Senators Vow To Renew Bid For State Taxes On Remote Internet Sales
jfruh writes "A bipartisan group of U.S. Senators are working hard to make it legal for U.S. states to collect sales tax on any sales made to their residents, even if the sellers live elsewhere. They tried to add an amendment making the change to an unrelated defense appropriations bill, but the attempt was defeated. They have vowed to try again."
We don't have a revenue problem, we have a spending problem.
No good deed goes unpunished.
Unrelated riders on politically hot button bills and earmarks on important budget issues are how the most heinous of legislation is often passed. Should be illegal, but it will never be.
Silence is a state of mime.
By forcing web sites to collect sales tax for all 50 states and the territories will create an accounting nightmare. The only companies that can afford to hire the people to do it would be the dominant players like Amazon. So, all the small start ups would be stifled right out of the gate. The end result will be a near monopoly and very few start ups bringing new ideas to market.
Seems to me that the states shouldn't be trying to deal with the taxes on this, and instead congress should be doing it under the mantle of "Regulating Interstate Commerce". Pass a law that says all sellers must collect and report both federal and state income tax on sales as if the sale were occurring at the buyer's physical location, or the location to which the product is delivered. (Whichever is easier to make into an enforceable law).
Simple, clean, unambiguous, very few loopholes, and understandable to customers.
It is anything BUT clean - it is a complete mess for businesses to try and figure out what tax to charge and who it gets sent to. It is not just 50 states, it is as you suggested the buyer's physical location, so every other tax on top also must be calculated, collected, and paid to the local parish, county, city, district, etc. And add in some audits by each of these taxing authorities. Paying local taxes is is easy when Mom and Pop hardware is selling to it's walk in customers, they pay the city, county, state and federal govt. And it is almost workable for a large corporation that pays for a top tier ERP system and adds a tool like vertex (expensive and must be maintained by a team). But your proposal just cut off any small - medium business that wants to sell beyond the physical locations they occupy. I hep you like Walmart, because they and others sized like them will be your online provider of products.
no comment
Or they could just not spend without restraint in exchange for votes. I know, that's not an obvious solution nowadays.
They want to raise taxes on the "rich" by 1.6 trillion over 10 years. That's about 180 billion a year.
The deficit is well over a trillion a year, but let's just say it's only $1 trillion. That leaves $820 billion left to make up with cuts.
This whole argument over taxing the rich is a waste of time and a distraction. I say let the raise it to where they want and then insist that Obama cuts $840 billion a year.
If he doesn't then, we are just rearranging the deck chairs on that well known ship.
When Fascism comes to America, it will call itself Anti-Fascism, and tell you to give up your guns.
Allowing the states to collect a tax isn't the same thing as imposing a tax. Not quite. Besides it's either that or the states will have to raise income and property taxes.
Then they should raise income or property taxes. Sales tax is about the worst tax there is -- it's regressive, so it hurts poor people disproportionally, and it depresses retail sales and services. If states really want their businesses to compete with amazon, they should abolish sales tax so that purchasing locally becomes more attractive.