Slashdot Mirror
States Push for Net Sales Taxes
Marnhinn writes "Lawmakers in several states are asking Congress for the right to begin collecting sales tax on interstate internet purchases. CNN has the scoop."
← Back to Stories (view on slashdot.org)
← Back to Stories (view on slashdot.org)
I think it's only a matter of time before this occurs; there's just too much money at stake. As a consumer, I'm against it though.
CB
free ipod and free gmail!
I find it interesting that when a business experiences tight finances, they must improve efficiency and trim costs in order to stay afloat. Heaven forbid a government entity have to do the same thing! Cut one penny from a bloated government program (or even cut the rate of growth!), and suddenly the headlines scream about no school lunches and seniors losing social security.
Sickening.
He said his Mom always paid the taxes, just to avoid a scandal because it was her husband's job to enforce that law. In the end, they end up collecting what is given to them, but the prospect of collecting that money is more expensive most of the time, then the total value of the money collected.
I've got not issues with the gov't collecting taxes. No real issues with the gov't collecting taxes on Internet sales. I've got some issues with them attempting to regulate VoIP. I think that's wrong on so many levels (if you are going to do that, tax by the byte/packet, it's just data at that point VoIP isn't special on the internet, however, that's for a different rant).
When money moves around, the gov't wants a piece of it (they figure if you are spending money, you can afford to give some of it to the gov't, and generally they try and not tax neccessities, hence no taxes on food). The gov't has to aquire revenue to provide the services it does. The gov't doesn't need to provide a lot of things it does. So I don't think they truly need the revenue. However, if they decided to tax it, I've got no problem with that in particular. I do have a problem with them never cutting back services during lean years, and never saving money during the boom years. When they expand gov't services during the boom years, and then try continue will all the same services during the lean years, that's a problem. They needed to be either, returning the money to the citizens, or they needed to be saving it away.
I'm curious to see what will happen if the real estate market ever collapses, that'll directly affect revenue of the state gov't, in property taxes. That'll be a serious problem around here.
Kirby
Since we do not what to add any extra burdon to the rich and recall elections are expensive this is a great way to increase revenue!
On the way to work, I saw state-contracted workers pressure washing the center divider.
That's just one example that is repeated throughout government, as it becomes more and more of a jobs program.
If you want the "Scoop" on this story, go to washingtonpost.com's story, which reports that Amazon.com is about to endorse the Internet sales tax plan. And it gives really good background on this whole issue. Kudos for AP for reporting a good story, but check out the facts at washingtonpost.com.
This is the price we must pay for the mess the Iraqi war caused budget-wise.
I don't know but $400 billion for prescription drugs for seniors (who statistically have more disposable income than any other age group in the country) seems like a bigger waste of my money.
--
"What do you want me to do? Whack a guy? Off a guy? Whack off a guy? Cause I'm married."
"As I recall, States were not allowed to levy tariffs and such against each other."
"No tax or duty shall be laid on articles exported from any state." (Article I, Section 9.5)
I have not really heard the proponents of such taxes try to justify their scheme in Constitutional terms. I suppose they would try to make some argument that this was originally intended to keep the exporter of the articles from having to pay taxes to the originating state as the goods go out, and now the exporter is collecting taxes to send to the destination state to make up for the revenue they supposedly lost because the goods weren't purchased locally. But this is really questionable logic, whether I buy something from California and get hit by taxes that wind up in the coffers of California or of my own state, someone is placing a questionable tax on the export of goods, and some state is infringing into the Federal purview of interstate commerce.
Actually, that changes on a state-to-state basis. And also depends on whether or not the purchasee is in the same state as the purchaser. If your business has a physical presence in WA, and you sell something to a customer who receives it (shipped to, or picked up in-store) in WA, then you as the company are responsible for collecting and paying the sales tax on that item. Thus, when I order from Amazon (located about 15 minutes from my house), I pay sales tax. When I buy from buy.com (located in CA), I don't. Not only that, but when I buy from Amazon, I also have to pay the extra .8% or so of sales tax that the county tacks on.
What these states want to do is set it up so that if my company ships something to FL or TX or CA or wherever, we'd have to collect the sales tax for that shipping address, and then find some way to get that tax to the appropriate state. It's a HUGE hassle, since we'd have to know all of the various tax percentages for that state (and its counties), and know when they change. The article says that the states are trying to make this easier/simpler, but it'll still be a huge hassle. This is why the federal goverment has been trying to get an "internet tax" passed, that would provide one sales tax value for all internet purchases, which the federal government would then divvy up to each state how it sees fit).
Do you really need reason for beer? Wingman Brewers
Income tax is not any worse than sales tax in that regard. There are plenty of deductions that reduce your tax for spending on "worthy" things, such as charitable contributions, 401k, and college savings (501?).
But income tax has the advantage that you see how much the government takes from you. (How much do _you_ pay in sales tax?) And, you only calculate it once a year. No need for mental multiplication before every purchase.
If I were running a small business on the web, I'd be very worried about the sales tax proposals. It's a PITA handling paperwork for one state, forget about learning 50 different tax codes for the U.S. plus European VAT plus Canadian sales tax plus....it's doable for a big company, but it would just about kill smaller companies.
And don't forget Article I, Section 10.2
.sig
"No State shall, without the Consent of the Congress, lay any Imposts or Duties on Imports or Exports, except what may be absolutely necessary for executing it's inspection Laws: and the net Produce of all Duties and Imposts, laid by any State on Imports or Exports, shall be for the Use of the Treasury of the United States; and all such Laws shall be subject to the Revision and Controul of the Congress."
On second though, go ahead and forget it - the people arguing in favor of interstate sales taxes clearly have.
-- this is not a
I already pay taxes on both "real" and electronic goods purchased in the US.
The taxes on "real" items are simply charged when the product ordered in the US enters the country. The postal service will deliver it and charge me both VAT (19%) and import.
When I buy electronic goods I fill in my credit card billing address and the database will calculate the appropriate VAT. This is in place for all EU countries.
They could simply link the billing address to a state and make 48 entries with state salestax.
It's not full-proof, but how many people will get a credit card in a state without salestax to avoid this?