Internet sales tax? yea or nay?

[JWBooth]

To reiterate....
Nay

 

[Underhill]

I have no problem with paying taxes on a purchase - just like the fuel tax the truckers pay. They pay the tax at the point of sale. They don't get home and have to pay the taxes again.

That is not true. Truckers pay International Fuel Tax Agreement (IFTA).

Yes, it is. The only exception I know of is the indians. If you stop at a reservation and get tax free gas you are supposed to send in the taxes. But otherwise, you pay the tax wherever you get fuel.

 

[MeadHallPirate]

Exactly, it's completely unworkable without an excessive, costly system in place to track and enforce it.

The government gets enough money as it is. They don't need anymore.

ahoy and well met Dont Taz Me Bro,

as it relates to state and local governments, the bolded be untrue, matey.

many be starvin' fer monies.

- MeadHallPirate

 

[MeadHallPirate]

I'm curious as to why some people think that the mere act of me purchasing an item entitles some government entity proceeds from that sale.

ahoy Alan1,

i'll try me hearty.

yer state that ye reside in needs monies fer things. stuffs like takin' care 'o old people...or fixin' roads...or payin' fer yer municipal courts (which we need, since we be a country 'o laws)...or to pay fer state police that keep yer highways free 'o mischief.

a state can't do these things with no monies.

part 'o the way this monies be raised be through sales tax. thar also be things like property tax, or state income tax.

one way or the other, though, the monies has to be raised, because State Government's can't function on just goodwill alone.

aye?

aye.

- MeadHallPirate

 

[Meister]

I'm curious as to why some people think that the mere act of me purchasing an item entitles some government entity proceeds from that sale.

ahoy Alan1,

i'll try me hearty.

yer state that ye reside in needs monies fer things. stuffs like takin' care 'o old people...or fixin' roads...or payin' fer yer municipal courts (which we need, since we be a country 'o laws)...or to pay fer state police that keep yer highways free 'o mischief.

a state can't do these things with no monies.

part 'o the way this monies be raised be through sales tax. thar also be things like property tax, or state income tax.

one way or the other, though, the monies has to be raised, because State Government's can't function on just goodwill alone.

aye?

aye.

- MeadHallPirate

Yo-Mead....you forgot about paying those public union pensions.

 

[Meister]

Exactly, it's completely unworkable without an excessive, costly system in place to track and enforce it.

The government gets enough money as it is. They don't need anymore.

ahoy and well met Dont Taz Me Bro,

as it relates to state and local governments, the bolded be untrue, matey.

many be starvin' fer monies.

- MeadHallPirate

Yo-Mead.....starving to pay for the public union pentions

 

[MeadHallPirate]

I'm curious as to why some people think that the mere act of me purchasing an item entitles some government entity proceeds from that sale.

ahoy Alan1,

i'll try me hearty.

yer state that ye reside in needs monies fer things. stuffs like takin' care 'o old people...or fixin' roads...or payin' fer yer municipal courts (which we need, since we be a country 'o laws)...or to pay fer state police that keep yer highways free 'o mischief.

a state can't do these things with no monies.

part 'o the way this monies be raised be through sales tax. thar also be things like property tax, or state income tax.

one way or the other, though, the monies has to be raised, because State Government's can't function on just goodwill alone.

aye?

aye.

- MeadHallPirate

Yo-Mead....you forgot about paying those public union pensions.

ahoy Meister,

aye, thar be that too.

all them promises made decades ago? well, the bill be due and absent efforts such as Governor Christie's in NJ, ayup....ye need monies fer that too.

i actually find it wierd that folks can enjoy all the services a state provides, from parks to schools to snowplowed streets in the wintertime, etc, etc, etc, and feel outraged that folks don't provide these services fer free.

*scratches his noggin'*

well met, matey.

- MeadHallPirate

 

[MeadHallPirate]

Exactly, it's completely unworkable without an excessive, costly system in place to track and enforce it.

The government gets enough money as it is. They don't need anymore.

ahoy and well met Dont Taz Me Bro,

as it relates to state and local governments, the bolded be untrue, matey.

many be starvin' fer monies.

- MeadHallPirate

Yo-Mead.....starving to pay for the public union pentions

ahoy Meister,

yer preachin' to the choir, matey. i find some 'o the pension packages (particularly fer police officers, them heroic first responders) that were doled out o'er the decades positively bizarre.

still, what can be done, Meister? either we be a nation 'o laws or we aren't, and them deeds were contracts - a future promise legislators made to our public servants.

the bill be due, and i don't see whats to be done, 'cept fer them municipalities to go bankrupt (which is whats goin' on in Stockton, California).

*bows*

- MeadHallPirate

 

[FA_Q2]

One worthy point here is that there is no difference in an internet business under this law selling items to other states than there is Wal-Mart in needing to pay the different taxes to varying states. If you are selling products there you are inherently doing business there.

 

[BillyV]

One worthy point here is that there is no difference in an internet business under this law selling items to other states than there is Wal-Mart in needing to pay the different taxes to varying states. If you are selling products there you are inherently doing business there.

Neither the internet business nor Walmart "pay" sales tax; they merely collect it on behalf of the government. The consumer pays the sales tax, and is the one who benefits from it in state services. The question here is whether one state should be allowed to compel a business in another state to bear the burden of collecting its sales tax. The answer is, of course, they can't; that's why they need a federal law to implement it, under the interstate commerce powers.

 

[WorldWatcher]

One worthy point here is that there is no difference in an internet business under this law selling items to other states than there is Wal-Mart in needing to pay the different taxes to varying states. If you are selling products there you are inherently doing business there.

Neither the internet business nor Walmart "pay" sales tax; they merely collect it on behalf of the government. The consumer pays the sales tax, and is the one who benefits from it in state services. The question here is whether one state should be allowed to compel a business in another state to bear the burden of collecting its sales tax. The answer is, of course, they can't; that's why they need a federal law to implement it, under the interstate commerce powers.

One state will not be compelling a business in another state to collect another states sales tax, the state that the business is located in will be the one to require collection of sales/use tax. If a business is located in FL and the purchaser is in VA, it is VA that will be the one requiring participation of business entities located in VA.

If VA chooses not to participate, then they are free to let businesses continue to operate as they already are. (Of course estimates are that VA will continue to loose out on an estimated $285 Million dollars in revenue, but that is VA's choice.)


>>>>

 

[BillyV]

One worthy point here is that there is no difference in an internet business under this law selling items to other states than there is Wal-Mart in needing to pay the different taxes to varying states. If you are selling products there you are inherently doing business there.

Neither the internet business nor Walmart "pay" sales tax; they merely collect it on behalf of the government. The consumer pays the sales tax, and is the one who benefits from it in state services. The question here is whether one state should be allowed to compel a business in another state to bear the burden of collecting its sales tax. The answer is, of course, they can't; that's why they need a federal law to implement it, under the interstate commerce powers.

One state will not be compelling a business in another state to collect another states sales tax, the state that the business is located in will be the one to require collection of sales/use tax. If a business is located in FL and the purchaser is in VA, it is VA that will be the one requiring participation of business entities located in VA.

If VA chooses not to participate, then they are free to let businesses continue to operate as they already are. (Of course estimates are that VA will continue to loose out on an estimated $285 Million dollars in revenue, but that is VA's choice.)


>>>>

From the text of the Marketplace Fairness Act:

SECTION 2. AUTHORIZATION TO REQUIRE COLLECTION OF SALES AND USE TAXES.
Each Member State under the Streamlined Sales and Use Tax Agreement is authorized to require all sellers not qualifying for the small seller exception described in subsection (c) to collect and remit sales and use taxes with respect to remote sales sourced to that Member State

So the Member State is authorized to force businesses who have sales "sourced" to that member state to collect sales taxes. It has absolutely nothing to do with the home state of the business.

Remember, "sourced" is defined in the Act as "the location to which a remote sale is sourced refers to the location where the item sold is received by the purchaser."

 

[WorldWatcher]

Neither the internet business nor Walmart "pay" sales tax; they merely collect it on behalf of the government. The consumer pays the sales tax, and is the one who benefits from it in state services. The question here is whether one state should be allowed to compel a business in another state to bear the burden of collecting its sales tax. The answer is, of course, they can't; that's why they need a federal law to implement it, under the interstate commerce powers.

One state will not be compelling a business in another state to collect another states sales tax, the state that the business is located in will be the one to require collection of sales/use tax. If a business is located in FL and the purchaser is in VA, it is VA that will be the one requiring participation of business entities located in VA.

If VA chooses not to participate, then they are free to let businesses continue to operate as they already are. (Of course estimates are that VA will continue to loose out on an estimated $285 Million dollars in revenue, but that is VA's choice.)


>>>>

From the text of the Marketplace Fairness Act:

SECTION 2. AUTHORIZATION TO REQUIRE COLLECTION OF SALES AND USE TAXES.
Each Member State under the Streamlined Sales and Use Tax Agreement is authorized to require all sellers not qualifying for the small seller exception described in subsection (c) to collect and remit sales and use taxes with respect to remote sales sourced to that Member State

So the Member State is authorized to force businesses who have sales "sourced" to that member state to collect sales taxes. It has absolutely nothing to do with the home state of the business.

Remember, "sourced" is defined in the Act as "the location to which a remote sale is sourced refers to the location where the item sold is received by the purchaser."

I see what you are saying, I will have to think on this some more, I just don't see how FL is going to enforce the provisions unless it is the state of VA that makes such compliance a requirement under VA law.



>>>>

 

[Desperado]

One worthy point here is that there is no difference in an internet business under this law selling items to other states than there is Wal-Mart in needing to pay the different taxes to varying states. If you are selling products there you are inherently doing business there.

Neither the internet business nor Walmart "pay" sales tax; they merely collect it on behalf of the government. The consumer pays the sales tax, and is the one who benefits from it in state services. The question here is whether one state should be allowed to compel a business in another state to bear the burden of collecting its sales tax. The answer is, of course, they can't; that's why they need a federal law to implement it, under the interstate commerce powers.

Absolutely not. The internet sales tax is a bad idea from the start.

 

[Dot Com]

Wonder what'll happen in the House?

Senate passes Internet tax bill; VA one step closer to securing transportation funding « Watchdog.org

ALEXANDRIA—The U.S. Senate on Monday night overwhelmingly passed a bill requiring online retailers to collect sales taxes in the states where their customers live, putting Virginia one step closer to securing the transportation funding for this year’s General Assembly transportation package.