US Supreme Court to Review Bid to Collect Internet Sales Tax

Megalith

Megalith

24-bit/48kHz
Staff member
Joined
Aug 20, 2006
Messages
13,000
The Supreme Court initially ruled that states could not force online retailers to collect taxes unless they had a physical presence in the state (e.g., a warehouse), but that decision is being revisited. One of the major complaints is that the current law puts brick-and-mortar stores at a major disadvantage.

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 nonpartisan audit and research agency. Other estimates are even higher. All but five states impose sales taxes.
 
Amazon put a warehouse in Missouri so now I have to pay sales tax on stuff, but I have noticed it is only when things are shipped from that warehouse. Doesn't make sense. Seems like since they have a presence I would have to pay it all the time. Still more convenient than going to Walmart.
 
This is how it should be.

1. Eliminate all sales tax on the state level.
2. Gov. creates national sales tax of 8-12%
3. Distribute fed sales tax to stale level and from state level down to counties and cities.


This way when somebody purchases something online then the whole nation will benefit from people purchasing things online.

Same goes with income tax.
1. Tax everybody that same rate. 20-25%
2. No IRS, No Returns.
3. Just pay your taxes and dont have to file every year.
4. Also no need for tax accounting as you just pay and be done with it.
 
taxes or not it doesn't change how often i shop on amazon so i don't see how this really benefits B&M stores.. being able to buy stuff from my computer chair or cell phone and not having to drive anywhere is still a hell of a lot easier.

canmanone said:
This is how it should be.

1. Eliminate all sales tax on the state level.
2. Gov. creates national sales tax of 8-12%
3. Distribute fed sales tax to stale level and from state level down to counties and cities.


This way when somebody purchases something online then the whole nation will benefit from people purchasing things online.

Same goes with income tax.
1. Tax everybody that same rate. 20-25%
2. No IRS, No Returns.
3. Just pay your taxes and dont have to file every year.
Click to expand...

would never work since every state has different tax requirements to fund different state/county/city grants meaning different areas of states can have different sales tax percentages. giving the federal government to much control of how money is spent at the state level would be a massive mistake. VAT tax would never work in the US.
 
Last edited:
canmanone said:
This is how it should be.

1. Eliminate all sales tax on the state level.
2. Gov. creates national sales tax of 8-12%
3. Distribute fed sales tax to stale level and from state level down to counties and cities.


This way when somebody purchases something online then the whole nation will benefit from people purchasing things online.

Same goes with income tax.
1. Tax everybody that same rate. 20-25%
2. No IRS, No Returns.
3. Just pay your taxes and dont have to file every year.
4. Also no need for tax accounting as you just pay and be done with it.
Click to expand...

But, but, but....you're unfairly hurting the poor... (stupid liberals...Trix are for kids).
 
Wouldn't this backfire though and make amazon more prominent because Amazon could put their wear houses in Oregon or other states that do not charge sales tax? Also Amazon third party vendors may move to Oregon and sell goods from their and look more attractive since you do not have to pay sales tax? Am I wrong?
 
Real solution is for Congress to quit sitting on their brains long enough for some blood to flow and pass corrective legislation. Please, no one hold breath waiting for this to happen, the death toll would be staggering. I think the whole Internet Commerce thing is well beyond needing special treatment.
 
Internet sales is just the evolution of mail order. If mail order had to pay local taxes, then any advantage in price would have went out the door with shipping costs in comparison to brick and mortar stores.

Again this just comes down to states wanting more tax money. I doni't see why the supreme court needs to decide if states get to tax across their jurisdiction. This has already been decided a long time ago.
 
Devastadus said:
Wouldn't this backfire though and make amazon more prominent because Amazon could put their wear houses in Oregon or other states that do not charge sales tax? Also Amazon third party vendors may move to Oregon and sell goods from their and look more attractive since you do not have to pay sales tax? Am I wrong?
Click to expand...

would only benefit those in oregon since the sales tax is determined by the shipping address(not billing address) and in some states by the county the warehouses are located.. for example buying from amazon here in washington we pay seattle taxes at 9.6% instead of the state tax which is 6.5% no matter where the package comes from, the county i live in sale's tax is 9%. but that doesn't change the fact that i'll buy from amazon before i waste my time buying locally unless there is a sale that makes driving there worth it.
 
Gigus Fire said:
Internet sales is just the evolution of mail order. If mail order had to pay local taxes, then any advantage in price would have went out the door with shipping costs in comparison to brick and mortar stores.

Again this just comes down to states wanting more tax money. I doni't see why the supreme court needs to decide if states get to tax across their jurisdiction. This has already been decided a long time ago.
Click to expand...

States wanting tax money that they are entitled to. I hate taxes, and I will figure out a way to pay as little as possible, but technically, people just don't pay sales/use taxes on things that they "should" be paying for.
 
kirbyrj said:
But, but, but....you're unfairly hurting the poor... (stupid liberals...Trix are for kids).
Click to expand...

Fuck the poor im not rich by any means. Wife and I combine make 60k a year. And I dont like it when liberals says "the rich are getting a tax break. Well dont everybody deserve a tax break whether poor or rich.
 
kirbyrj said:
States wanting tax money that they are entitled to. I hate taxes, and I will figure out a way to pay as little as possible, but technically, people just don't pay sales/use taxes on things that they "should" be paying for.
Click to expand...
Why are they entitled to it?
 
canmanone said:
Fuck the poor im not rich by any means. Wife and I combine make 60k a year. And I dont like it when liberals says "the rich are getting a tax break. Well dont everybody deserve a tax break whether poor or rich.
Click to expand...

My point is that a national sales tax in the place of regular income tax means that poor people actually have to pay taxes and liberals don't like that. I've always said that rich people buy more stuff and will pay more taxes, but my liberal friends want no part of hearing that.
 
Gigus Fire said:
Why are they entitled to it?
Click to expand...

Because many states have laws for use tax collection for items that haven't been already paid for by sales tax. By NOT paying it you are breaking the law. There is actually a question like that in TurboTax. Something like, "Did you buy anything on the internet you didn't pay sales tax for?"
 
kirbyrj said:
My point is that a national sales tax in the place of regular income tax means that poor people actually have to pay taxes and liberals don't like that. I've always said that rich people buy more stuff and will pay more taxes, but my liberal friends want no part of hearing that.
Click to expand...
Liberal just want everyone to be poor. Easier to control when the people relies on the government for everything in their lives.
 
kirbyrj said:
Because many states have laws for use tax collection for items that haven't been already paid for by sales tax. By NOT paying it you are breaking the law.
Click to expand...
Whatever it is, it's a lot less than sales tax. It's a line item on your local return stating that if you purchased more than 1000$ worth of goods you need to pay a certain amount.

Here's the problem. If i go into another state and make purchases, i pay local sales tax. It goes to the local government there. If i carry it across state borders i don't pay any taxes on the item i bought (except in rare cases for like cars).

If this goes through and i place an internet order, my local government wants the store that sold me the item to pay them. Currently if they don't have a presence in the state they get nothing because there's no way i could have even gone to a local store.

That makes sense to me. However if this passes through my local government (the shipped to address) will want sales tax. If that's the case, the other state which the purchase originated from will start complaining they want that tax. That's the problem it'll open up.

Overall it's bad for the consumer, bad for the tax payer and bad for the economy. Most online stores (which there are a lot of now) especially the smaller ones will be the ones that are hurt the most. Big companies like Amazon who already saw the writing on the wall years ago will still be doing great.
 
That's what the Supreme Court is for, making laws that congress won't make. Can they institute a simple flat tax while they are at it? Would that mean that the previous ruling was un-Constitutional?
 
I've been paying sales tax from Amazon for years. Nothing new to me. I guess my rare Newegg purchases would currently cause me to report these to my home state - I don't think I am charged sales tax right now. (But, I rarely think of Newegg anymore - used to spend thousands a year with them and Amazon showed up with (usually) lower prices and much better shipping options.)
 
Gigus Fire said:
Whatever it is, it's a lot less than sales tax. It's a line item on your local return stating that if you purchased more than 1000$ worth of goods you need to pay a certain amount.

Here's the problem. If i go into another state and make purchases, i pay local sales tax. It goes to the local government there. If i carry it across state borders i don't pay any taxes on the item i bought (except in rare cases for like cars).

If this goes through and i place an internet order, my local government wants the store that sold me the item to pay them. Currently if they don't have a presence in the state they get nothing because there's no way i could have even gone to a local store.

That makes sense to me. However if this passes through my local government (the shipped to address) will want sales tax. If that's the case, the other state which the purchase originated from will start complaining they want that tax. That's the problem it'll open up.

Overall it's bad for the consumer, bad for the tax payer and bad for the economy. Most online stores (which there are a lot of now) especially the smaller ones will be the ones that are hurt the most. Big companies like Amazon who already saw the writing on the wall years ago will still be doing great.
Click to expand...

Technically, you aren't supposed to pay the sales tax in the other state. You could actually apply and get a refund, but it's not convenient so it is rarely done. Cars are actually an example of how things are supposed to work. You only pay taxes when you register the car to "use" it in the state you reside.
 
kirbyrj said:
My point is that a national sales tax in the place of regular income tax means that poor people actually have to pay taxes and liberals don't like that. I've always said that rich people buy more stuff and will pay more taxes, but my liberal friends want no part of hearing that.
Click to expand...


I agree with your statement. I dont like liberals that blames the poor's situation that they are in on rich people. Rich people worked hard for that wealth and they deserve whatever pay they think their worth. And also fuck Nancy Pelosi.
 
SecretStash said:
That's what the Supreme Court is for, making laws that congress won't make. Can they institute a simple flat tax while they are at it? Would that mean that the previous ruling was un-Constitutional?
Click to expand...


The SCOTUS is NOT for making laws. They are a court of interpretation, not law makers. Please revisit your history book before commenting further
 
kirbyrj said:
It's not really irrelevant when it boils down to selectively enforcing the law.
Click to expand...

This isnt selective enforcement of the law. Buying something over the internet from a store where it has no physical present in your state is INTERSTATE commerce. Something the states have no power to regulate.

This is about YOU not paying the tax to your home state when you buy something online from such a store. Because you know you ARE legally required to do so right? Unless of course you live in one of the few states that dont collect sales tax.
 
kirbyrj said:
Technically, you aren't supposed to pay the sales tax in the other state. You could actually apply and get a refund, but it's not convenient so it is rarely done. Cars are actually an example of how things are supposed to work. You only pay taxes when you register the car to "use" it in the state you reside.
Click to expand...
Actually it depends if the state is a origin or destination sales tax area. https://blog.taxjar.com/charging-sales-tax-rates/
 
canmanone said:
I agree with your statement. I dont like liberals that blames the poor's situation that they are in on rich people. Rich people worked hard for that wealth and they deserve whatever pay they think their worth. And also fuck Nancy Pelosi.
Click to expand...
They also took all the risks to get where they are and most likely created jobs along the way.
 
canmanone said:
This is how it should be.

1. Eliminate all sales tax on the state level.
2. Gov. creates national sales tax of 8-12%
3. Distribute fed sales tax to stale level and from state level down to counties and cities.


This way when somebody purchases something online then the whole nation will benefit from people purchasing things online.

Same goes with income tax.
1. Tax everybody that same rate. 20-25%
2. No IRS, No Returns.
3. Just pay your taxes and dont have to file every year.
4. Also no need for tax accounting as you just pay and be done with it.
Click to expand...

I dunno if a straight national sales tax of 8-12% in place of all state/county/municipal sales taxes would work.

I live not too far outside of Birmingham, and the sales tax rate in the city is 10%: 4% AL, 1% Jefferson County, 5% City of B'ham; sales tax is also levied on groceries across the state and additionally fast food in some municipalities.

I think sales tax is the largest revenue generator in this state.

You have that, and all the other taxes paid, yet the state government acts as though the state is going broke.

A national sales tax would probably have to be closer to 20-25% to satisfy budgets.
 
JMccovery said:
I dunno if a straight national sales tax of 8-12% in place of all state/county/municipal sales taxes would work.

I live not too far outside of Birmingham, and the sales tax rate in the city is 10%: 4% AL, 1% Jefferson County, 5% City of B'ham; sales tax is

also levied on groceries across the state and additionally fast food in some municipalities.

I think sales tax is the largest revenue generator in this state.

You have that, and all the other taxes paid, yet the state government acts as though the state is going broke.

A national sales tax would probably have to be closer to 20-25% to satisfy budgets.
Click to expand...



On that 8-12 was my guess im not an expert. So you really think it should be that high for a national sales tax? How about a national stales tax and state can add 2-3% on top of the fed sales tax. Would that work?


Also how do you feel about eliminating deductions? I feel that fed gov should just do away with deductions and we just pay income tax and not have to file every year. I hate fiiling. This way it would eliminate loop holes.
 
canmanone said:
On that 8-12 was my guess im not an expert. So you really think it should be that high for a national sales tax? How about a national stales tax and state can add 2-3% on top of the fed sales tax. Would that work?
Click to expand...

I don't think it should be that high, but I have a feeling that if such thing took place, it probably will be that high, or close to it.

An additional 2-3% state sales tax on top of a national one might work, but it does depend on what the sales tax is levied on.

Taxing food sucks to high heaven, but when it comes to financing government through taxes, the more tax sources, the better, I guess.
 
Usually there is no taxes on groceries unless it is prepared food. So none on raw ground beef, but on a package of precooked patties, you do pay sales tax.
 
mynamehere said:
They also took all the risks to get where they are and most likely created jobs along the way.
Click to expand...

Still doesn't make them entitled to a limitless portion money. Liberals aren't against wealth, just absurdly ridiculous wealth at the expense of the rest of the nation not being able to afford a living.

This is supposed to be capitalism, not corporate drive to a monopolistic monarchy. The US is becoming a game show called "Win Your Own Country!"
 
canmanone said:
Fuck the poor im not rich by any means. Wife and I combine make 60k a year. And I dont like it when liberals says "the rich are getting a tax break. Well dont everybody deserve a tax break whether poor or rich.
Click to expand...

At the expense of everyone else and creating an estimated TRILLION DOLLARS in debt?

The problem with both the tax cuts and current tax law is that the rich don't pair their fair share. There are so many loop holes in tax law that people with money are able to take advantage of that it puts the tax burden more on the lower and middle classes. I don't blame people for taking advantage of loop holes, they exist and people are well within their rights to use them. However, I think the government needs to get rid of them or rework the system so that the burden is not unfairly distributed.
 
alxlwson said:
Usually there is no taxes on groceries unless it is prepared food. So none on raw ground beef, but on a package of precooked patties, you do pay sales tax.
Click to expand...

I wish that was the case in states like Alabama and Mississippi, but it ain't.

In fact a lot of municipalities in Alabama didn't charge any sales tax on fast food, it was just the state 4% + an extra 1% for "dine-in convenience".
 
Sales tax is theft. Theft is wrong. Eliminate sales tax.

If you want to give all your money away to social programs go ahead, but why should these liberals have the right to piss away my money?
 
Devastadus said:
Wouldn't this backfire though and make amazon more prominent because Amazon could put their wear houses in Oregon or other states that do not charge sales tax? Also Amazon third party vendors may move to Oregon and sell goods from their and look more attractive since you do not have to pay sales tax? Am I wrong?
Click to expand...
CA has been collecting sales tax from Amazon for years, they are building more warehouses in this state not moving them. So no they don't seem worried about this, speed of delivery is what they worry about.
 
Dman014 said:
Sales tax is theft. Theft is wrong. Eliminate sales tax.

If you want to give all your money away to social programs go ahead, but why should these liberals have the right to piss away my money?
Click to expand...

You do realize that in most states sales tax is used to pay for everything, right? Also, social programs are a good thing. They're not always run well, but a country that isn't willing to help its own people is a fucking shithole of a country.
 
This has repercussions for my origin state of Pennsylvania, which as a way of meeting budget requirements started charging tax for online sales (Newegg being the first storefront I noticed). Of course both political parties (Democratic Governor, Republican State House/Senate) pointed fingers at the other one for the blame. Essentially the governor preferred to tax corporations especially in the energy industry and previous Democrat governors (Rendell) went so far as to legalize gambling where the proceeds mysteriously only went to the two main city counties (Pittsburgh and Philadelphia, largest regions of Democrat voters in the state). On the other hand, the Republican state government preferred to find other means, most recently through online sales taxation.

Personally I'm against that but it underlines a bigger issue that comes from state funds mismanagement which has been mishandled by both political parties depending on the state (although I have to say Democrats in CA take the cake). Quite frankly it's a fundamental problem in the U.S. that isn't going away any time soon and of course the "buck" ends up back in the federal playground.

Of course with PA I have a background in the energy industry so I have much opprobrium for what the Democrat governors have done to that industry in the state (I've since moved away) but neither would I condone selectively overriding the federal law as stipulated here...although perhaps it should be revisited so such actions aren't required.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top