White House: Internet Sales Tax ‘Will Level The Playing Field’
Source: Agence France-Presse
The White House Monday backed a Senate bill to force online retailers like Amazon and eBay to collect state and local sales taxes, hoping to end a cost disadvantage hampering bricks and mortar businesses.
The bill, which was being debated in the Senate on Monday, could lead to the recouping of $11 billion in lost annual sales taxes, according to a University of Tennessee research study.
“We believe that the Marketplace Fairness Act will level the playing field for local small-business retailers, who are undercut every day by out-of-state online companies,” said White House spokesman Jay Carney.
“Today, while local small-business retailers follow the law and collect sales taxes from customers who make purchases in their stores, many big-business online and catalog retailers do not collect the same taxes.”
Read more: http://www.rawstory.com/rs/2013/04/22/white-house-internet-sales-tax-will-level-the-playing-field/
= new reply since forum marked as read
Highlight:
NoneDon't highlight anything
5 newestHighlight 5 most recent replies
swayne
(383 posts)rhett o rick
(55,981 posts)But I guess you can get more stuff, if stuff is important. I am betting you are a free market kind of guy.
cstanleytech
(26,290 posts)to pretty much drive a whole lot of other smaller businesses out of business by setting up shop in states with little to no taxes and or by getting sweetheart tax breaks in other states from which they then ship their products from almost tax free.
Steerpike
(2,692 posts)but amazon and best buy support this tax.
cstanleytech
(26,290 posts)probably have setup in some of the states they have placed some of their main facilities thus offsetting much of the impact where as a small company without said tax breaks wont be able to absorb the hit to online sales.
So ya short term it amazon likes it alot but long term it will level the playing field, that or we can just go with the no tax to online sales and watch as needed revenue dries up more and more each year for the state government and services are cut more and more because of it.
KatyMan
(4,190 posts)There are a lot of reasons for online retail success- it is more convenient for those living outside of towns/cities; online retailers usually offer a larger stock-- (It is very difficult to find some books at brick and mortar stores (and I do live in a large city)--there are many who cannot get out to shop--online has been great for them.
Also- it does create some jobs- someone has to deliver all the packages!
I have no problem paying the sales tax (I already pay 8.75%)
marshall
(6,665 posts)People adapted--buggy whip manufacturers learned to make auto parts.
rhett o rick
(55,981 posts)shops for min wage. Perfect. Corporations uber alles.
And all for cheaper prices so we can buy more crap. Capitalism will eventually kill itself. And a lot of us will die in the process.
Sunlei
(22,651 posts)employees just to sell books.
Response to swayne (Reply #1)
Post removed
SharonAnn
(13,772 posts)For me, I live 20 miles from a shopping center and 14 miles from a Wal-Mart. And many things are hard to find even if I drive there and take the time to shop.
I can do it at home, access a better selection, avoid the cost and hassle of driving and parking, and have it delivered to my door.
I'm willing to pay the tax. Fair is fair. I've always had a problem with people trying to evade taxes.
that's a bunch of bullshit.
Demonaut
(8,914 posts)if they profit they they stay in business, if they overcharge then they lose customers
internet tax is long overdue
hedgehog
(36,286 posts)is NYS asking me to estimate the amount of sales tax i owe on on-line transactions every year!
This may be a problem for small time retailers on Etsy and the like.
tridim
(45,358 posts)This is going to kill Amazon and UPS/FedEx.
bushisanidiot
(8,064 posts)They can go to hell.
tridim
(45,358 posts)Try that at Walmart.
harmonicon
(12,008 posts)Come on, the small price difference that tax makes up for most items bought online doesn't make people get them there. It's otherwise lower prices, and mostly the convenience of delivery combined with a very wide selection.
Amazon now has a massive business than can deal with allocating various taxes to different states. Smaller online, especially independent retailers do not.
This will only hurt small business.
bemildred
(90,061 posts)Those are the people we want to protect from on-line retailers.
harmonicon
(12,008 posts)It's not an online/offline dichotomy. It's about big business vs. small business, and this hurts small business. A gigantic business like Amazon can pay loads of people to deal with everything that will come with having to separately charge, collect, and then pay tax dollars for 50 (or 40 some... I don't think all states have sales tax) different states. An actual small business that's just an owner and a few employees can't do that. How could they? Why should they?
bemildred
(90,061 posts)harmonicon
(12,008 posts)bemildred
(90,061 posts)harmonicon
(12,008 posts)You posited a dichotomy between small, local business and "on-line" business. I posit that this is a false dichotomy, as a great number of very small businesses these days do business online, nationally, if not internationally, and that requiring each of them to organize dozens of different tax structures would be a financial burden. You disagree with this assessment because .... ?
bemildred
(90,061 posts)harmonicon
(12,008 posts)bemildred
(90,061 posts)wercal
(1,370 posts)There are alot more than 50 taxing entities in this nation.
There are thousands of sales tax rates in this nation - townships, bond issues for cities, bond issues for schools (which have boundaries that straddle city/county boundaries).
There are companies that do the work and research all the rates, and sell a software to handle it all...and they sell maintenance so you can get updates. It costs thousands a year. So it certainly is a burden on small businesses.
Lost in this debate - beyond the 'fairness', is the lost sales tax revenue to states and smaller taxing entities. It is starting to make a dent in revenue, and something has to be done.
I buy alot of auto parts online, and they always charge tax - so I was under the impression that most of the 'big boys' did...I am surprised Amazon doesn't...of course my state tax form asks for me to declare unpaid sales tax, which would be a nightmare if I shopped there.
loyalsister
(13,390 posts)Absolutely! It's a huge problem in MO. We can only raise most taxes via popular vote. Since that was implemented, our revenue stream has shrunk so much that it has become a huge problem. The internet sales tax is one that can be structured in a way that does not require it to be a ballot issue.
I really hope this passes.
Tunkamerica
(4,444 posts)most are 1 or 2 person operations who blew their load on buying product and making a website. Buying the software to do this alone or hiring a full-time accountant, or whatever will kill a good percentage. You seem to think that online = big. I would say the unbelievably vast majority of online retailers are small. Laughably small because of the low overhead and low cost of entry.
Sunlei
(22,651 posts)If one is just a small business you don't even need software, can use paper record keeping.
Purplehazed
(179 posts)that is the easy part. However, you don't just send send a check to a state.
The retailer will have to register with each state to receive some type of taxpayer ID. A fee will probably be involved. The retailer will have to file monthly, quarterly, and annual filings with each state, even for periods when no taxes are to be paid. The retailer will be subject to record keeping requirements for each state and audits.
This legislation will place an unreasonable burden online retailers. Tax codes are geared towards the business operating in one state. An online retailer would be subject to complying with 50 state tax codes.
bemildred
(90,061 posts)It makes no sense to want to be a MomNPop (Sniff! Struggling!!!) who wants to market in every state, and conversely, it makes no sense to say you wnat to market into every state without having to deal with state laws and taxes. If you want regulation of interstate commerce to smooth the way, you have to go to Congress, which just hates to do a damn thing in that regard.
But seriously, if you are big enough to hire the service or provide it yourself, go for it, but if not, then not.
That's why they are still MomNPops. I mean if they want to go head-to-head with Amazon, that is fine with me, but you won't draw much symathy from me that way. I think one Amazon is more than enough, handy though it can be. The Internet is not driven by market forces in the same way as out in the real world. The cost of finding alternatives is too low, that's why retailers love it and hate it, it's a winner-take-all environment for commerce. People rarely forage outside their local trails, so to speak, on the internet, and there is no way to force your message on them, like on TV or Radio. It's all voluntary.
Purplehazed
(179 posts)Internet sales are driven because of market forces.
The debate over collecting the taxes is revolving around the "Amazon Model" where items sold online are the same ones available locally. It leaves out the large number of sellers who sell items that are not normally available locally. The internet is certainly an advantage to mom and pops who can sell their Alpaca wool to a nation wide market rather than the few thousand people in their local community.
The internet allows very "non corporate" businesses to flourish in ways that were not possible 20 years ago. States would actually be getting a windfall, collecting taxes on transactions that would have never happened if it were not for the internet.
In a different direction; in states with sales taxes, there is a responsibility for the seller to collect sales taxes and there is also a responsibility for the buyer to pay sales taxes. Technically, if I buy an item out of state at a lower tax rate, I am obligated to pay the difference to my state. I don't think many people do, except for automobiles where the tax will be collected when you register it. If I buy a car in New Hampshire, I have to pay 5% to Maine in order to register it. I recall that several years ago, there was a native american tribe that was selling cigarettes online very inexpensively because they were not charging taxes. The Massachusetts revenue people forced the tribe to turn over the list of customers that resided in MA and then took legal action against the residents to collect taxes and penalties. I would hate to see that happen with general internet sales.
bemildred
(90,061 posts)Other things to do right now ...
bemildred
(90,061 posts)1. Market Forces: in the real world economy, there are various marketing methods (direct mail, broadcast and cable media, publications, telemarketing) by which marketers can attempt to get you to pay attention to their message. And also, the barriers to entry are high, it takes a lot of money to set up or buy your own advertising channel, and the number of channels is limited and regulated in various ways. On the internet, all that goes away, both the ability to push a message against resistance and the barriers to entry. Anybody can get their message out cheaply, and nobody can make you read something you don't want to, or make you do much of anything else. The only monopoly-like players on the internet are like Google, Amazon, etc., but unlike in the real world, they have no means to compel, if they alienate their audience they are toast, there are satisfactory alternatives. So when I say "market forces" there I am referring to the monopolistic and manipulative marketing methods which we have become so used to in our real economy in the form of the constant attempts to coerce, befuddle, and nickel-and-dime us to death in the process of shopping for goods and services. On the internet, you can't really do any of that, if you are annoying, you will also be ignored. There is no coercion on the internet like in real life, they cannot make you hurry, or wait, or make demands. Amazon won by being all things to all people, and it cannot afford to stop, unlike say, Exxon, which long ago figured out people would have to buy it's gas no matter what. Amazon has lots of competitors who would just love to get a chance, and geography no longer matters.
2.) Sales taxes are regressive, and ought be limited to luxury items (yachts, sports equipment, fast cars, etc.) not consumer necessities.
3.) I am therefore quite Ok with the idea of exempting Mom & Pop businesses based on gross receipts or operating revenue numbers or the like.
4.) However, nobody is forcing Mom & Pop to do business in any state they don't want to, so nobody is compelling them to deal with any state tax laws they don't want to, so that is a spurious argument, they are not compelled either, and the internet remains quite useful to them anyway. It is perfectly possible to be on the internet and only do local business, and many people do exactly that.
5.) And then there is EBay.
6.) There are, as you point out so well, a variety of messy state-to-state issues here too, which combined with the various interstate commerce provisions of the Constitution constitute a can of worms of large dimension, but not really much to do with Amazon. I've done multi-state income tax returns and they are a trackless waste when it comes to figuring out what to do, you take a stab and pray, or rely on custom.
Tunkamerica
(4,444 posts)I bet a lot of small shops in other lines of business do the same. What percentage will be left after all this is done?
bemildred
(90,061 posts)The purpose of tax policy is not to encourage businesses with bad business plans, or to stifle competition and the consequent weeding out of the unfit.
Steerpike
(2,692 posts)but i believe states have to supply free software and provide their own means for tax collection to businesses. plus this only applies to businesses that do over 1 million a year in that state.
Tunkamerica
(4,444 posts)It eases my mind a lot.
graham4anything
(11,464 posts)
Cal Carpenter
(4,959 posts)They'll just spend even less than they already do on wages, benefits, and conditions for their warehouse workers.
tridim
(45,358 posts)
Newest Reality
(12,712 posts)Regressive taxes!
Shhh. Those aren't really new taxes, they are just taxes that were not being collected, right? -- Richie Rich
earthside
(6,960 posts)How Democrats, liberals and progressives can be in favor or raising the one tax that hurts most the poor, middle class and senior citizens on fixed incomes the most is beyond me.
We should be against all sales taxes.
This internet tax is not going to help your local businesses, it will just continue to erode the purchasing power of regular, ordinary economically stressed Americans.
I would like to see sales taxes banned in this country.
And ... I like Amazon.
Sorry, but I can get items on Amazon that I simply cannot find at a reasonable price anywhere else. The comparison to Walmart is not analogous ... Amazon does not foul my neighborhood with increased traffic, it does not take subsidies from my municipal taxes, it does not drive out of business my Safeway, haircutter, nail spa, oil lube service, etc.
Newest Reality
(12,712 posts)Glad you understand. Be sure to keep on expressing it.
jberryhill
(62,444 posts)I'm sorry but it didn't used to be so common to see a UPS truck in a residential area as it is now.
How, pray tell, are your purchases getting to you?
earthside
(6,960 posts)And their trucks buy diesel/gasoline and pay a hefty tax on those purchases that goes into the federal and state transportation fund.
They also have to register and license their trucks and they pay taxes and fees for that privilege, most of which goes to maintaining streets and highways.
Amazon (and other shippers) are also paying UPS -- and most often to me, the United States Postal Service -- to deliver my orders.
So, what is your point?
bushisanidiot
(8,064 posts)I would still rather shop brick and mortar than online.
Igel
(35,300 posts)I buy very little new at local bookstores. Usually used books.
Otherwise there's very little at local bookstores I want to buy.
There are textbooks. But the textbook I got for $40 costs $130 locally.
Same with sheetmusic. I can go to a brick-and-mortar store, see that they have a crappy selection, special order something and wait ... and wait. Or I can go to a megasite that *is* brick and mortar (just not within 1000 miles of me) and get it shipped next day, if they have it; or order through a place that does special orders on a continuing basis, and get it about 8 days later.
Or plants. I like buying "local." Except that I still think of myself as living in Oregon and like to patronize Oregonian nurseries for things more exotic than marigolds. Like aronias or jujubes or even fuki.
Or seeds. Locally they have okra and kale. Online I get choho and mitsuba.
Heck, there have been times when I've ordered from non-US bookstores. amazon.fr is great. Found a nice bookstore in Tehran, and another in S. China. They have the decency of not charging VAT. With no way for them to pay local sales taxes.
For me, pretty much it's all downside with no upside. The real winners aren't the local stores but state and local treasuries. Pay 8% more for what you want, plus handling and shpping, or be content with local drek based upon what somebody who thinks s/he knows better what I want than I do decides to stock.
csziggy
(34,136 posts)I do needlework - the closest store that carries more than the basic supplies is over 40 miles away. Their selection and service is terrible, their hours are a mystery and change by the whim of the owner, so it's not worth the drive there. The other choices are the limited items that JoAnn's, Michal's and Hobby Lobby carry - and they have all been cutting back on their selections and not restocking.
On the other hand, there are numerous online stores that carry wide varieties of threads and fabrics, all the tools needed, and that provide great service. The only major downside is that the screen images of the colors may not be accurate and some of the threads simply do not show their sheen and glitter accurately.
I can order the supplies I need easily, find out immediately if they don't have them in stock and try another online source without spending time and money driving across the state looking for out of stock materials.
I'd happily go to a local store if they fit my needs. Since they do not, I am happy to pay tax and S&H with the added convenience of shopping in my sweats and saving time and gas!
Response to bushisanidiot (Reply #5)
Post removed
upaloopa
(11,417 posts)too. Go look up one of you favorite store's web page. They will most likely have interrnet sales advertising.
People who make extra money selling on ebay will have to file sales tax returns and pay to states withheld taxes and sales tax law is very tricky because of the different rates in various localities.
William Seger
(10,778 posts)You can order online from stores like BestBuy, but they will charge you sales tax if they have stores in your state.
RebelOne
(30,947 posts)I just go to their store, which is about 5 miles from me. I may pay sales tax, but there are so shipping charges.
William Seger
(10,778 posts)The point was that, yes, your local stores can sell on the internet, too, but they are supposed to charge sales tax to anyone in a state where they have a store, so they are still not competitive with sites like Amazon which don't have any local stores.
rhett o rick
(55,981 posts)to rationalize it. Amazon is the Walmart of the internetz.
Ash_F
(5,861 posts)
valerief
(53,235 posts)
SoapBox
(18,791 posts)AAO
(3,300 posts)But it will never happen because neither side of the isle wants to increase the cap. It will effect the amount THEY would have to pay in to SS-like they need it.
Nihil
(13,508 posts)valerief
(53,235 posts)
Auggie
(31,167 posts)byeya
(2,842 posts)
liberalmuse
(18,672 posts)This is bullshit. Corporations win again.
Occulus
(20,599 posts)Using Valve Software's Steam as an example, I can go into a brick-and-mortar store and buy a DVD copy of a game, and pay the full retail price plus tax. I then have a DVD (which by the way can be scratched and rendered forever unusable).
I go to steam and buy the game for the exact same price (said prices set by the publisher/creator), and then at the end of the year I get to go through all my purchases on Steam to calculate and report the state sales tax. Each one, individually, by hand.
That's somewhat less than fun. For this example, the Act in question would save me some time and effort, and I really doubt prices will rise at all as a result, or that any game stores will go out of business or face any particular hardship because of it. I don't buy games online to avoid paying the tax, but for other reasons more important to me than who calculates what I owe in tax.
jeff47
(26,549 posts)Remember, it's not just states that assess sales taxes. Counties, cities and a whole host of other entities do too.
Corporations like Amazon can easily handle that.
"Mom & pop" shops can not. They will have to hire corporations to handle it for them.
Hayabusa
(2,135 posts)based on what street you're shopping on. Yeah, it can lead to a lot of headaches.
msongs
(67,405 posts)
russspeakeasy
(6,539 posts)
Response to Purveyor (Original post)
guyton This message was self-deleted by its author.
Nye Bevan
(25,406 posts)Response to Nye Bevan (Reply #16)
guyton This message was self-deleted by its author.
GETPLANING
(846 posts)I haven't bought anything from Amazon or any big box online retailer since I read it. I now stick to small ebay stores or individuals.
Purveyor
(29,876 posts)bowens43
(16,064 posts)
rocktivity
(44,576 posts)Amazon and Ebay will simply fire their affiliates, cutting into their income, which will in turn cut into the government collecting their income taxes.
rocktivity
PSPS
(13,594 posts)Actually, Amazon, Dell and other online retailers already do this for many of their sales. And it is a requirement anyway if they have a physical presence in your state. But the idea that someone purchasing something online shouldn't have to pay the sales tax they would have to if they bought it at a local store doesn't hold up. The same infrastructure is needed to deliver the goods and its maintenance is paid for through these taxes.
Also, note that this is not an income item for online retailers. The tax amount is merely collected by them and then remitted to the purchaser's state/city. And people selling things through eBay won't have to do anything extra either, as eBay (and others of their ilk) already have calculation/remittance built in to their system.
Granted, sales taxes are regressive in nature. But carving out an exception for online retailers isn't the way to address that problem.
AtheistCrusader
(33,982 posts)Instead of taxing on the internet, remove the disparity in the other direction.
Paulie
(8,462 posts)Else the rich will still get away from paying the tax. Oh and remove the luxury of writing off loses against gains. All is about as likely as hens teeth. 
ode2joi
(26 posts)You have an excellent grasp of what is the crux of the problem that is the tax code/structure in this country.
PSPS
(13,594 posts)bowens43
(16,064 posts)Makes no sense. Just another way for the rich to screw the poor but thats what dems and cons live to do.....
Response to bowens43 (Reply #56)
bowens43 This message was self-deleted by its author.
PSPS
(13,594 posts)I assume you live in NC. So, you want all the services that are funded by taxes, but you don't want to pay any taxes.
AAO
(3,300 posts)bowens43
(16,064 posts)AAO
(3,300 posts)But most everyone I know likes the convenience, and not being harassed by salespeople.
vi5
(13,305 posts)I always prefer to buy brick and mortar. Especially for books, music equipment, home stuff. Pretty much anything I can.
But admittedly I'm a lazy SOB a lot of the time and it's just easier to order it and have it shipped if I don't need or want it in a particular amount of time.
AAO
(3,300 posts)
vi5
(13,305 posts)then I am a saint.
AAO
(3,300 posts)And I qualify as a saint as well!
A Little Weird
(1,754 posts)We've had to pay Amazon sales tax in KY for ages because they have a warehouse here. I still buy tons of stuff from them because it's so convenient and much of it is for stuff I can't find locally.
And I don't know if it's true in all states, but here you are supposed to pay tax on stuff you buy online anyway. The trouble is you have to keep track of it yourself and then report it on your taxes at the end of the year. No one does it - it's not practical and there's no one enforcing it.
I would rather see some kind of financial transaction tax that would have a greater impact on the wealthy, but I don't see the big deal.
forestpath
(3,102 posts)
BrotherIvan
(9,126 posts)Figuring our state tax is bad enough. But having to report through all 50 states, we'll have to close. If they could get ONE big corporation to pay their taxes it would generate more than they hope to gain by this.
forestpath
(3,102 posts)ErikJ
(6,335 posts)These Amazons and Ebay pukes etc have put millions of Mom and Pops out of business leaving behind boarded up blighted main streets worse than what Walmart does! Its a CRIME! Tax them 20% sales tax at least. Use that money to help the bricks and mortars survive!
bowens43
(16,064 posts)ErikJ
(6,335 posts)Cant wait for every main street in your city boarded up eh?
jeff47
(26,549 posts)And they can do so much, much easier than opening a store.
Hayabusa
(2,135 posts)Were three model tanks from a game store in Michigan. Not a large game store, but one that was closing their physical location and going into online-only sales. So, why should I have had to pay 20% (which is an absolutely ridiculous amount) when I am buying from an independent store?
Lurks Often
(5,455 posts)people aren't shopping online just because of sales tax. They are shopping online because it is easier, the selection is better, the prices are often much better and in 3-10 days a nice man in a brown or blue uniform knocks on the door and gives you a package. No driving around to multiple stores hoping that they have what you are looking for, no using up your gas and no dealing with crowds, especially around the holidays.
secondvariety
(1,245 posts)The lack of a sales tax has no effect on what I choose to purchase online (which isn't much, actually). It has more to do with availability.
dixiegrrrrl
(60,010 posts)online shopping saves on time, gas, it would take for me to drive 90 miles one way to a store.
tammywammy
(26,582 posts)
florida08
(4,106 posts)Many Walmart's do not return sales tax on a refund or they just don't pay it to the state
http://reclaimdemocracy.org/walmart_state_tax_dodge_rent/
I still won't shop at the place. Maybe the tax I pay to Amazon will actually get to my town.
Turn CO Blue
(4,221 posts)I am an eBay seller. Go look at many items on eBay, and there will be a dozen or five dozen Chinese warehouses selling it much cheaper, often with free shipping (if it's small or lightweight) and they won't have to collect local or state sales tax either.
This seems like bullshit to me-- another way for online retailers to lose out to the China behemoth.
Redfairen
(1,276 posts)We're talking about a federal law which would enforce state laws. State and local taxes do not fall within the scope of federal powers. I've never been one to yell "states rights" but I don't see where the federal government gets the authority to declare which businesses are subject to state taxes. Each state has the authority to do it on its own. Let them do it if they will. I don't see a workable alternative under our constitutional system.
dixiegrrrrl
(60,010 posts)Right now, I can go to Fla. a few miles away and buy tax free groceries.
But if I sit at home and order something from Fla. online, I have to pay tax on it????
BS on that.
I will make it a POINT now to go shopping in Pensacola, just as folks in Wash. state go shopping in Oregon or Idaho to avoid extra taxes.
That means my home state, county and city, which charge a total of 9.5% sales tax, loses big time.
Art_from_Ark
(27,247 posts)when interstate commerce is involved.
http://legal-dictionary.thefreedictionary.com/Commerce+Clause
Xithras
(16,191 posts)First, it only applies to businesses that do more than a million dollars a year in online sales.
Second, it prohibits states from levying any special taxes for the Internet. They can only apply the same sales tax rates that are applied to brick and mortar stores in the same jurisdictions. It prohibits higher rates, and prohibits any additional taxes from being files.
Third, it requires the states to develop and offer, at no charge, automated online services that will allow retailers to calculate the amount of local tax owed. The website backend submits the buyers address and the total, and the state has to return the monetary value for the amount of tax to be collected. This eliminates the largest current hurdle with taxation, which is calculating the correct tax rates for the thousands of different taxing jurisdictions that exist in the country. If a state wants to collect sales taxes online, they have to straighten that out.
Finally, it removes the current requirement that many states have, which mandates that any business paying taxes submit complete a full tax return in that state. Instead, they will merely have to submit their collected taxes. Business owners won't have to deal with getting tax ID numbers and navigating the (often radically) different taxing systems used by various states.
dixiegrrrrl
(60,010 posts)So my state will now have a record of every single online transaction I make, my name,address and item bought.
sounds like.
Xithras
(16,191 posts)First, if it's recorded at all, it wouldn't include the items. They would submit ONLY the total.
Second, there would be little value in the state keeping the data. Depending on who's doing the numbers, between 50% and 75% of all online shopping carts are abandoned before the transaction is complete. Any decent shopping cart is going to show you a running total while you're shopping, so the vast majority of tax inquiries will be for transactions that were never finished.
The data would be of little value to the government. They would only know that "Someone at 123 Elm Street looked at $32.50 worth of stuff at Amazon". They wouldn't know what the "stuff" was, or whether you actually bought anything.
dixiegrrrrl
(60,010 posts)Now you are saying "nope"?
and why should the gov. know that ""Someone at 123 Elm Street looked at $32.50 worth of stuff at Amazon".
if they do not know that the items were bought?
What value would knowing someone "looked at items" have for the govern?
Xithras
(16,191 posts)There's a big difference between the government knowing that you bought three books on Islam last week, and the government knowing that you were looking at $42 worth of unknown stuff on Amazon.
Besides, it's largely a moot point anyway. We're talking about a web service (a backend XML exchange), and web services are typically unmonitored. While it's technically possible for the government to monitor all queries against its web services, doing so would require vast amounts of storage and provide virtually nothing of value to them. This is the stuff of tinfoilhatters.
matt819
(10,749 posts)And it's going to add untold costs to small businesses as they navigate sales taxes in 50 states. And, look at it from the flip side, it removes a competitive advantage that small online retailers have over brick and mortar.
Maybe this isn't the greatest analogy, but the argument about the toilet seat is always framed from the woman's perspective. Female partner: (Dammit) Honey, why can't you manage to put the (frigging) toilet seat down. You know, there's another way to look at that problem: Male partner: (Dammit) Sweetums, why can't you manage to put the (damn) toilet seat back up.
So, yeah, there are two ways to look at the internet sales tax. And all this just to capture the sales taxes from Amazon and others like it. And the rest of us will be lost in the shuffle.
Gormy Cuss
(30,884 posts)They're regressive as hell.
just1voice
(1,362 posts)Shopping in most "brick and mortar" stores is a rude experience with over-priced items if they are in stock, ill-fitting clothes, poorly made imported slave labor items, parking 100s of yards away, the time, traffic and gas to get there and massively over-sized stores that are more like warehouses.
Small, local businesses are great, as is local produce but most big stores are nothing but a huge waste of time.
bowens43
(16,064 posts)Obama has been a complete fucking disaster from day one
bowens43
(16,064 posts)morons...everyone of them
Response to Purveyor (Original post)
Post removed
blkmusclmachine
(16,149 posts)Que Teabagistan in 3 - 2 - 1 ...
Zorro
(15,740 posts)State and local governments need revenue sources to function effectively.
Sunlei
(22,651 posts)
Harmony Blue
(3,978 posts)get with the times yo haha. Epic fail and frankly they seem so out of touch with the general public. How sad is that the WH has lost its way?
truebrit71
(20,805 posts)..in the WH, because i am tired of the current occupant representing the corporate rich..
quadrature
(2,049 posts)F the Senate
alp227
(32,020 posts)Article notes opposition from Heritage Foundation.
I had also gotten a mass email from the CEO of eBay who wrote in opposition. Excerpts:
The solution is simple: if Congress passes online sales tax legislation, we believe small businesses with less than 50 employees or less than $10 million in annual out-of-state sales should be exempt from the burden of collecting sales taxes nationwide. To put that in perspective, Amazon does more than $10 million in sales every 90 minutes. So we believe this is a reasonable exemption to protect small online businesses. That's what we're fighting for, and what big companies such as Amazon are fighting against.
[link: http://www.senate.gov/legislative/LIS/roll_call_lists/roll_call_vote_cfm.cfm?congress=113&session=1&vote=00107|The roll call vote]:
26 Republicans voted Yea:
Alexander (R-TN)
Barrasso (R-WY)
Blunt (R-MO)
Boozman (R-AR)
Burr (R-NC)
Chambliss (R-GA)
Coats (R-IN)
Cochran (R-MS)
Collins (R-ME) (a moderate who also voted for the stimulus)
Corker (R-TN)
Crapo (R-ID) (although a Mormon he was recently arrested for DUI!)
Enzi (R-WY) (sponsor)
Fischer (R-NE)
Flake (R-AZ)
Graham (R-SC)
Hoeven (R-ND)
Isakson (R-GA)
Johanns (R-NE)
McCain (R-AZ) (still grumpy about 2008, Johnny Boy?)
Moran (R-KS)
Portman (R-OH) (the first active Republican senator to back marriage equality)
Risch (R-ID)
Sessions (R-AL)
Shelby (R-AL)
Thune (R-SD)
Wicker (R-MS)
vs 17 Republicans NAY:
Ayotte (R-NH)
Coburn (R-OK)
Cornyn (R-TX)
Cruz (R-TX)
Grassley (R-IA)
Hatch (R-UT)
Heller (R-NV)
Inhofe (R-OK)
Kirk (R-IL)
Lee (R-UT)
McConnell (R-KY) (Senate R leader)
Paul (R-KY)
Roberts (R-KS)
Rubio (R-FL)
Scott (R-SC)
Toomey (R-PA)
Vitter (R-LA)
The 3 Democrats who voted nay:
Baucus (D-MT)
Tester (D-MT)
Wyden (D-OR)
Let me play armchair pundit and guess why each senator voted:
- Wal-mart is based in Arkansas, which is probably why both Arkansas senators Mark Pryor (D...INO?) and John Boozman (R) voted for the bill. According to OpenSecrets.org, Wal-Mart is Boozman's top campaign contributor for the 2007-2012 era ($56,150 total= $44,150 individual employees+$12,000 PACs). The Wal Mart PAC donated $1,000 to Pryor in 2006 and $5,000 in 2012. In 2005, Progress.org accused Boozman (then a member of the House) of adding "an amendment to the highway bill to exempt retailers, such as Wal-Mart, from federal truck driving rules."
- Amazon.com, another backer of this sales tax legislation, is based in Seattle, WA. Both Washington's senators voted Yea.
--Patty Murray (D) has gotten $61,200 from amazon.com in her entire career in the senate;
--Maria Cantwell (D): $57,500
-However, Amazon.com also owns warehouses nationwide, including in the Las Vegas area (my personal knowledge based on experience ordering books from Amazon.com); both NV Sens. Reid (D) and Heller (R) voted against this bill. In 2010, Amazon donated $5k to Reid's campaign and in 2012 the same amount to Heller's campaign (and also $1,000 to Heller's Democratic challenger, Las Vegas-area Rep. Shelley Berkley).
The NYT article also identifies the National Retail Federation as a backer of the sales tax bill. In 2012, the NRF donated to these senate candidates who later voted YEA on the bill:
- Barrasso ($3,500)
- Fischer ($1,000)
- Flake ($2,000)
- Gillibrand ($3,500)
- Isakson ($2,500)
- Johnson ($3,500)
- Klobuchar ($3,500)
- Manchin ($2,500)
- McCaskill ($2,500)
- Nelson ($1,000)
- Pryor ($2,500)
- Rockefeller ($2,500)
- Whitehouse ($1,000)
Hayabusa
(2,135 posts)because MO is going very strong on charging sales tax on online purchases. They have been since at least 2007, but it's never gotten anywhere. Let's hope it stays that way.
graham4anything
(11,464 posts)BTW, as rightly stated, the poorest cannot shop online because they don't have computers fast enough to use credit cards to purchase in the first place.
So as all studies have shown, it takes a higher income to start off with to shop on the net.
AND
internet shoppers are getting off cheap because they don't have to spend gas money or train/bus to get to the store
and besides, it's not fair for the mom and pop stores across America.
Anyone against Walmart should be for an internet sales tax. And it will only effect ebay/amazon dealers who make a million or more a year.
Are there any? Who makes more than a million on ebay?
(and if they do, they can afford a little tax anyhow. BTW, technology is there to make it easy to file, so the anti-s soundbytes about things would not apply.
sofa king
(10,857 posts)Think for just one moment how much larger the enforcement and CID wings of the IRS would have to grow just to enforce minimal participation. Think of the costs of implementing, recording, reporting, auditing, and defending, brought down upon every American business that has something you can buy online.
Then remember that Internet-only businesses can "relocate" to an overseas server in a matter of seconds, and that the kids who run those businesses are far more adept than the agencies chasing them, and that any criminal who does find a way to evade taxes instantly gains a price-point advantage over those who just lost money trying to play by the rules.
Also keep in mind that the Internet was invented so that any single physical place within the network could be easily and permanently avoided. So if any "place" attempts to assert too much authority over it, it can and will simply be cut out just as if it were obliterated by a nuke (the original reason for the Internet's design).
Think of how incredibly fucking rich I could get by setting up a FedEx-type operation on the US-Canadian border that flies domestically produced packages in, puts them on a treadmill that rolls them into Canada, sends a signal to complete the domestic transaction in Canada, applies a foreign shipping label, and then rolls them back into the US, tax free. I'd have to buy some Senators (and Canadian MPs) to keep it duty-free, but a Kickstarter campaign could probably finance that.
Hell, I've changed my mind. This is a great idea!
MrSlayer
(22,143 posts)They take the money anyway.
Who knows?
CountAllVotes
(20,868 posts)Main reason is the sales tax thing. One of the places I used to buy a hell of a lot of stuff from recently sold their company to a corporation and now they charge sales tax, shipping charges, return shipping charges, etc.
It isn't worth doing any more because most of the time I have to return to at least 1/2 of what I buy online (like clothing specifically as all of the stores where I live have pretty much closed down) because it does not fit or is not as I expected it to be.
So, I pay the tax, the shipping to me, the shipping back to them, waiting for the refund to be processed and then hopefully have enough time between these incidents to pay off the credit card before it begins to accrue interest on the balance due which may be not really due but is pending posting after being returned.
So, I've about given up on it and that is a blow to the economy. I know the place I mention above now has some big problems with their sales because of who they sold their company to, the quality of the products they sell are no longer the same, they have different people working there now and no, it is not the same any longer and no, I do not buy much from them anymore because they have also raised their prices along with adding in the sales tax.
That said, this trend will also prevent many from buying on Ebay too. I try not to buy from the mega sellers if possible but it is not always so easy.
The computer I am typing on right now sold for $2,000.00 new and it is one hell of a damn good laptop being it is basically new and was in storage most of its life of 10 years. I picked it up on EBAY for $53.00 total (shipping charges included) and to my huge surprise it is new and in unused condition! What a deal it was to find but I think deals like this are a thing of the past as the profit for a seller like the person I bought this from (a single person that simply never used this A31 IBM Thinkpad probably because it weighs quite a load -- abt. 8 lbs. or more and not really something to be considered a "mobile" computer because of this) will find it not to be worth the effort (seller made less than $45.00 total on this but the ad for it was not very descriptive so it was a total gamble).
As for amazon.com, etc., never was a great fan of them after their bogus Master card offer sucked me in and no, there was no "discount" of $50.00 off of the purchase I made from them which I quickly closed out being angry and pissed. And also, amazon.com charges me sales tax! 
is this amazon.com argument all about anyway? They are collecting the taxes if I buy from them as it is I suppose part of the law in Calif. best I know.
So, I guess I'd say I was about done already and now I suppose I am indeed "done".
dipsydoodle
(42,239 posts)Prolly become like Europe where the sales base is Luxembourg and individual countries simply warehouse and distribute.
fasttense
(17,301 posts)Now you have to know every tax rate for ALL 50 states and know when and if they apply.
For example, I sell gourmet mushrooms. In the State of TN, I am exempt from sales taxes because I am a farmer selling directly to the public. But now I have to find out if as a farmer, my product is tax exempt in all the other states. Then there is the problem if I introduce non-farm product how much of that will be taxed. In TN there are specific rules based on what percentage of non-farm product sales I have. Now I will have to figure it out for evey state in the Union. Man this is going to be an accounting nightmare for a smaller producer.
It sounds like a scam to put smaller on-line businesses out of business and reduce competition for the big corporations. I bet Wal-Mart pushed for this.
alarimer
(16,245 posts)Sales tax is incredibly regressive. Often prices are better online, but not having to pay sales tax is a major reason for me to shop online. Plus how complicated is this going to be? Sales taxes are sometimes very local.
Sunlei
(22,651 posts)grow and keep prices low.
Same thing for homes, no property taxes on a homes first 100k of value.
We need to stop taxing the lower middle class so much.
So now 'used', open box and referb. won't have any taxes right? What stops all the mega online stores selling everything as open box?
Orsino
(37,428 posts)...I'd have listened to Bush's press secretaries.
booksenkatz
(3,466 posts)
d_r
(6,907 posts)well, besides sales tax being regressive, is that the tax should be applied to the bill to: address not the send to: address.
If you are in Florida and buy something delivered to a friend in Tennessee, you pay Tennessee's 10% sales tax. If you just went out and bought it and sent it to them, you'd pay Florida's sales tax. The tax should be where it is billed to, not where it is shipped to.
MindPilot
(12,693 posts)Then the playing field might start to level.
This is another example of people who don't understand technology making laws about technology.
JCMach1
(27,556 posts)... they wouldn't have to pay state sales tax...
Sunlei
(22,651 posts)
PuppyBismark
(594 posts)If you look at most state laws about sales tax, you will find that most states require payment on all purchases. Large companies must track all their purchases that are not raw materials and pay the states and local governments the amount owed on those purchases if they were not assessed by the vendor. The issue is that many states have not forced retailers from out of state to collect the tax due. All this is doing is collecting taxes due at the source and increasing state revenue which most states dearly need.
A good example of this is if you buy a car out of state, when you register it, you are assessed the sales tax.
The issue of fairness is another matter, but with the GOP in control of so many states don't look for fairness.
Doctor_J
(36,392 posts)That should tell you what you need to know about who will win and who will lose.
At least he is consistent.
Munificence
(493 posts)I say tax it at the first purchase of the product and then forget about it.
Example, Jo'SMO Crazy Legs Inc makes leg warmers some place. When those leg warmers are purchased from a distribution company the the manufacturer collects the proper sales taxes for their jurisdiction.
Currently the "end user" is taxed.
Hayabusa
(2,135 posts)it does make sense.
bitchkitty
(7,349 posts)I'm not sure how I feel about this. I don't think it "levels the playing field". I think the Internet leveled the playing field by offering many more choices to the consumer and opportunities to small business. And I don't think it's a lack of sales tax that drives people to shop online.
quadrature
(2,049 posts)and middle class
russspeakeasy
(6,539 posts)I guess the alternatives have more clout.
Doctor_J
(36,392 posts)The Dems need to prepare for a slaughter in the mid-terms. Obama is leading them into a massacre.
russspeakeasy
(6,539 posts)What deep thinkers...
Pelican
(1,156 posts)Nope.. not a one...
Rex
(65,616 posts) Alan M
(22 posts)As someone who has made a living on the Internet since 1999, I can honestly say this is simply unworkable. On a simple cost bias I can’t comply with the tax regulations of 50 different states plus thousands of local taxing authorities. The costs of doing so would far exceed any profit I made on the business. Yes, Amazon eBay and few other large corporations have the resources to do this and it will greatly benefit them as it will get rid of most of their competitors in one fell swoop. One of the great things about the Internet had been that an average person without significant capital could open a business and compete equally with the corporate giants. I guess that is no more. Now you have to have the means to comply with 50 state taxing authorities and 1000s of local taxing authorities.
If you want to have an Internet Sales tax that’s fine, but at least be smart enough to make it have a universal rate and only have one taxing authority that has be complied with.
avebury
(10,952 posts)to tax internet purchases which will impact a large majority of the 99% but they don't want to after:
1. the 1% with all of their tax breaks and out sourcing of wealth to other countries
2. the Banks and Wall Street investment companies that drove the economy into the gutter
3. the mega-corporations that managed to rake in money through the wazoo yet not pay any taxes
And they quietly are doing away with the law that would prevent politicians from being involved in insider trading.
Even if they add sales tax to internet purchases that will not drive me back to shopping locally any more then I already do. The convenience of shopping on line is that I can do it at home, it saves on the wear and tear and gas costs of my car, and a lot of time I am not charged shipping costs. Too often you go into local stores and you just can't get the customer service like you used to get. My biggest purchase online are from Itunes, Audible.com, and Kindle books from Amazon. With Audible, I buy credits at a fixed rate. If I pick out an audiobook that has a membership price greater then the per credit cost of my credit, it is cheaper to buy on line then buying the CD format of the same book.
I love it when I can find an ebook or audiobook for free download from the local library. Talk about convenience.
Congress is made up of a bunch of hypocrites.
Marthe48
(16,949 posts)And the White House is going to force Internet sellers to collect taxes? So the CIA can give more money to the likes of Karzai? Really? And be sure to tell me it is going to be state sales tax collected, and it'll go to prop up the states...yeah, tell me my taxes are going to improve my infrastructure, my schools, my ability to have health care.
