Slashdot Mirror
US Supreme Court Will Revisit Ruling On Collecting Internet Sales Tax (theverge.com)
An anonymous reader quotes a report from Bloomberg: The U.S. Supreme Court will consider freeing state and local governments to collect billions of dollars in sales taxes from online retailers, agreeing to revisit a 26-year-old ruling that has made much of the internet a tax-free zone. Heeding calls from traditional retailers and dozens of states, the justices said they'll hear South Dakota's contention that the 1992 ruling is obsolete in the e-commerce era and should be overturned. State and local governments could have collected up to $13 billion more in 2017 if they'd been allowed to require sales tax payments from online merchants and other remote sellers, according to a report from the Government Accountability Office, Congress's non-partisan audit and research agency. Other estimates are even higher. All but five states impose sales taxes.
The high court's 1992 Quill v. North Dakota ruling, which involved a mail-order company, said retailers can be forced to collect taxes only in states where the company has a "physical presence." The court invoked the so-called dormant commerce clause, a judge-created legal doctrine that bars states from interfering with interstate commerce unless authorized by Congress. South Dakota passed its law in 2016 with an eye toward overturning the Quill decision. It requires retailers with more than $100,000 in annual sales in the state to pay a 4.5 percent tax on purchases. Soon after enacting the law, the state filed suit and asked the courts to declare the measure constitutional.
The high court's 1992 Quill v. North Dakota ruling, which involved a mail-order company, said retailers can be forced to collect taxes only in states where the company has a "physical presence." The court invoked the so-called dormant commerce clause, a judge-created legal doctrine that bars states from interfering with interstate commerce unless authorized by Congress. South Dakota passed its law in 2016 with an eye toward overturning the Quill decision. It requires retailers with more than $100,000 in annual sales in the state to pay a 4.5 percent tax on purchases. Soon after enacting the law, the state filed suit and asked the courts to declare the measure constitutional.
Wickard_v._Filburn emasculated states' rights and the 10th amendment.
>"The earlier ruling was made because there was no law on the books either way. "
The US constitution prohibits states from taxing interstate commerce. That is the historical basis for states not taxing goods that are sold in other states and brought into the state in question.
Not quote right. Some states and localities have sales tax some states have "use tax" they are not the same. In the case of a sales tax, the sale is taxed, in the case of a use tax the receipt is taxed. You cannot be required to pay a sales tax on a purchase made across state lines by anyone but the feds, it would violate interstate commerce. You can be required to pay a use tax to your own state or municipality.
Repeal the 17th Amendment TODAY! Also Please Read http://www.gnu.org/philosophy/right-to-read.html
Sales by zip code will not work, because zip codes do not follow municipal lines. The U.S. Post Office determines the zip code for a particular address based on the particular post office which they believe it will be most convenient to deliver the mail from. This has no relationship to what local municipality that address is in. In order for this to work it would be necessary for there to be a database which contains the taxing jurisdiction for EVERY address in the United States.
The truth is that all men having power ought to be mistrusted. James Madison