Internet Sales Tax Is Coming - Comments Page 2

Tax-free shopping is inevitable only if you accept today's business model as inevitable. We need to wake up to the fact that we live in a global community with comparable transportation and communication. We cannot continue to tax every move a person makes and remain competitive. If the local enterprise cannot compete in this environment, let it close. The privacy issue is another whole bag of worms that we have to address with urgency.

I do not see a problem with the collection of sales tax except the amount of work, and added expense it creates for the state who wishes to collect the tax. I can see the individual state having to add tax-payer supported jobs, computers, and software to make the collection possible.
My state does not have a sales tax, so it would not affect my online shopping

The brick and mortar stores here in my home town are at a disadvantage to an online seller. I think this would be a way to help them compete. No, I do not own a store, but I do think this is a matter of fairness for an actual business as opposed to an internet business.

My poor senators! Everybody already hates them, now they are going to be bombarded with angry calls about this. I feel so sorry for them, I hope they both decide to quit. (Oh, yeah, the senior senator is already quitting, and the junior one just replaced the one who quit last year.)

S.743 does not require sellers to turn over customer data to States. Wyden merely speculated that if a State audits a seller and a shipment cannot be sourced to a specific tax district by its ZIP+4 code, then a delivery address might be needed to pinpoint the appropriate tax district. Such ambiguities are rare. It's pure FUD.

The software (that sellers get free) will assign sales and taxes to tax districts, telling the State to pay $X to district 1, $Y to district 2, etc. That data is completely anonymous as far as buyers are concerned. Customer names and addresses are retained by the seller. No State will be able to look up random buyers by name or address.

Sales tax remittance systems have existed for decades, and none of these "privacy" concerns has been raised. The same systems will form the basis of software sold to States and given to sellers. Sales tax audits have been conducted even longer, and nobody has had their sex toy purchases outed.

I just bought a set of headphones from China (paypal payment) for delivery to an elderly Aunt in California.

They cost $6.89 USD and my card was charged with £4.66 GBP as I live in Wales UK.

The delivery to California from China was free.

A very 'similar' set on a USA website were priced at over $20 plus shipping (and tax in California).

To have a set sent from the UK would have cost a fortune - couriers charge far more to ship from here to the States than from the States to here..... they probably measure in centimeters and charge in inches...

It seems you have the same problem as us. A shifting of tax from income and ownership (property tax) to purchase.

The loss of Import Duty due to the manipulation of shipping costs by the Chinese would raise far more and level the playing field for businesses in both our countries.

Until our governments wake up, remember that it's probably a quarter of the price with free delivery from China. Buying Chinese goods direct from China lets you spend more on goods made at home by local companies.

Be Happy,

Jon

"No tax or duty shall be laid on articles exported from any state." U.S. Constitution Art I section 9 clause 5.

So the Federal government passes a State tax collection law. How long will it be before some states get the idea of a special "Sate Internet Sales Tax" that imposes high taxes on Internet sales. They would argue it is a State sales tax, so must be collected by all Internet retailers in every state. What happens to other States' rights in this scheme? When will the UN pass similar international sales taxes? Will folks think this is only fair too? Enough already.

you did not mention equity issues with local retailers, that's probably the only reason I would be supportive of a measure like this.

In many states, if you want to start a business to make a living or just extra income, you have to be come a rotten tax collector. I sure loved to tell my silver customer, of his $10,000 investment, to slide $550 off to the side, 5.5% WI sales tax, and I would ask him what kind of silver would he like to trade his fiat $9450 for.
I was a tax collector. The invester ran out of my store.
Why do retail business have to be tax collectors for the Gov.
Just set a tax on the MFG of all products. Base tax on all imported goods. That way the tax is paid before the wholesalers buy it. No retailers would have to collect tax at the point of sale.
Save millions of man hours of tax paper work by the retailers, and by the gov pencil pushers.
A soap company shippes out a train load of soap every week to each state. Why not pay the tax at the mfg level. Then all the thousands of stores in 50 states don't have to collect sales tax. The tax on all goods has been paid.

"Each State must provide a single point of contact, administration, and remittance for businesses to deal with. Apportioning collections among local jurisdictions would be the State’s problem."

So, how does this not add costs to the state? Is this "point of contact" going to work for free??

As well, does each state HAVE to go with this law? Seems like it truly IS a state issue and not a federal one. If states want to actually collect these taxes, then why don't they pass their own laws AND enforce them??

I'm sure the MF's in Congress will exempt themselves from this added burden on taxpayers

@ Dennis W. Waterman "When I "retired" I started two websites plus selling on Amazon and eBay. So now the government wants me to become a tax collector."

Reread the article. Only those businesses that generate a million or more on out-of-state internet sales must collect state sales taxes.

I doubt that you fall into that category. However, if by chance you do, would you share your secret for success? 8^D

I'll just start buying locally again as much as possible as will many others. Think about the business this will take away from our post office. This will very likely be the final blow to our already struggling postal service.

nose

Right now, the condition is that businesses without a presence in your state don't have to collect taxes for your state. This bill is supposed to change that, because it's a matter of "fairness". Well, no, it's not. Anytime you see the word "Fairness" (as in Paycheck Fairness Act) in a bill from Congress, it's guaranteed *not* to be "fair". Local businesses want it because they think that people who would be their customers are instead buying someplace else. States want it because they can't make their own citizens pay "use" taxes on stuff purchased out of state.
If it passes, and that's a real question considering the makeup of the U.S. House of Representatives, I would guess that it will result in an immediate decline in the volume of business done online, as I think someone mentioned, not because people will turn to buying locally, but because people will limit their buying. So those states that charge sales taxes might see a slight increase in tax revenues, but only a slight one. They will get more tax from internet businesses than they had before (which except for California and maybe Texas is zip), but less from local businesses, since they will be affected by the general fall-off in sales.

I live in Wisconsin we have what is called Use Tax. As a business owner and a resident of Wisconsin I am required to file with the state any purchases I make that have not been taxed. My tax preparer says most individuals don't pay this tax even when though is included on their tax form as something they must report. For the business it is another business form that gets filed at year end along with many other tax forms. I just do it. I pay Caesar what is Caesar's. I keep books - even personal ones and it isn't difficult to do.

Though I am not crazy about paying taxes, until we vote people in who prioritize the streamlining of the entire tax system, this is how it is: complex and cumbersome. Since most people in Wisconsin ignore this line on their tax form, Wisconsin would benefit greatly by this legislation which would put the onus on the seller to collect the appropriate tax from the purchaser as a true cost of the sale and then pay it to the proper state.

By the way Bob, your article was excellent and clearly defined the nature of what is happening with this bill and you did it without apparent bias.

Re: Jorge, 24 Apr 2013

Taxes are based on: Point of delivery, Point of order, or Point of sale. (Section 4(7))

So, technically it could impact non-US purchasers. Most companies already collecting sales tax or VAT use Point of delivery. The law would allow these to be collected based on the purchaser's location (Point of sale) for non physical purchases (music, movies, software, et al.). If neither Point of delivery nor Point of order can be identified, then Point of sale is to be used.

So, whether or not the law affects non-US customers really depends on how the company applies it.

Just ordered a microwave by internet, free shipping because I can wait for slow delivery. Age and health make store shopping problematic. Aside from my own convenience and need to watch pennies, the cost of the internet tax collection boggles the mind - how many more government employees will this need? So how much will it either cost the taxpayer or dilute the amount left to be distributed? I don't see any real benefits to this!

Bob:

Does this mean that Vladi Putin will also have the right to collect sales tax from residents of the U.S.? Seems like the logical next step.

Later, John.

This law will have minimal effect on my online purchases. What I buy online is either not available locally, or can be delivered to a local store (convience).

Actually, I am in favor of total sales tax - no income taxes. That is the only fair way for everyone to do his/her share - no loop-holes, unreported income, money laundrying, or other ways to avoid taxes. A fixed rate on all sales, split between Federal and States, would benefit government tremendously. Billions could be saved by doing away with the IRS. Billions more could be collected on illegal money. Money saved or invested would be tax exempt - until it was spent. Of course, certain items would be tax exempt, just as they are in most states charging sales taxes. The amount actually provided to each state would be based on that state's purchases. The order of priority in S.743, Section 4(7) is a fairly good guide.

Software would be simple: assess a given percentage (preferably 24%) and record the state using the provided criteria (no other personal information would be collected). The Federal government would take its share (16%) and pass the rest to the state (again, simple sorting software). States could use the same sorting software to distribute funds to the next lower level; and so on through all levels of taxing government.