Slashdot Mirror

← Back to Stories (view on slashdot.org)

Bipartisan Internet Sales Tax Bill Introduced

Posted by samzenpus on from the just-in-time-for-the-holidays dept.

jfruhlinger writes "Four senators, including both Democrats and Republicans, have introduced a bill that would allow (but not require) states to collect sales tax on items purchased by residents online, even the seller has no physical presence in that state. Sellers would be able to pay through either the existing Streamlined Sales and Use Tax Agreement or a new alternative tax simplification plan. Battle lines are being drawn predictably: brick-and-mortar retailers love the idea, Internet-only sellers hate it."

10 of 548 comments (clear)

  1. Bipartisan support by Totenglocke · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Because the one thing all politicians can agree on is that they want more of your money.

    --
    "The tree of liberty must be refreshed from time to time with the blood of patriots and tyrants." ~Thomas Jefferson
    1. Re:Bipartisan support by Kenja · · Score: 5, Insightful

      And citizens want police & fire departments, better schools, better public transportation, better water supplies, better sewers, better roads, better bridges, etc. What they dont want is to have to pay for any of it.

      --

      "Have you ever thought about just turning off the TV, sitting down with your kids, and hitting them?"
    2. Re:Bipartisan support by Kenja · · Score: 5, Insightful

      But we're talking about state taxes, not federal. For example, every election cycle here in CA we tend to vote YES on things like highway improvements but NO on taxes to fund them. Thats why CA is in the mess its in, because our state constitution requires a separate vote for funding and no one wants to pay for the stuff they want the government to do.

      --

      "Have you ever thought about just turning off the TV, sitting down with your kids, and hitting them?"
    3. Re:Bipartisan support by abhi_beckert · · Score: 5, Insightful

      Exactly how much tax is collected is a perfectly valid topic to discuss. But a successful nation needs to collect some kind of tax, and the tax being collected needs to be fair.

      Making a local business charge tax while their competitors on the other side of the country (or planet) don't charge tax is damaging to the local economy.

    4. Re:Bipartisan support by hedwards · · Score: 5, Insightful

      Or you have absolutely no clue how expensive things are. Services have been cut back pretty substantially over the last 3 decades or so to the point where infrastructure is beginning to literally fall down. It's not the spending that's the issue it's the refusal to collect the taxes necessary to maintain what we have.

      Around here the infrastructure has been crumbling since at least the late 70s and it's gotten to the point where the city is just working on the worst streets first and has a tremendous backlog. And this is a city in which the voters generally understand that we need to pay taxes to maintain and invest in the infrastructure.

    5. Re:Bipartisan support by riverat1 · · Score: 5, Insightful

      I have no objection to you buying from online retailers. I just don't think they deserve an advantage over other retailers by not having to collect the sales tax. I buy some things online but other things at brick and mortar stores. For some things I want to be able to touch and feel them before I buy and having a local place to go back to if you have problems, someone who has to look you the eye, is good for resolving them. In the end it doesn't really matter much to me because I live in Oregon. We don't have a sales tax.

    6. Re:Bipartisan support by Buelldozer · · Score: 5, Insightful

      "ervices have been cut back pretty substantially over the last 3 decades or so to the point where infrastructure is beginning to literally fall down. "

      Yes, and meanwhile there has been an explosion of six figure salaries in "administration."

  2. More money not always the solution by perpenso · · Score: 5, Insightful

    And citizens want police & fire departments, better schools, better public transportation, better water supplies, better sewers, better roads, better bridges, etc. What they dont want is to have to pay for any of it.

    Wrong. What they don't want is a vast gulf between the amount of taxes collected and the quality of the services and infrastructure provided. For example spending more money per student and getting some of the lowest test scores. Its not that people are unwilling to fund education, its that money is obviously not the problem with education. Something else is broken and perhaps we should fix that first before evaluating what an appropriate level of spending would be.

    Or if you prefer, a car analogy: They don't want to pay Cadillac prices and have a Chevy Aveo delivered. :-)

  3. About time by abhi_beckert · · Score: 5, Insightful

    I'm not sure if this bill is the answer, but it's about time you guys fixed this issue over on your side of the pond. It's just plain stupid that some businesses collect sales tax, while other businesses don't.

    All businesses should be paying the exact same tax, under the same laws. Anything else is extremely unfair.

  4. Bipartisan fuckery by fyngyrz · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Yes, and meanwhile there has been an explosion of six figure salaries in "administration."

    This. And also, six and seven and eight figure salaries in corporations, yes, those same corporations who won't hire anyone, but are delighted to offshore production while at the same time offshoring income so they don't pay the amount of tax they were intended to, thus putting more of it (taxes) on the backs of the middle class.

    But, hey, keep electing rich fucks to political positions, and keep wondering why the tax laws/loopholes favor the rich, while your household budget shrinks every year. It's a frigging mystery, isn't it?

    --
    I've fallen off your lawn, and I can't get up.