The bill, known as the Marketplace Fairness Act, is that rare piece of legislation that has turned Democrat against Democrat, Republican against Republican and business against business, while uniting states as different as New Hampshire, Montana and Oregon â?? which have no sales taxes â?? against virtually every other state.
Any chance of passing ?
It will eventually pass in some form or another. Politicians will never give up on finding ways to take the sheeple’s money.
It will pass , I would say %80 of our retail spending is on line
It’s only fair and less distorting to the market if all of the retailers are tax at the same level BUT, if that was what it was about they would make it revenue neutral ( or at least try ). ie . raise the tax of online retailers and lower the tax traditional merchants. That’s not what is happening so this is nothing but a tax grab with a fancy name.
[quote]tmay11 wrote:
It’s only fair and less distorting to the market if all of the retailers are tax at the same level BUT, if that was what it was about they would make it revenue neutral ( or at least try ). ie . raise the tax of online retailers and lower the tax traditional merchants. That’s not what is happening so this is nothing but a tax grab with a fancy name. [/quote]
My understanding is that it is not a tax grab or increase at all. When you purchase something online you owe a sales or use tax on it (depending on your state+store location). Remember sales tax is an end user tax. The problem is people never pay it and it is really hard for the government to enforce. So the change would be to force online retailers to collect the tax up front like local businesses do. All fine and dandy as an idea.
The problem with it is the unfair regulatory burden it places upon online businesses. Online businesses will be forced to calculate, collect, and deliver state and local sales tax based upon the customers location. Brick and mortar businesses only have to collect based upon where the business is located.
A bricks and mortar small business with a turn over of 2 million is going to be located in only 1 state, and in all likelihood a single county. So they have one or two different sales taxes they need to be aware of. An online store set up in the same area with a similar turn over will have to collect taxes for thousands of different local governments.
The only way for this law to be fair is if we also force local businesses to check where all their customers live and collect sales tax based on where the customers live. Oh you are on holiday from California? Which county? Updating the registers etc to calculate sales tax depending on location would be a nightmare.
It’s a grab, no doubt about it. Gov’t will always try to find seemingly legal ways to fuck you out of what you earned. I think politicians are one of the only jobs where there is little to no accountability, and when you fuck up, you get a promotion.
[quote]phaethon wrote:
[quote]tmay11 wrote:
It’s only fair and less distorting to the market if all of the retailers are tax at the same level BUT, if that was what it was about they would make it revenue neutral ( or at least try ). ie . raise the tax of online retailers and lower the tax traditional merchants. That’s not what is happening so this is nothing but a tax grab with a fancy name. [/quote]
My understanding is that it is not a tax grab or increase at all. When you purchase something online you owe a sales or use tax on it (depending on your state+store location). Remember sales tax is an end user tax. The problem is people never pay it and it is really hard for the government to enforce. So the change would be to force online retailers to collect the tax up front like local businesses do. All fine and dandy as an idea.
The problem with it is the unfair regulatory burden it places upon online businesses. Online businesses will be forced to calculate, collect, and deliver state and local sales tax based upon the customers location. Brick and mortar businesses only have to collect based upon where the business is located.
A bricks and mortar small business with a turn over of 2 million is going to be located in only 1 state, and in all likelihood a single county. So they have one or two different sales taxes they need to be aware of. An online store set up in the same area with a similar turn over will have to collect taxes for thousands of different local governments.
The only way for this law to be fair is if we also force local businesses to check where all their customers live and collect sales tax based on where the customers live. Oh you are on holiday from California? Which county? Updating the registers etc to calculate sales tax depending on location would be a nightmare.
[/quote]
Good post.
As for:
This does happen, but to a relative small degree with relatively expensive purchases. If I buy a sofa in NH and have ti shipped to my house, the store needs to collect the sales tax because of the terms of delivery. If I pick it up in my father in law’s truck, they don’t have to collect sales tax.
Likewise if I buy a car in NH, and they don’t collect the sales tax (often bundled in your loan) then i will have to pay it when I register the car in MA. Somewhat different, but accomplishes the same goal.
Now if someone is driving to NH and buying $200 worth of cigars every week, 52 weeks a year, the government is unlikely to catch them. Having the same cigars shipped to their home, can get them caught.
[quote]countingbeans wrote:
[quote]phaethon wrote:
[quote]tmay11 wrote:
It’s only fair and less distorting to the market if all of the retailers are tax at the same level BUT, if that was what it was about they would make it revenue neutral ( or at least try ). ie . raise the tax of online retailers and lower the tax traditional merchants. That’s not what is happening so this is nothing but a tax grab with a fancy name. [/quote]
My understanding is that it is not a tax grab or increase at all. When you purchase something online you owe a sales or use tax on it (depending on your state+store location). Remember sales tax is an end user tax. The problem is people never pay it and it is really hard for the government to enforce. So the change would be to force online retailers to collect the tax up front like local businesses do. All fine and dandy as an idea.
The problem with it is the unfair regulatory burden it places upon online businesses. Online businesses will be forced to calculate, collect, and deliver state and local sales tax based upon the customers location. Brick and mortar businesses only have to collect based upon where the business is located.
A bricks and mortar small business with a turn over of 2 million is going to be located in only 1 state, and in all likelihood a single county. So they have one or two different sales taxes they need to be aware of. An online store set up in the same area with a similar turn over will have to collect taxes for thousands of different local governments.
The only way for this law to be fair is if we also force local businesses to check where all their customers live and collect sales tax based on where the customers live. Oh you are on holiday from California? Which county? Updating the registers etc to calculate sales tax depending on location would be a nightmare.
[/quote]
Good post.
As for:
This does happen, but to a relative small degree with relatively expensive purchases. If I buy a sofa in NH and have ti shipped to my house, the store needs to collect the sales tax because of the terms of delivery. If I pick it up in my father in law’s truck, they don’t have to collect sales tax.
Likewise if I buy a car in NH, and they don’t collect the sales tax (often bundled in your loan) then i will have to pay it when I register the car in MA. Somewhat different, but accomplishes the same goal.
Now if someone is driving to NH and buying $200 worth of cigars every week, 52 weeks a year, the government is unlikely to catch them. Having the same cigars shipped to their home, can get them caught. [/quote]
unless your governor is devil Patrick, the duke of deadbeats, he’s trying to connect the tax regardless, there are a couple of incidents where ties where purchased and tge devil sent tax bills to the people. good ole devil never saw a tax he didn’t like
LOL. I love TI tho
All the bill does is give the States the right to put a sales tax on online purchases. Lets see if all the states will start to collect the sales tax or not. Some states might be smart to not enforce it, but the states that need to balance the budget will tax till the cows come home. More reasons to leave California.
It’s just a money grab. Sales taxes pay for the costs a local business imposes on the community (e.g., police protection, fire protection, whatever). The only thing an internet provider imposes is delivery — which is paid by UPS, FedEx, etc.
This is just theft, because, well they can do it.
The more power you let the government have, the more they will abuse it.
The Democrats and the Establishment Republicans are both disgusting.
[quote]dmaddox wrote:
Some states might be smart to not enforce it, [/quote]
What advantage would a state acquire by not enforcing it ?
[quote]pittbulll wrote:
[quote]dmaddox wrote:
Some states might be smart to not enforce it, [/quote]
What advantage would a state acquire by not enforcing it ?
[/quote]
Possibly bring companies to their state for jobs and economic boom.
I agree the advantage would be very very small if at all.
[quote]dmaddox wrote:
[quote]pittbulll wrote:
[quote]dmaddox wrote:
Some states might be smart to not enforce it, [/quote]
What advantage would a state acquire by not enforcing it ?
[/quote]
Possibly bring companies to their state for jobs and economic boom.
I agree the advantage would be very very small if at all.[/quote]
How would that work? They already have state sales taxes, we are just talking about collecting it on online sites.
In fact, not enforcing it would be an even further DIS-INCENTIVE for businesses to come to that state because it would continue to be much cheaper for people to buy their wares online rather than Ma and Pa’s Toolshop
[quote]Jewbacca wrote:
It’s just a money grab. Sales taxes pay for the costs a local business imposes on the community (e.g., police protection, fire protection, whatever). The only thing an internet provider imposes is delivery — which is paid by UPS, FedEx, etc.
This is just theft, because, well they can do it.
The more power you let the government have, the more they will abuse it.
The Democrats and the Establishment Republicans are both disgusting.[/quote]
Sheesh, I know…I just hate all these roads to drive on, and schools to indocrtinate…oops I mean “educate” our children, and police to go catch bad guys…
Everyone should just altruistically donate to these organizations, that way there can be NO TAXES AT ALL!!!
[quote]VTBalla34 wrote:
[quote]dmaddox wrote:
[quote]pittbulll wrote:
[quote]dmaddox wrote:
Some states might be smart to not enforce it, [/quote]
What advantage would a state acquire by not enforcing it ?
[/quote]
Possibly bring companies to their state for jobs and economic boom.
I agree the advantage would be very very small if at all.[/quote]
How would that work? They already have state sales taxes, we are just talking about collecting it on online sites.
In fact, not enforcing it would be an even further DIS-INCENTIVE for businesses to come to that state because it would continue to be much cheaper for people to buy their wares online rather than Ma and Pa’s Toolshop
[/quote]
Did you read my last sentence?
I am rethinking what I wrote, but with that said, people might leave a state that would enforce the sales tax and move to a state that does not enforce it. If a lot of small businesses are run by individuals that buy stuff on the internet. If they do not have to pay sales tax in a particular state they might move to that state so they do not have that cost.
With that said, I really do not expect any state to not charge this sales tax.
Eh, OK…I certainly see this tax as a very good thing for small B&M businesses currently in operation, intangibles aside. Even big businesses. Though I suspect they all will still be undersold by the online realtors due to their brick/mortar costs.
The reality is that states used to rely on sales taxes to pay for all the stuff we like to use and enjoy, and that portion is ever shrinking as more and more trailer parks get connected to the www. That is a MASSIVE revenue fall-off that is not sustainable.
edit: clarified which small businesses
[quote]VTBalla34 wrote:
Eh, OK…I certainly see this tax as a very good thing for small B&M businesses currently in operation, intangibles aside. Even big businesses. Though I suspect they all will still be undersold by the online realtors due to their brick/mortar costs.
The reality is that states used to rely on sales taxes to pay for all the stuff we like to use and enjoy, and that portion is ever shrinking as more and more trailer parks get connected to the www. That is a MASSIVE revenue fall-off that is not sustainable.
edit: clarified which small businesses[/quote]
I agree with you. Most B&M shops though are starting to match prices with online retailers, but that cost of rent or the building is a huge cost to over run. It does level the playing field though. I just like purchasing stuff online without paying tax, and then seeing who has the cheapest shipping.
This is going to be a nightmare to set up, enforce, and to keep up with all the sales taxes all over the place.
[quote]VTBalla34 wrote:
[quote]Jewbacca wrote:
It’s just a money grab. Sales taxes pay for the costs a local business imposes on the community (e.g., police protection, fire protection, whatever). The only thing an internet provider imposes is delivery — which is paid by UPS, FedEx, etc.
This is just theft, because, well they can do it.
The more power you let the government have, the more they will abuse it.
The Democrats and the Establishment Republicans are both disgusting.[/quote]
Sheesh, I know…I just hate all these roads to drive on, and schools to indocrtinate…oops I mean “educate” our children, and police to go catch bad guys…
Everyone should just altruistically donate to these organizations, that way there can be NO TAXES AT ALL!!![/quote]
Fricking Liberal , you mean you think you have to pay for the shit you get ? sheeesh
