Slashdot Mirror
Congress Takes Up Online Sales Tax
head_dunce writes "A bill introduced Thursday by a bipartisan group of U.S. lawmakers seeks to make it easier for states to collect sales taxes stemming from online purchases. Amazon is among the e-retailers supporting the proposal, while a lobbying group representing eBay and Overstock.com stands opposed. From the article: '"Small businesses and states alike are suffering from the inability to collect due -- not new -- taxes from purchases made online," said Rep. Steve Womack, R-Ark., adding the legislation is a "bipartisan, bicameral, common-sense solution that promotes states' rights and levels the playing field for our Main Street businesses."'"
I've been noticing that Amazon has been spreading out physical presence in a lot of states in recent years, and in the process cutting deals with those states to suspend sales taxes specifically on them (though a few states wouldn't play ball). So it makes sense to me why they might actually support this. As a big employer in a lot of states, Amazon can continue to create and extend special deals to exempt themselves at the state level, while sticking competing online retailers who don't have so much local presence with a new tax burden. Plus, it also standardizes the now chaotic process a little more at the federal level.
What political party do you join when you don't like Bible-thumpers *or* hippies?
Only idiot politicians give out tax suspensions. Its happened several times with VW and Sony. As soon as the 10 year suspension was up both companies packed up and left.
Only the State obtains its revenue by coercion. - Murray Rothbard
Because local sales taxes, property taxes, state and federal income taxes, capital gains taxes, and all of the additional fees that people forget are actually just taxes isn't enough, apparently. And of course, the justification is always "well, but when you buy a video game that is shipped from another state, it has to travel over our roads -- so our state incurs an expense, even if the business you did business with is 2,000 miles away".
Of course, they conveniently ignore the fact that the companies doing the delivery of your product (UPS, FEDEX, DHL, etc) already pay taxes for doing business in that state for transporting your good. And buy gas, with included gas taxes for road usage. So, really, what individual states are demanding is additional revenue for incurring absolutely no cost or wear and tear. It's a money grab by a bunch of irresponsible pigs who can't handle what they're already given to budget with.
The big box stores go right along with it, because they're tired of the online competition. That's their only motivation. Somehow, they have this idea that if I have to pay taxes to Amazon for a product they'll deliver to my doorstep in 24-48hrs that I'll change my mind and drive a few miles to go buy the same thing for at least as much and for the same amount of sales tax in their store. Pretty shitty logic. It's less hassle to just go the online route, even with taxes. In fact, I'm more likely to do it just to spite the big box brick and mortar stores.
Anyway, it's a lost cause. It'll be taxed, because the pigs want it taxed. And it won't help anything, because the more money they get, the more they spend. It's just really depressing when you consider how much money you're handing over every April and how little will be done with it, compared to how much of an impact it could make to you. For the taxes I just paid this time around, I could have put a kid through four years of a good state college and had enough left over for them to buy a car. Or I could have helped my mother with her retirement after decades of working in a thankless and harrowing job with no real retirement opportunities or benefits. I could have covered her salary for three and a half years, making retirement a possibility for her. Instead, it'll probably go toward 20% of a drone purchase or installing two speed bumps. And that sort of waste is why people are so disgruntled with paying taxes. If they felt the work and money they are just handing over was being respected and used wisely, they'd feel that sense of "hey, it's my civic duty". When it's just being used as a free pot of money by a bunch of irresponsible pigs, you just feel like you're getting fucked.
Actually, the comment doesn't make any sense: "Small businesses and states alike are suffering from the inability to collect due -- not new -- taxes from purchases made online,"
How are small businesses suffering? It's not their job to pay your taxes. Its your job. It's only small businesses job to collect sales tax for purchases made within their state.
People tend to romanticize "Mom & Pop" stores. But having worked in a Mom & Pop grocery store growing up, I'm under no such illusions. The people I worked for were just as greedy and treated their workers just as shitty as Walmart or any of the big box stores. There is nothing inherently noble or morally superior about being a small business on Main Street. It just means you're small, and also on Main Street.
What political party do you join when you don't like Bible-thumpers *or* hippies?
You're giving Mr. Womack's statement far too much credibility. He represents Arkansas's third congressional district, the home of Wal-Mart. Citing main street business is just a propaganda tactic.
Are you in 3rd grade? The point is that small businesses suffer because customer will go to on-line retailers that don't charge state sales tax. The way State tax laws are written, the consumer is suppose to pay state sales tax from their state - they call it a use tax now. So even though you live in one state and purchase from an on-line retailer that resides in another state, you are still suppose to pay your state's sales tax.
We shouldn't even be looking at sales tax as a revenue source. The reason sales tax is so acceptable is that people don't notice it until it's too late. They don't realize how regressive it is. In fact, people are so oblivious to this tax that it's become the fashionable way to pay for multi-million dollar stadiums. That reason alone is why I buy things online. Because of all these projects, sales taxes in "major" metro areas are approaching 10% and exceed that for hotels, car rentals, bars and restaurants. That's money that's taxed after you've already paid income tax on it.
Would anyone here take a 10% cut in pay? Yet we gladly pass sales taxes that do the same thing.
The U.S. should go back to its roots and use tariffs as the only source of revenue.
If they have the courage of their convictions, the GOP will kill this in the House. This job killing tax will take money out of the hands of private individuals, where it can't be spent wisely and place it in the hands of government where it will be squandered.
Small businesses will suffer because the expense of keeping track of the sales tax they need to collect from every municipality around the country will add one more cost of doing business. For Amazon, that cost is minimal. For a company that is run out of someone's basement by that single individual, it will likely be the difference between being profitable and a waste of time. Small retailers who think that this will make it easier for them to compete with Amazon are dreaming. It will mean that they will never be able to afford to open a website to sell their goods directly to consumers at a distance.
The truth is that all men having power ought to be mistrusted. James Madison
The moment I have to pay sales tax on {stuff I get from Amazon} is the moment I stop being an Amazon customer - over 90% of my online purchases are with Amazon, and its not just the usual stuff that people buy online - I buy the sort of stuff that people would buy at walmart (soap, deodorant, batteries and other household goods at Amazon so I don't have to pay sales tax
So is this tax a federal sales tax, or is it going to allow the states to collect sales tax? From the article (which was vague) it makes it sound like it's going to allow states to collect and is to benefit states / local economies. That sounds great (not really), but...
...how long until I'm paying taxes to two (or more!) states for a purchase online? (Tax to my state and tax to the state where the merchant is)
I can't find the bills online (spent 5 minutes on senate.gov), so I can't see if the bill provides some direction on which state gets to collect the tax. If someone finds the bills it would be great to provide a link.
Here's a new video card for $0.01 - shipping is $200.
The problem isn't that "state taxes are too big for Amazon to figure out." They've got plenty of legal and tax representation.
The real issue is for SMALL sellers on the internet. Say, people who sell via etsy, or bands that sell albums direct to fans.
Now, suddenly, THOSE people need to understand and properly understand taxes for all 50 states, collect those taxes, and remit them to the proper time to the proper authorities. Oh, with all the necessary paperwork.
Mom & Pop can be much better employers... or they can be much, much worse. Corporate america tends to be a bit more normalized. I would not be at all surprised that Mom & Pops are significantly more likely to have issues with sexual harassment, withholding pay, poor working conditions, etc. I am sure it happens, but it is hard to imagine any of these things overtly happening in a corporate environment, since this is a function that even the least competent HR department can handle.
Rep. Steve Womack, R-Ark., (said) the legislation is a "bipartisan, bicameral, common-sense solution that promotes states' rights and levels the playing field for our Main Street businesses."
This, folks, is a politician.
When he sees that local businesses are being heavily taxed, and some other business model comes into existence that evades that tax, his efforts are to ensure that other business is ALSO heavily taxed. Make sure the misery is spread equally, instead of (perhaps) asking if there's anything that can be done to reduce the misery generally.
Specialization increases efficiency in a system, generally.
If products can be viewed electronically (remotely), and delivered by mail/courier, the 'public services' being used are minimal. The distribution center already pays property and relevant taxes. The carriers are paying taxes for gasoline and vehicles (which is already subsumed in their prices) which compensate for the public ways/facilities used. The homeowner is already paying property taxes for local law enforcement, etc. (Or the property owner, if it's a rental unit.) I and the retailer are both already further paying for the infrastructure allowing us to communicate.
The fact is that modern technology has made many goods more efficiently sold through remote-purchase and postal distribution. This is simply a (faster) recap of the paradigm-shift in commerce when traveling merchant caravans no longer bought everything on speculation to (hopefully) sell later down the trail. Likewise, big-box retailers kicked the crap out of local small retail/grocery stores generally (albeit that process isn't quite complete yet). Nobody today mourns the loss of the merchant caravan; and already the younger generations have no maudlin feelings about the local small general store.
-Styopa
You worked for the wrong people then. Most of my relatives are from small towns, and several owned stores and one family a restaurant. On my mom's side, the whole town believed in doing what is best for your neighbor, and if you couldn't afford something you needed, say, at the hardware store, the owner would help you out or cut the price to something you could afford. Probably has something to do with them being Mennonite, but I grew up with that mentality - do something good for your neighbor, and they will do something good for you. Note this is not on the commune - these were former communal Mennonites, but they still got together to build each other's barns and stuff.
The difference is that most local retail stores bring in their goods by truck - frequently their own trucking system like Walmart. They get economies of scale for their delivery charges. If I purchase something on line, depending on the retailer, I may have a very large shipping and handling charge to transport each single item.
They shouldn't get to play the "It's unfair competition on prices. Because you don't pay sales tax we're dying," card.
If the government wants to enforce an extremely regressive form of taxation like the sales tax, that's another debate. But no whining about a tiny percentage of the cost for sales tax causing suffering when most stores - with the exception of Amazon - sometimes - charge outrageous S&H charges - and still beat on price by much more than the sales tax percentage.
The small stores should open up their own web front if they want to compete. Then they'll be whining "Don't make us figure out the complexities of every localities on-line sales tax rules!"
A. It's called a cost of doing business.
B. There's this stuff called "software" that is really good at tracking numbers automatically.
I don't respond to AC's.
From what I understand, almost every large business today forces its employees to go through credit and drug tests. From what I understand, that's almost universal in the US now. I don't know any mom and pop businesses that do that.
I don't respond to AC's.
The people I worked for were just as greedy and treated their workers just as shitty as Walmart or any of the big box stores. There is nothing inherently noble or morally superior about being a small business on Main Street.
This is a terrible collision of logic and statistics that presents a view which is technically correct but misleading in almost every meaningful way when seen in the context of history. You're saying that because small businesses (referring to them as Mom and Pop stores is definitely over-romanticizing) are made of the same greedy people as big businesses and because they are businesses, they will treat their workers just as poorly. To reduce: A is always true and B is always true, therefore C is possible possible, therefore we should assume that C is always true.
It doesn't work like that. You only have to do a little research to see what hideous working conditions big businesses create. Walmart is a poster child for this, but take a look at Amazon's shipping facilities or Nike's assembly lines. The razor thin profit margin, the distance between the decision makers and the workers, the relentless need to please the shareholders: these are all terrifyingly dehumanizing elements of big business, and it shows. Small business has some of these pressures too, but at least your boss has to look you in the face when he's an asshole; that's a powerful motivator.
I'll bring my anecdotal evidence in last because it's probably the least significant, but yes, I've had a dozen or so jobs for both local businesses and national enterprises. I can say with absolute certainty: It's not even just a slight difference in management style, flexibility, pay, work environment, and good old-fashioned giving-a-shit: It's bloody night and day! When the owner of the company you work for sees you every day, collaborates with you in person, buys drinks, plays D&D, etc, I guarantee that you are treated better than any employee at WalMart.
Item X costs $10. Mom & Pop R Us needs to collect sales tax by law. You pay 10$ + tax, ~11$ Online mega merchant doesn't. You pay $10. Therefore, you go online cause it's cheaper. Mom & Pop suffer.
You missed the part where mega merchant charges you $3 for shipping.
I really shouldn't have used someone else's email address for this account.
The real problem is voracious government entities that will NEVER be satisfied with how much they take from you. NEVER.
You want fairness? Get rid of the sales tax on the brick and mortar stores. What? We can’t do that need that money! For the children! To buy civilization!
We are WAY past “buying civilization”. The only question discussed by any parasitic government entity is how quickly to kill the host.
And yes, the host is dying. The U.S. is over 100 trillion in the crapper with admitted debt and unfunded government liabilities according to the Dallas Federal Reserve president. We can’t grow our way out of a 100 trillion (and rapidly growing because of massive spending) problem. The U.S. at least, is screwed.
Peace is easy to achieve, just surrender. Liberty is much harder get/keep.
How will this shiny new tax be collected and enforced?
One option is to put the onus on the retailers to maintain a database of all the different sales tax rates in the country, so they can collect the appropriate amount on the purchase. At least in New York, sales taxes vary by county -- the State takes 4% and the county takes anywhere from 3-5%. That's 62 lines on the spreadsheet, just for New York. I think NYC adds a point or two as well. This would have to be correlated with a ZIP code table, so the retailer would know which ZIPs are in which jurisdictions. It's tedious, but not impossible. Perhaps the IRS could spend some of our money to draw up the tables and maintain them.
Another avenue is to put the onus on the buyer to calculate and remit the appropriate taxes to the authorities. If I were a sociopath, I'd like this method better. It doesn't burden the retailers and it provides a delicious means of social control, not to mention a wealth of interesting information on what people are buying. Let's take a non-Amazon company as an example, since Amazon has bought exemptions from State sales taxes:
NewEgg is contacted by the NY Department of Taxation and Finance and ordered to turn over their NY sales records. No warrant is required, since the request is for tax compliance purposes. DTF runs the records through their computer system and looks up the tax records of each NewEgg customer. If the customer didn't report the sale, they're in big trouble. If it's a significant amount that they didn't report, or there's a pattern of non-compliance, off to private prison with you!
Cue the naysayers saying I'm a paranoiac and Our Glorious Overlords would never do something so fiendish...
A. It's called a cost of doing business. B. There's this stuff called "software" that is really good at tracking numbers automatically.
So, how much is it going to cost me to get that software? Who is going to update it every time one of those many municipalities changes their tax laws? How much will that cost me? Do you have a clue how complicated it is to keep track of the sales tax laws all throughout the U.S., with different municipalities charging sales tax on different things? Not everything is taxable in every municipality and what is taxable, or not taxable varies from location to location. In addition, How do I keep track of what tax jurisdiction a customer is in (hint, zip codes won't do the trick)?
Sure, you can say, "That's a cost of doing business," of course when you say that what you are saying is "I don't mind stacking the deck in favor of big business."
The truth is that all men having power ought to be mistrusted. James Madison
I think you made a really good post, but I disagree on a couple of items. We live in a "must... have... it... now!" society. I've learned that to some people, saving money or getting better is completely irrelevant if they can get it now over waiting a few days for it come by UPS, Fed Ex, etc. These people aren't going to buy online anyway and they're more numerous than you may think.
The other problem I have is with your taxes comment. Lots of Americans seem to equate paying taxes with flushing money in the toilet - paying for military equipment for wars they don't support, paying some government employee's salary to do nothing every day at work, and so on. Believe me, if you were to live in some kind of Libertarian utopia where you never paid taxes you'd wish the current system was back. Know those roads you drive in that hopefully don't have giant potholes in them? Your taxes paid for that. Know those police and fireman who come quickly when you call instead of making you give a credit card number first before they'll come to your house? Your taxes paid for that. Got kids? Well, if you use public schools, your money went to help educate your kids and your neighbor's kids.
My guess is that places like Paypal will include this as a feature for free. Software should be able to handle the problem easily I'm sure.
A software company does the updating. Right now a company called Intuit updates all kinds of very complex payroll tax tables all across the US for the most popular small business accounting package, called Quickbooks. They've been doing it for at lease a decade. Works well. I don't understand why you'd think this would be an insurmountable problem.
I don't respond to AC's.
That depends. What if you're paying for something virtual... say like a movie that you can download?
I also have a question. What happens if the said software happens to have a wrong tax figure? Who pays the penalty once the problem is found?
So what percentage of tax will I need to charge customers who pay anonymously for online services and download products where I don't even know what country they are in?
now we need to go OSS in diesel cars
How about getting rid of the fucking tax?
Surprise! The Congressman representing (3rd District, encompassing Bentonville, where Wal-Mart's HQ is located) the largest brick-and-mortar retailer in the world is pushing for sales tax on sales made by their main competitors.
"These people look deep within my soul and assign me a number based on the order in which I joined" --Homer re:
But what you do have when you have 20 small stores versus one MonsterMart is competition. If you work for a sucky small store, you can quit and work for nice Mr. Jones down the street -- when MonsterMart is the only game in town, you're screwed.
Tom Swiss | the infamous tms | my blog
You cannot wash away blood with blood
You missed the part where mega merchant charges you $3 for shipping.
"Free Shipping on Orders over $25".
B. There's this stuff called "software" that is really good at tracking numbers automatically.
A popular myth. While the statement is literally true, what people are interested in isn't (supposedly) "tracking the numbers", it's "maximizing profit". And we've gotten really, really good at calculating "profit" from incomplete sets of numbers and conditions. Bean-counter blindness, if you will. If your accountants don't factor in the number of customers that the toxic effluents of your factory kill off, you may be suffering from this ailment, for example.
Myself, I could live with 50-odd sets of rate and (simple) rules for determining online tax charges. However, locally, we have cities and townships, counties and Enterprise zones, some of them only a few blocks in scope, and that's excluding "sweetheart" deals made with individual companies. I'd just as soon not have to break it down that fine.
Would you expect your grocery store to suddenly stop charging you tax? Because that's what's happening with Amazon's groceries. Shipping doesn't make up for it, that goes to fedex and ups. It's been a loophole for a while now, and a lot of people have taken advantage, while brick and mortar stores have suffered. The latter may not be the worst thing, customer service at Best Buy is a lot better now, but I can buy a surfband modem on amazon for $80, and at bestbuy for $120, after tax in my area that comes out to $130, that's quite the difference. It sucks that we'll eventually have to start paying tax for online items, but we'd be returning to the standard and the way the economy is supposed to work, and improve things in the long term.
Well, let's see. First off I did not say it was an insurmountable problem. I said it the proposed legislation favors large companies over small companies. I am talking about companies that are small enough that buying Quickbooks makes it not worth their time to start the company.
The truth is that all men having power ought to be mistrusted. James Madison
That one is easy, the business owner. About 20 years ago my state changed their sales tax laws. In particular, they changed what was and was not taxable. One small business owner gave up trying to figure out which items he sold were or were not taxable and charged sales tax on everything. He remitted the full amount collected to the state. The state prosecuted him for charging sales tax for things which were not taxable. The penalties exceeded his yearly revenue.
The truth is that all men having power ought to be mistrusted. James Madison
But not at tracking laws automatically. Or classifying goods as taxable or non-taxable (or taxable at a special rate) automatically. Or knowing what tax jurisdiction someone lives in automatically -- no, you can't reliably figure out what city or county someone lives in by their zip code, and some states sales tax laws depend on what jurisdiction the buyer lives in.
Sales tax on inter-state transactions is a gods-awful complicated mess.
Tom Swiss | the infamous tms | my blog
You cannot wash away blood with blood
Quickbooks costs $300 retail. It's called a "cost of doing business". There are many, many costs of doing business, including collecting and paying various taxes. Unless I'm mistaken, there's no right, in the US, at least, to be able to operate a business completely unencumbered by any cost other than the cost of goods sold.
I don't respond to AC's.
A "popular myth" that software is good at calculating and storing numbers? Computer software could very, very easily track many, many different tax jurisdictions. I don't know what you're talking about "maximizing profit".
I don't respond to AC's.
Very much agree with this. I worked for a "Mom and Pop" store when I was just out of university and hadn't found a job yet, and needed to pay the rent. I was a cheese shop. I basically stocked shelves, served customers, that sort of thing. Not easy work either, Their main storage fridge was in the basement and it wasn't uncommon to get 50 lbs. wheels of cheese. They payed just a little over minimum wage. There was no benefits. Meanwhile, all the large grocery stores had unionized workers, and got paid at least 50% more than I did. They also had benefits. So I don't believe that small businesses are any better to their employees. They really can't afford to be, because the big corps get much better prices on goods.
Anthropic principle: We see the universe the way it is because if it were different we would not be here to see it.
The unfortunate but very real truth is that some people are not smart enough to run a business. Millions of people can and do calculate sales tax correctly every single day. Overcharging customers because of one's ineptitude is not a very good idea.
I don't respond to AC's.
It would simply be a service that most smaller companies would have to buy. There are lots and lots of other services small businesses have to buy because they're too small to do it in house. I don't know where people get the idea that commerce in modern society is done with pencil and paper and every online merchant is going to have to sit down and calculate thousands of numbers by hand. That's pretty darn silly.
I don't respond to AC's.
You should not be so swift to dismiss them. Although it's true that some of them aren't very articulate when it comes to making the case against waste, fraud and abuse, it would be a mistake to dismiss those concerns merely because you don't like some of the messengers. The waste of our tax money by government is a serious and well documented issue that's worthy of discussion and investigation. The taxes that the government receives represent the blood, sweat and tears of hard working Americans and it's galling to us that they spend it with such frivolity and a clear lack of respect for the people who entrusted it to them in the first place. Government workers and elected officials have a duty to the people to spend tax money carefully, wisely and frugally, but from what we can see they spend it with reckless abandon on stupid programs and worthless projects or just plain waste it on state employees who spend their days doing absolutely nothing productive. Don't you understand that government is extraordinarily wasteful or have you fallen so far under Obama's spell that you're willing to overlook the truth even when its staring you in the face?
So, you are in favor of increasing the cost of doing business? Which of course means that you prefer doing business with larger companies, because a larger, established company can more readily absorb an increased cost of doing business.
Quickbooks may only cost $300 retail, but if you want that payroll tax calculator functionality, it is another $29 a month (plus $1.50 per employee per month). What do you think they are going to charge for the sales tax package (which is significantly more complicated than the payroll tax package, very few municipalities institute "tax holidays" on payroll taxes and if they do, it is almost always across the board, not just on certain classes of items). Oh yeah, if you want that payroll tax functionality, you need to buy a new version of Quickbooks every three years. So, you're talking about an additional $600+ for the first year to start up a company that the person has no guarantees will ever be profitable.
The truth is that all men having power ought to be mistrusted. James Madison
I worked retail at the time, the law was very confusing. Before the law was changed, it was complicated enough, but some things were clear. If you put it in your mouth and swallowed it, it was not taxable because it was considered food. After the change, if you sold hot dogs cold, they were not taxable, but if you put them on a grill and heated them up, they were. Milk was not taxable, but chocolate milk was. Fruit drinks were not taxable if they were over a certain percentage real juice. Candy was taxable, but granola bars weren't (was a granola bar covered in chocolate taxable or not? I don't remember, but that was a matter of some debate for over a year after the law passed).
The store owner in question in my above example had been in business for twenty plus years.
The truth is that all men having power ought to be mistrusted. James Madison
Horse. Shit.
A government that governs best governs least. The fact that you actually fell for the "you didn't build that" speech from the Left means you are either happy with paying more to a government that continues to grow faster than Kudzu, or you have no idea how much FWA goes into the average government institution.
it's not "their" money, so why would they be frugal? Even with respect to road maintenance, there's no incentive to hold the contractors to their word and make a decent road (has anyone LOOKED at the roads in the US lately? They look like bombed out airstrips from WW2). And with the millions in revenue the governments at all levels get (trillions upon trillions of dollars) there never seems to be "enough."
The fall of the Roman Republic happened when the Aristocrats could rob the middle class legally through fees and taxation. Guess what? The fall of the American Republic is following that same route. No wonder I don't put "politics" in my slashdot page anymore. The very essence of individual liberty has been subjugated by the "free shit" crowd and the "government's good mmmkay" focus groups.
I weep for the experiment the Founders started. We killed it. We couldn't even keep it going for more than a few centuries.
Lots of Americans seem to equate paying taxes with flushing money in the toilet
From where many of us are standing, there isn't much difference to us personally.
Libertarian utopia where you never paid taxes you'd wish the current system was back.
Libertarians are not anarchists. We acknowledge that some government is necessary and proper and that government requires taxes to pay for it. That being said, we most definitely prefer a smaller government that does fewer things and therefore costs less money, but whether the government is large or small every American ought to be angry when taxes are wasted.
Know those roads you drive in that hopefully don't have giant potholes in them? Your taxes paid for that.
Out here in California the roads are chock full of potholes because the Democrats who run this state have diverted the gas tax money to everything but repair and maintenance of the roads. Potholes my ass.
Got kids? Well, if you use public schools, your money went to help educate your kids and your neighbor's kids.
Out here in California the public schools are ranked between 48-50th in the nation. They suck despite receiving over 50% of the state budget every year. Yes, that's right. California is a large state that takes in vast amounts of tax revenue every year, at least 50% of which goes to schools, and yet our public K-12 education system is among the worst in the nation. Yes indeed, we sure are getting a good value for our tax money here. I'd rather have the money in my pocket and send my kids to private school, thanks.
They will create 1,500 more Kiva robots to handle picking and hire just 100 humans
How exactly is software going to know when a municipality introduces a sales tax holiday for three days? Someone is going to have to keep track of all of the various changes to those sales tax laws and enter it into the software. I really doubt that Paypal will offer it for free (unless of course you are selling through Ebay)..
The truth is that all men having power ought to be mistrusted. James Madison
Actually the reason I buy stuff online has nothing to do with sales tax, it has to do with availability and price. Many of the things I want to buy are not available locally, and everything that is available locally is far more expensive BEFORE sales tax is added in, and harder to find.
Nothing to say here... move along
Ron Paul's organization, the Campaign for Liberty, is trying to kill this thing and prevent the national sales tax from being implemented:
http://dailycaller.com/2013/02/15/the-national-internet-tax-mandate-must-be-stopped/
Libertas in infinitum
And there is the REAL reason sales tax doesn't get collected, the sales tax rules are so complex that the B&M are barely able to keep the rules for their one physical location straight, much less the rest of the country/world.
Is amazon (US) supposed to charge VAT on orders by residents of EU member countries?
I know that amazon.uk is smart enough NOT to charge me VAT when I order from them. (I am in US)
Nothing to say here... move along
Of course I'd like for government to be less wasteful. Who wouldn't? Preferring Obama to the only viable alternative doesn't mean one wants the government to spend money to little effect.
Also, the idea of Obama's having a "spell" is something you, or someone who influences your thinking, invented out of laziness.
If I'm not mistaken, then you are only exempt from sales tax for an online purchase if the retailer does not have a local presence. So, is it any surprise that the guy is from the state where the world's largest retailer is headquartered?
I'll leave the debate about lost revenue for another day. But this is nothing more than WalMart taking a shot at Amazon.
The other part missing is the when online merchant DOESN'T charge $10, they charge $7. So the M&P store is really whining that they can't make $8 of profit on a $10 sale, they don't want to drop their prices to match (as a rule) AND have to pay sales tax.
Then the $3 shipping looks really good, even better when free shipping comes in... (i.e. they buy more to hit the free shipping cut)
Nothing to say here... move along
The only problem with what you say isn't really true. Because "Online mega merchant" doesn't operate a retail store, they can cut costs by a lot. Also, because they sell so many items, the book distributor (or whatever product they sell) gives them a good deal on the item to begin with, so in the end, it ends up looking like this.
Mom & Pop (AKA Women & Women First) = $20 + tax = $22
Online mega Merchant (AKA Amazon) = $12 + shipping (or not) = $12-$17
Retail Mega Merchant (AKA Walmart) = $15 + tax = $16.50
So what ends up happening is if you buy with the Mom and Pop, you always pay more. If you go with either of the Mega Merchants, you sometimes get a better deal if you buy it online, and sometimes get a better deal if you buy it at a retail location.
Anthropic principle: We see the universe the way it is because if it were different we would not be here to see it.
Are you kidding me? I'm sure there are several companies that will license use of their service to others. A simple API in your checkout form could call the service and get the tax rules based on zipcode. Heck, there are several free websites that offer this service for manual entry, I can only imagine that there are some that will allow automated entry for some cost structure. The more important thing is not calculating collection of sales tax, but delivering the sales tax to the proper places. If I sell a widget to a man in California, do I have to mail a check to the California IRS? How often do I have to give the sales tax money to these states? If Paypal or some payment processor took care of this for you, it would be quite easy for them to do so. They could immediately take the sales tax from the transaction and place it into a massive account. The money could then be electronically distributed the the correct parties on a daily/weekly basis. Maybe they would charge something for the service, but my guess is that it would be minimal if not free.
and get the tax rules based on zipcode.
FAIL. Zip codes do not follow municipal boundaries. If you use zip code to determine what tax rate to apply, you will get it wrong a significant percentage of the time. Just because someone has a particular city zip code does not mean that where they live is subject to the tax rate of that city.
The truth is that all men having power ought to be mistrusted. James Madison
That shipping isn't really free. It's included in the cost of the products. If Amazon charged for shipping its prices would be even lower.
Quite an experience to live in fear, isn't it? That's what it is to be a slave.
The tax is a small problem these days, at least for me. Recently I needed some PTEX candles (ski repair plastic, basically). I drove to 3 different local stores and nobody had any. The retailer who was supposed to have it was out. I wasted 40 minutes of my time, and over $5 in gas. If I had ordered online, $5 shipping would have been well worth it.
Even if you have a 45MPG car, it is cheaper to slap a stamp on a letter and have it delivered for $0.45 if you destination more less than 2 or 3 miles away. Shipping is a bigger and bigger bargain the higher gas prices go.
Even those who arrange and design shrubberies are under considerable economic stress at this period in history.
Sales tax is a huge waste of everybody's time and resources. just outlaw sales taxes and get it over with. The differences can be made up by income tax. Besides, sales tax is regressive in that it harms the poor more than the rich; especially when applied to essentials like food... and I'd include electricity and heat too.
So, you don't care about the poor? (seems like most Americans do not) well how about an appeal to equity - why should you pay more tax than bill gates? sales tax is higher for you than it is him. that is not equitable.
If you do not consume, you pay less tax; essentially we reward people who do not consume in this heavily consumer biased economy... Your income is taxed already (unless too poor) so why tax you again when you spend that money?? Isn't that a double tax?
If you save money, you get taxed on the interest unless you have one of the loophole schemes.... even then you have to invest aggressively because inflation is higher than any conservative investments. Inflation is an indirect covert tax on everybody who isn't heavily and aggressively invested - and what is worse the inflation tax does NOT go to the public it goes to the same Robber Barron Bankers, or more aptly put term from the last century: Banksters.
Democracy Now! - uncensored, anti-establishment news
Time to move to Alaska, Delaware, Montana, New Hampshire, or Oregon. Alaska and New Hampshire also have no state income tax, but Alaska is isolated and has a cold climate until global warming makes it into a paradise sometime in the 3rd millenium and New Hampshire is only free when it comes to taxes. They have routine suspicionless roadblocks, stop and identify laws and other nasty police state stuff. Delaware can be ruled out immediately.
So that just leaves Montana vs Oregon. Unfortunately both have state income taxes. Oregon's income taxes are currently 9% if you make betwen 7750 and 125,000 which should cover pretty much everyone here. Montana has a much more incremental sliding scale at the low end. Only 1% if you manage to make less than 2,600 per year and still survive. 5% if you make between 9,400 and 12,100 as I do. 6.9% if you make more than 15,600 as I'm sure nearly all of you do.
So I guess Montana would win on taxes alone, but Montana also has suspicionless roadblocks which they call 'safety checks' or something like that because sobriety checkpoints are actually illegal there. Montana also shares a border with Canada so the northern half of the state is a constitution free zone from the POV of the CBP and is probably plagued with overzealous jackbooted thugs known as the border patrol who will be only too happy to interrogate you for half an hour every time you drive by even during the day and if you annoy them or 'stand up for your rights' you will probably end up in jail on contempt of cop charges. Maybe even after being beaten or killed. Attorney fees will easily trump sales tax for most of us and even if you make or spend enough that it doesn't take it from me that being locked in a cage is not much fun. Montana also has stop and identify laws. Oregon doesn't. So I think Oregon wins despite the (for most people) slightly higher income taxes.
Quite an experience to live in fear, isn't it? That's what it is to be a slave.
Try some reasoned arguments next time instead of ad hominem attacks. Or we could start talking about how you see the government as your daddy. I don't owe the government a goddamn thing. I am not a slave and they do not own me. If they want to bill me for services rendered that's fine, but I should have the choice as to whether or not I wish to use those services.
Also, what is often ignored in these 'discussions' is price. If taxes are just payments for services rendered then the question becomes whether the prices are reasonable or not. Private enterprise would go out of business if they charge prices that people cannot afford to pay. The government won't because they are more like a criminal enterprise then a business. The 'services' they offer are like the services the mafia offers you when offering you 'protection' against...unfortunate accidents. Thugs with guns who demand money for services that you never asked for are nothing new and nothing special and no different from any thief who sticks a gun to your head and demands your wallet. Because they title themselves, The Government doesn't change the dynamics of what is actually going on.
The only government services I actually need and use are the roads and their maintenance and trash pickup. Both could easily by done privately, but either way I would be willing to pay a reasonable amount for said services. Ideally such payments would be based on use as in toll roads and price per unit of trash picked up and perhaps the distance from your house to the nearest landfill. That's the way a civilized society would work. Not by threatening to put people in cages if they don't pay you. If services are truly essential there is no need to force people to do anything. They will voluntarily pay for such essential services.
Quite an experience to live in fear, isn't it? That's what it is to be a slave.
FAIL. Zip codes do not follow municipal boundaries. If you use zip code to determine what tax rate to apply, you will get it wrong a significant percentage of the time. Just because someone has a particular city zip code does not mean that where they live is subject to the tax rate of that city.
And, even with the full address, which address do you use...the delivery location or the one on the payment method?
Anybody who starts an answer with "that's easy..." just doesn't understand the issues at work. Any law made will have to specify the address to use, and states with lots of residents who spend lots of money will want it to be the billing address, even when that item is sent as a gift to some other address. Any smart legislator will see (I know, not likely to happen) that this will cause everyone to suddenly have all of their credit card bills delivered to mailboxes in Delaware (or New Hampshire, or parts of Oregon).
Using the delivery address creates a similar but not as widespread problem, as people find the addresses that have sales tax loopholes and open "receiving" locations for online purchasers. But, this does mean that wealthier people will be able to easily avoid these taxes if they want, as they could have everything delivered to a 0% sales tax location and then shipped onward to the final destination. Even for moderately large items, if you can save 10% on sales tax, you might be able to re-ship for less than that.
Nothing could have better complimented my post somewhat upthread. Thanks. Only way it could have been better is if you'd responded directly to that one. The first paragraph in particular perfectly illustrates the insurmountable differences in both approach and level of understanding facing anyone who bothers to attempt reasoned discussion on the topic of taxation and government, especially online. The last paragraph's pretty excellent as well. I couldn't have written better.
A few years ago, Wal-Mart was the company that people loved to hate. Wal-Mart stumbled, or more accurately, reached their natural maximum growth rate and penetration, so the small business lovers trained their sites on Amazon instead. It's the Wal-Mart hate all over again. We hear more tired arguments.
Amazon is killing some small business because they are inherently more efficient in delivering their products. It has NOTHING at all to do with sales tax. This is the same reason Wal-Mart grew so quickly and bankrupted even the once-mighty Sears. No great business model is impervious for long. Sooner or later, Amazon's successor will rise with a better, cheaper, or more convenient model to deliver their products and the haters will complain anew.
TFA is wrong. The reason the Supreme Court said States can only tax transactions made with companies that "have a physical presence" in that state, is because (follow along now):
(A) States have no legal authority to tax transactions that take place in other States, and
(B) an Internet transaction is deemed to have taken place at the seller's place of business, and
(C) the Federal government has no legal authority to collect taxes on behalf of the States.
Item (B) came about because of the rise of mail-order businesses, well over 100 years ago. The internet brings NOTHING new to the table... it just means a bit more business is being done remotely. (In case you hadn't noticed, the rise of the Internet has created a corresponding fall in traditional mail order business. It has not made as big an impact on sales taxes as many people would have you believe.)
If a mail-order (or Internet) business has a "physical presence" in your State, then it is not unreasonable to conclude that the business transaction took place in your State. Thus, sales tax is applicable. But if it doesn't, then the sale took place in the seller's state and your state can't charge sales tax.
And the reason (B) says that the transaction takes place in the seller's state, is because doing it the other way around is not practically possible; EVERY business would have to keep track of all Federal, State, and local tax laws, everywhere in the United States. Even today, there is no practical way to overcome this. Small businesses simply could not operate.
There is NOTHING that Congress has legal authority to do to change this situation, except amend the Constitution. They simply cannot give States additional taxation power, and they cannot give themselves power to tax on behalf of the States, without amending the Constitution.
This is not mere theory. These are past SCOTUS rulings and the stated reasoning behind them.
(NOTE: most if not all States have a separate tax, called a "Use Tax", that taxes the use of an item that is purchased out-of-state. But that is a separate issue. A Use Tax is not a Sales Tax... the transaction is not being taxed, the use of the item is. So it is legal. The problem is that States have no way to know what purchases you have made out-of-state, unless you tell them. Which makes it an enforcement nightmare. In my experience, many people do not even know that Use Taxes exist... unless they buy a car in a different state.)
I meant complement, of course.
Fucking almost-homophones.
Why not just let the idea of sales tax die and instead create a real digital currency similar to debit cards and let the government collect those fees instead of banks. There are reasons we decided on a national currency in the first place and those points apply to digital money as well as paper money and banks sure haven't shown themselves to be all that responsible. Banks do a good job of screwing both merchants and consumers and making their digital currency very un-democratic so not only would it be good to let the government collect these fees in lieu of taxes but it'd also be easy to improve on the current situation.
At what price learning? At what cost wisdom? The price is a man's peace of mind, and the cost is his life.
Yay! More taxes that the government is going to take and waste through ego, corruption, and bureaucracy!
This isn't a NEW tax. You are already required to pay state and local taxes on goods bought online and always have been. People have largely gotten away with not paying use tax in the past, but now that so much purchasing is being done online states are starting to feel the burden of that missing income. They are now simply trying to enforce tax payments that you already should have been paying.
How about instead:
Item X costs $10.
Mom and Pop store doesn't have item, but can get it in a week; Trip #1 wasted
When it eventually shows up, you pay $10 + tax ~ $11
Online megastore sells item X for $5
Online megastore has item in stock
Online megastore has 50 closely similar items in stock in case you don't exactly need item X
Online megastore will ship overnight for a small charge, or two days for free if you buy $25 total on your order
Online megastore lets you order at 2AM instead of rushing to Mom and Pop after work before they close
Result: -> Online megastore haters complain that sales tax prevents Mom and Pop from competing fairly
Moral of the story: Amazon's customer experience is far superior. Local stores cannot simply add online shopping and hope to provide a better experience. Sales tax is a red herring. If Mom and Pop have sales tax issues tying their hands, it's a problem caused by their local taxing authorities.
One of the major functions of government is to protect property rights. The people with the most property are the ones who use the most of this function. Therefore the people should pay a portion of the value of the property they own which is protected by the US government at all levels.
The steps go like this:
1. eliminate all current forms of taxation
2. tax all currency leaving the country (this gets rid of the offshore tax haven loopholes) equal to about 5 years worth of the tax in step 3
3. institute national property tax with no exceptions (houses, cars, bank accounts, stocks, bonds, land and the big one, intellectual property)
My napkin math says the revenue neutral amount would be between 2.3 and 2.8% annual rate for the federal taxes, would be maybe twice that if state taxes were included.
The beauty of a national property tax is that its impossible to avoid. SOMEONE owns the property and if nobody comes forward to pay then the property is seized and auctioned off. Foreign entities are taxes the same as domestic ones. The tax burden is now shifted from labor to capital as it should have always been.
Politicians can't give their friends favors because there is nothing to fiddle with or hide behind. If you own, then you owe. Rich people can't hide their money in trusts or foundations because those will be taxed like everything else. They can take their money to another country but step 2 is a disincentive to do that and the overall tax rate will be so low there wouldn't be a point.
The one possible gotcha is that food production should be considered to be a national security issue. The land and equipment used in farming is usually a much higher ratio vs the value of the crop produced. So family (not corporate owned) farms below a certain size should get a tax deferment until the property is transferred to a non-family member, at which point the back taxes are collected. This deferment would be included in the Homeland Security budget.
This is the correct solution.
I couldn't agree with you more. Those of us who dislike living as slaves in a police state working for our government masters often find it tedious to argue with people like you who only know ad hominem arguments and simply do not have the capacity to stick to logic. You cannot think philosophically or understand ideas.
Quite an experience to live in fear, isn't it? That's what it is to be a slave.
Seems your placement when it comes to education is a bold faced lie
Students First, which was founded by Michele Rhee (if you don't know who she is then you haven't been paying attention to education) in 2010 to advocate for measured performance based improvements in American public schools, grades California an 'F' for 2013 along with 10 other states placing us in the bottom quintile of US public schools. Exactly how bad it is depends upon whom you ask but by any objective measure California public schools compare poorly with those in most other US states. California taxpayers are definitely not receiving good value for their money when it comes to education. As for the 50% requirement, California Proposition 98 (1988) amended the state constitution to mandate it.
I don't understand how you can call government services a waste of money on essential things
I'm not against spending money on essential things and I believe that education is one of those things. However, that doesn't mean that I will accept failure on the part of the schools to achieve results with that money. The left argues that we should throw more money at the problem indiscriminately, but how will that improve performance? That will only reward failure on the part of teachers and school administrators to do the jobs that we've already paid them to do. I submit that if they cannot meet our standards that we must fire them and get people who can. I don't mind paying for performance, but I refuse to pay for failure. I don't stand for it when companies that I invest in fail to perform to my expectations so why should I accept it when government wastes my tax money?
Things like medical care that would cover more people and cost less is a taboo here because too many rich people would have to wait more than 5 minutes to see their doctor,
If you want healthcare, pay for it out of your own damn pocket or purchase insurance. Healthcare is expensive in the United States primarily because it lacks an effective mechanism to communicate prices to consumers in a competitive market. Try asking your doctor how much something might cost and they cannot even tell you because they have no idea. What other good or service is there where you cannot get the price upfront? We would never put up with this elsewhere in the economy so why do we continue to pay for our health care in this manner? There's a long and complex history to that, and I won't profess to give a whole answer here, but suffice it to say that government policies, and especially tax incentives, have encouraged Americans to purchase their healthcare in the most opaque and inefficient way possible. If your interested, you can read more here.
Fucking sociopath libertarians.
Am I to understand that the intellectually superior and enlightened left, when failing to carry the argument, resorts to name calling? If that's what four years of Harvard or Yale got you then I suggest you ask them for a refund.
So your cited figure is a bit disingenuous, being that it ignores roughly 60% of the state's actual funding.
California has a high rate of borrowing and bond indebtedness which is not sustainable over the long run. If you're going to include unsustainable borrowing in "actual funding" then yes education receives less than 50% of the "total". Its sort of like counting your available lines of credit as income because you could max out your credit cards to achieve this higher level of "income". Be that as it may, you will note that in every year since 1988, when Proposition 98 was passed, the spending from the general fund, which receives most tax revenues, has been at or above the 50% minimum mandated by law.
As for per student spending, it would be interesting to see if that was simply the result of the number of students divided by total budget or if administrative costs were subtracted before getting that number. I can't point to any specific study on this, but it seems to me that here in California at least we have too many administrators chasing too few teachers and classroom resources. Perhaps if they didn't spend so much on administration there would be more left over for the students?
The issue is even simpler than that. Excessive government, excessive law, excessive bureaucracy are all violations of fundamental rights in a free country. The government that governs best governs least. Having to keep track of complex sales tax rules even within a single state (something I've heard MANY small business owners complain about) is a violation of these fundamental rights. Extending this to keeping track of all sales tax rules in every possible legal jurisdiction in the country is simply absurd (it's also poor legal ethics: unneeded complexity in the legal system creates artificial demand for the services of legal professionals).
Governments at various levels in the USA are already violating fundamental rights on a massive scale by having an income tax system so complex multiple companies can make money selling software to help people navigate it: we need to be correcting that situation, not making it worse!
You may be living in a state where the sales tax rules are simple. In some states there are many exceptions and exemptions: not every purchase or every customer is subject to the same sales tax, and the rules can change from year to year or situation to situation. The situation is especially problematic for single person operating a business when the nature of that business requires them to sell in many different legal jurisdictions (such as anyone taking goods to shows, country fairs, conventions, and similar events).
Further, the legal professionals in the legislature who write the rules may do in a fashion that arguably creates artificial demand for the services of their profession to interpret those rules.
I've had single person business owners complain to me about both of these things, so the problem is real and the situation not as simple as it may be in the location where you are living.
I'm sure there will be an internet sales tax. There is too much money
involved for politicians to not tax it. Since this is inevitable, I
think the best thing to do is design a tax system that causes the least
complication for retailers. I propose the following:
1) An internet sales tax based solely on the shipping address.
2) The tax rate be set at 5% (no more then 7%).
3) The money is collected by the IRS or a separate federal sales tax
division.
4) The collected money is divided as follows:
4a) 1% goes to the federal government general fund.
4b) 3% goes to the state according to item 1 above.
4c) .9% (or less then 1% depending on the amounts involved with the
rest going to the federal government) goes to R&D for the internet,
support of public exchange points, support of public high speed links,
and the rest goes to college/university scholarships, general research,
the current general research emphases should be development of new new
sources of energy such as fusion, wind, water, etc.
4d) .1% should go into an emergency relief fund to help deal with
emergencies so relief organizations do not have to wait for congress to
authorize funds. This money would also go to the military to cover
costs of military assistance when military resources are used to
transport relief supplies any where in the world.
5) All merchants have to report is $$$'s collected by city, state,
zip/postal code, and country.
6) Other countries can sign on to the tax agreement by meeting the same
requirements for simplicity, ie reporting is done like item 5 above and
each country can decide how to apply the 5% between federal and local
authorities.
7) Tax should be collected on all sales, no exceptions even if the sale
is to a government, church, state, college, university, etc.
This is my basic opinion and plan. KEEP IT SIMPLE!!!!
Eh, the credit checks are vanishingly rare. The drug test are usually mouth swabs that only detect drugs in the past 24 hours anyway. It seems fair for them to verify that you are not currently on crack at the time of the interview.