to go to aren't being used. This is kinda like special taxing hybrids to pay for road use. Except that it's taxing index-finger-pointing to pay for road use or whatever else.

[Baron Von PWN]

Because not taxing gives internet sources an advantage over brick and mortar stores.

Counter balanced by the fact that if you go to a brick and mortar store you don't have to pay for shipping.

Look, I'm all for paying taxes. I just want to approach this logically and logically this fails for me.

I drive to a store. I purchase an item. I take it home. I pay the taxes at the POINT OF SALE.
I drive to a store. I purchase an item. I drive to UPS and have them ship the item. I pay taxes at the POINT OF SALE.
I drive to a store. I purchase an item. I have them ship the item. I still pay taxes at the POINT OF SALE.

So the destination point doesn't make any sense and doesn't come into play in either case.

What about ordering on the phone (QVC)?
What about ordering on the internet?

Why are these five scenarios different? Why does physical presence count and virtual presence fail to count?

Oh I almost forgot.

I drive to a store. I purchase an item. But the store doesn't have the item; it's in a warehouse in a different taxing jurisdiction. They ship to me from that location. I still pay taxes at the POINT OF SALE.

If you are purchasing online isn't your point of sale you PC? and therefore presumably your home? You would therefore be paying whatever the sales tax is in your state.

You presumably use roads ect by living in your state.

[Phatscotty]

The free software sways me to the left on this.

But Tzor's argument is keeping me from sliding far enough to support it.

I just can't see why I should pay sales tax for something that uses 0 government services. I'm not using roads, drainage ditches, or anything. It's a point and a click.
I understand that the interwebz are cutting into state tax collections,.. but then maybe those taxes aren't so vital if the usage of the services they're supposed to go to aren't being used. This is kinda like special taxing hybrids to pay for road use. Except that it's taxing index-finger-pointing to pay for road use or whatever else.

Underlined is a good point, and can be said about many other things that are taxed also. But that is no longer a good reason to justify a tax. Today, that reason is because the government needs MORE. The government is greedy beyond belief.They are never held accountable, and no matter how bad polticians screw up, no matter how much money they waste, no matter how corrupt any deal is, roughly 50% of the population still constantly screams that the government needs more money, or that the rich who pay for almost everything aren't paying their fair share, or that "we need to do something".

They have no respect for the people or our property when it comes to a government "need", and I don't blame them, because we don't give them any reason to respect us.

[Bones2484]

TGD, a tax is a deadweight loss which cuts into consumer and producer surplus, so it doesn't matter who does the collecting.

Actually, tax is not a deadweight loss as that revenue exists and is going to the government (and is taken out of consumer/producer surplus). Tax does CREATE deadweight loss, though.

edit: Here's a not-so-fancy graph.

[thegreekdog]

Personally, it just makes sense to me to charge sales tax on internet sales. Why should the internet be able to avoid that sort of thing these days? To not charge them sales tax is essentially a harm against brick-and-mortar stores, as people will go to the places that charge less (including sales tax).

Because the internet business may not have a footprint in that location, so it's not using local resources.

The internet business isn't paying the freaking tax! It's collecting it from someone who uses local resources.

TGD, a tax is a deadweight loss which cuts into consumer and producer surplus, so it doesn't matter who does the collecting.

Yeah? Night Strike isn't making that argument. Like I said, I voted "no" because I don't support the internet sales tax, but not for any of the fake reasons Night Strike is coming up with. I'm against it because it's (1) unconstitutional and (2) sales taxes are bad and fall on the consumer, not the company.

[thegreekdog]

Just in case anyone didn't know, I am a tax attorney specializing in state taxes. I know what I'm talking about. Here's what you need to know:

(0) The sales tax is a state and/or local tax that applies to the sale of enumerated taxable products and services. It is a tax PAID BY THE CONSUMER and merely collected by the seller. The seller does not pay any tax out of pocket.

(1) In order to be required to collect sales tax from customers, a company has to have nexus in the state in which it makes sales.

(2) Prior to and including the 1992 Quill decision, the US Supreme Court has held that in order for a company to have nexus in a state, it must have some minimum connection and physical presence (among other things that aren't immediately relevant).

(3) Sales of product over the internet started to become big business. Like a company selling product through catalogs, an internet company avoided nexus by having products deliverd by common carrier; the internet company would never set foot in the state and therefore not have nexus.

(3b) Every state that has a sales tax also has a corresponding use tax. The use tax requires that a purchaser who does not pay sales tax on a taxable product (for whatever reason; like the seller doesn't have nexus in the purchaser's state). Therefore the state should always get it's tax. However, most individuals don't actually pay use tax. So on internet sales where the seller doesn't have nexus, no sales tax is collected and the purchaser isn't paying use tax on the purchaser; so the state gets zero tax.

(4) States began to assert the concept of "economic nexus" whereby if a company merely advertised into a state over the internet, it would have nexus and therefore a sales tax collection responsibility. In my opinion, states did this because it was more cost-effective than auditing every individual that didn't pay use tax on the purchaser.

(5) Amazon (and other companies) started getting audits from states where they did not have nexus under a theory of "economic nexus."

(6) Internet Sales Tax is passed.

So, again, the bulk of the burden here does not fall on Amazon or any other inernet companies. The bulk of the burden falls on the consumers. If you are against this tax, you should not be against it because it hurts internet companies. Because it doesn't really hurt internet companies.

[Woodruff]

Because not taxing gives internet sources an advantage over brick and mortar stores.

Counter balanced by the fact that if you go to a brick and mortar store you don't have to pay for shipping.

I've paid for shipping from a brick-and-mortar store before. Certainly with furniture it's a common enough thing.

[Woodruff]

They have no respect for the people or our property when it comes to a government "need", and I don't blame them, because we don't give them any reason to respect us.

True, you do keep voting for Republicans, out of fear.

[Phatscotty]

They have no respect for the people or our property when it comes to a government "need", and I don't blame them, because we don't give them any reason to respect us.

True, you do keep voting for Republicans, out of fear.

False: you are a miserable liar

You need to change everything else to fit your perspective, now you are creating a voting record for me?

Is Ralph Nader a Republican? Is Jesse Ventura a Republican? Is Ron Paul a standard Republican? Are you so sure that my vote for Romney was a vote for Republicans, rather than a vote against Obama? (hint: I've pointed out repeatedly it was a vote against Obama). But you have habit of spewing bullshit, don't you?

That is my voting record, and all your post shows is you are a complete moron who continually demonstrates you don't have a clue what you are talking about.

[Woodruff]

They have no respect for the people or our property when it comes to a government "need", and I don't blame them, because we don't give them any reason to respect us.

True, you do keep voting for Republicans, out of fear.

You need to change everything else to fit your perspective, now you are creating a voting record for me?

WE CAN'T LET OBAMA WIN!!!!!

That is my voting record, and all your post shows is you are a complete moron who continually demonstrates you don't have a clue what you are talking about.

DON'T LET THE DEMOCRATS WIN!!!!!

Were you ever going to respond to any of my discussion points where you didn't think you had a "gotcha" moment, or do you just want to stick with the gotchas?