Amazon May Soon Need to Collect Sales Tax

mope54 said:
This may come as a surprise to you, but both of those things cost money to keep proper...as well as the police and firefighters that you see rolling around occasionally. Far more than the 2-3k you calculated you pay per year in taxes.
Click to expand...

No....

Private parks like zoos and theme parks provide a much better experience and it does not cost the customers far more than 2-3k per year in taxes.

The boat launch for the CA delta is privately owned and I have to pay 10 / launch or 180 per year. It also has a nice bar other park like facilities.

You people who believe there are not private sector alternatives that provide better services for less are not seeing the reality of the situation. It would NOT cost anyone 2-3k per year to use a park unless that was his or her own private park. The cost would be shared among members who use and it would be a small amount and it would be a much nicer park too.
 
Crucible1001 said:
To be fair, they would not be adding new taxes. Think 20 years ago before everyone shopped online. We all paid sales taxes in full for all our purchases. There was no way around it. Over the years the state governments have been getting less and less because of people shopping online. They simply want what they had before.
Click to expand...

No they don't this will be something new. Out of state companies have never had to manage the payment of sales taxes unless there was a physical presence in the state. And don't forget, before the internet and superstores, there were Catalogs. When you purchased from a catalog, you only got charged sales tax if there was a physical location there.

No one is saying that Local Sales taxes shouldn't be paid for goods. Being a Mass resident, any items I purchase in New Hampshire (no sales tax), I am legally responsible for reporting and paying taxes on. This is the same with internet sales. If I buy anything online I am required by law to pay the sales tax for. People don't do it, but that is not the fault of Amazon, or any New Hampshire business. They have no legal obligation, nor should they, to manage taxes of a state they have no presence in. This would be like requiring all B&M stores to collect out of state taxes from their out of state customers.

This is not about fairness, B&M or anything of the sort. This is simply states trying to get more revenue. It's just easier to fool people into supporting terrible legislation with hot button terms like "Fairness." There is nothing fair about this act.
 
griffinhart said:
Make no mistake, this isn't about "being fair" to B&M stores. This is everything to do about States trying to increase tax revenue during a tough res session where they are seeing deficits record in state budgets.
Click to expand...

Exactly. Why do they have those deficits? Because they absolutely refuse to tighten their belt like everyone else has to do with less income coming in. Local governments are joining in as well as the Fed.

I just went for a 4 mile drive to, believe it or not, pay my local taxes. I saw two speed traps set up. They are ticketing like crazy around here and I heard are passing out citations for going 1 mile over the speed limit! To add insult to injury, the city here is tearing out unused railroad tracks going through town and building a lighted walking path. A path that no one wants and probably no one will even use.

This insanity has got to be reigned in!
 
Boo Hoo. Sales tax here for online purchases (Canada) is 13-15%, save for some of the prairie provinces.
 
1 said:
Yeah...if you're calling those expensive programs a success, then you're part of the big government cult mentality (and probably like apple products too.) Every one of those either has a much more successful private counter part, or it could if the government didn't have a monopoly on money and force.
Click to expand...

I love when someone comes along clamoring for a privatized military and food and drug regulation. Even the most radical libertarians think those are dumb ideas.

Just what we need, a gang of mercenaries with a profit motive protecting our way of life...unless the stock drops and our shareholders get mad, and then we will just save on the bottom line by firing fewer bullets this year or let the Russians invade Alaska because defending it would be "cost prohibitive." :rolleyes:

The cost would be shared among members who use and it would be a small amount and it would be a much nicer park too.
Click to expand...

Hmm, replace "tax" with "cost" and "members" with "citizens," and it is pretty much the damn thing, and something tells me a privatized park would not be much nicer. I have a feeling Yosemite brought to you by Pepsi Cola and Exxon might be quite different if they have to turn a profit.
 
Vlad335 said:
Exactly. Why do they have those deficits? Because they absolutely refuse to tighten their belt like everyone else has to do with less income coming in. Local governments are joining in as well as the Fed.

I just went for a 4 mile drive to, believe it or not, pay my local taxes. I saw two speed traps set up. They are ticketing like crazy around here and I heard are passing out citations for going 1 mile over the speed limit! To add insult to injury, the city here is tearing out unused railroad tracks going through town and building a lighted walking path. A path that no one wants and probably no one will even use.

This insanity has got to be reigned in!
Click to expand...

Preaching to the chior about government spending here. What's not fair is that struggling families put serious consideration into saving pennies by getting cheaper toilot paper vs charmin to make ends meet while the USDA spends 2 million of our tax dollars on redesigning the "food pyramid" to the "USDA Dinner Plate."
 
Fuck more taxes we pay to much how it is I love how the gov think hey we need $ lest add more taxes and we the pepole of the usa vote the fuckers back in year after year. We the pepole need to tell them the hell whit it do what every one else does live whit in your means
 
griffinhart said:
Preaching to the chior about government spending here. What's not fair is that struggling families put serious consideration into saving pennies by getting cheaper toilot paper vs charmin to make ends meet while the USDA spends 2 million of our tax dollars on redesigning the "food pyramid" to the "USDA Dinner Plate."
Click to expand...

Plus a 73% increase in armored government limos for the ruling class.
 
LurkerLito said:
Doesn't matter to me they already tax me for Amazon Purchases.
Click to expand...

That's nice. Only problem is they aren't going to make the law say - 'Only Amazon has to collect sales tax over the internet.' It's going to include stores you DO buy at online that don't include sales tax already if you actually buy things online.
 
One way or another you pay taxes. Whether those taxes go to a government or to a business in the end you still end up paying for everything. Your state skimps on taxes they have to skimp on services as well. Say roads are one of those things they skimp on, so now you have to pay more into maintaining your vehicle because of the harsher road conditions, and "public" transit rates are higher because they then have higher maintenance costs as well.
 
Steve said:
My only problem is this:

Imagine what this will do to small businesses? This isn't just about Amazon. How many small internet businesses can afford a dedicated tax person to make sure tax is collected for all 50 states, tabulated and disbursed to each state separately. This will kill a ton of INTERNET businesses.
Click to expand...

-sarcasm on-
Yep, nobody could *ever* set up an online service that would calculate the sales tax to apply based on the shipping zip code and that would bill the business the lump sum number per month, then automatically send the payments to the correct municipalities for a small service fee, way less than *hiring a dedicated accountant*.
-sarcasm off-

Computers can do a lot these days. If there's a will there's a way.

It's actually even more complex than you think, each county and city also can tack on sales tax to each sale, so it's not just 50 states worth of sales/use tax rates, it's really hundreds, maybe even thousands of different rates. But there already are services in place to collect the correct sales tax for each municipality. A lot of national companies already do it: Dell, HP, etc. Heck, even the car dealership where I bought my car (in a different county) knew what the local tax rate was where I lived and collected the correct amount.

Sure it will be more of a burden, but not as dire as you make it out to be.

I'm on the fence about this issue... it definitely would help local businesses a bit since I think they're getting the raw end of the deal currently. But in the long run, I think that small, local businesses that don't fit in niche segments will still go away since they lack to economies of scale to beat huge online retailers. For example, newegg.com tacks on sales tax on all the items I buy from them, but I still purchase a lot of items from them that I won't from local dealers since newegg is still cheaper and has a much wider selection.
 
Steve said:
Politicians are once again making a push for sales tax on items you buy over the internet, regardless whether or not the company has a presence in that state. :(
Click to expand...
I thought this was already ruled to be contrary to the constitution. If California thinks they have the right to overrule the supreme court and circumvent congressional approval, more power to 'em. But if they think Amazon is just going to roll over and not take this all the way to the supreme court...
 
Katalysis said:
I love when someone comes along clamoring for a privatized military and food and drug regulation. Even the most radical libertarians think those are dumb ideas.

Just what we need, a gang of mercenaries with a profit motive protecting our way of life...unless the stock drops and our shareholders get mad, and then we will just save on the bottom line by firing fewer bullets this year or let the Russians invade Alaska because defending it would be "cost prohibitive." :rolleyes:
Click to expand...

I never said military nor did I give any reason for you to believe I meant that, but feel free to throw out hyperbolic bullshit to avoid a genuine argument if that helps you feel secure in your beliefs.

Hmm, replace "tax" with "cost" and "members" with "citizens," and it is pretty much the damn thing, and something tells me a privatized park would not be much nicer. I have a feeling Yosemite brought to you by Pepsi Cola and Exxon might be quite different if they have to turn a profit.
Click to expand...

It is not the same thing because a private park would be used by those who pay for it, and it would be optional to use it. How is that even remotely similar to government forcing me to use and pay for its services? Privately owned services are such that people only pay for services they actually wanted to use instead of roads to nowhere and lit sidewalks that no one cares about.

And you toss out more bullshit making absurd claims about what you imagine a private park would look like. You cannot claim that Yosemite would look like Times Square if it were private...that is utter bullshit. The delta ramp does not have much advertising except at the bar, but how is that possible you must be wondering. Park owners would have to provide an experience people wanted to pay for. A private owner would actually have more incentive to keep and maintain the natural beauty of certain parks than the government does...but I doubt you understand that.

You have not said anything of any value or provided a single counter point except to show that you don't get that a private park that you choose to pay for to use versus a government park that you pay for if you use it or not and have no choice in the matter are completely different. And you specifically said you see no difference!!!!! You DO not get it....it don't want to live in the same country or even the same world as people like you don't seem understand what is so fucking obvious to me!!!!
 
fattypants said:
I thought this was already ruled to be contrary to the constitution. If California thinks they have the right to overrule the supreme court and circumvent congressional approval, more power to 'em. But if they think Amazon is just going to roll over and not take this all the way to the supreme court...
Click to expand...

Um, you missed an important fact... California doesn't have a state "sales" tax, it's a "use" tax. Yeah, weaselly, but hey, we're dealing with lawyers, politicians and taxes, would you expect any different? Unfortunately small distinctions like this make a *huge* difference when it comes to the law. The link you provided deals with rulings on "sales" taxes.

I'm sure it will go all the way to the supreme court, though.
 
1 said:
I never said military nor did I give any reason for you to believe I meant that, but feel free to throw out hyperbolic bullshit to avoid a genuine argument if that helps you feel secure in your beliefs.



It is not the same thing because a private park would be used by those who pay for it, and it would be optional to use it. How is that even remotely similar to government forcing me to use and pay for its services? Privately owned services are such that people only pay for services they actually wanted to use instead of roads to nowhere and lit sidewalks that no one cares about.

And you toss out more bullshit making absurd claims about what you imagine a private park would look like. You cannot claim that Yosemite would look like Times Square if it were private...that is utter bullshit. The delta ramp does not have much advertising except at the bar, but how is that possible you must be wondering. Park owners would have to provide an experience people wanted to pay for. A private owner would actually have more incentive to keep and maintain the natural beauty of certain parks than the government does...but I doubt you understand that.

You have not said anything of any value or provided a single counter point except to show that you don't get that a private park that you choose to pay for to use versus a government park that you pay for if you use it or not and have no choice in the matter are completely different. And you specifically said you see no difference!!!!! You DO not get it....it don't want to live in the same country or even the same world as people like you don't seem understand what is so fucking obvious to me!!!!
Click to expand...

+1

Very well said.
 
Death to politicians....

Why on earth would I pay a fucking sales tax AND shipping. The whole point of online purchasing is to pay the small fee for shipping. Well I won't be voting for DICK next time around....
 
Whole bunch of unintended consequences in store for us if this is implemented. Any government step to inhibit a type of economic activity will not result in increased prosperity and higher revenues.

Just pounding more nails into the coffin while looking for more ways to get into our wallets.
 
3DChipset said:
Death to politicians....

Why on earth would I pay a fucking sales tax AND shipping. The whole point of online purchasing is to pay the small fee for shipping. Well I won't be voting for DICK next time around....
Click to expand...

Speaking of shipping... What is the result of this on UPS, Fedex, USPS, etc.? Less volume for them translates into more unemployment. Just what this country needs...
 
Vlad335 said:
Speaking of shipping... What is the result of this on UPS, Fedex, USPS, etc.? Less volume for them translates into more unemployment. Just what this country needs...
Click to expand...

What is the result of this on local B&M who originally lost customers to the internet? More sales for them translates into good business and expansion.
 
Catboxer said:
OLD NEWS. This bill was already signed in IL.

http://www.chicagomag.com/Chicago-M...mpanies-Cry-Foul-on-Main-Street-Fairness-Act/

I still do not pay tax as a consumer. All it did was kill IL amazon afillilates and decrease the state's income tax it would be gained from those partnerships.
Click to expand...

That's the first though that crossed my mind when I read about this bill.
Amazon WILL cut off thier afilliates, and stop doing business with warehouse/companies that ship product for them that happen to have a California presence. The end result will be no increase in sales tax, and a drop in income tax. Just shows how clueless our elected officials are.

As for the people who alway say there is no difference in the parties, this bill has completely one sided support: Democrats in support and Republicans against. The elected Democrats in California that are mostly lawers and career politicians, and the current Republican minority that are mostly small business owners.
 
Team Obi Juan said:
What is the result of this on local B&M who originally lost customers to the internet? More sales for them translates into good business and expansion.
Click to expand...

Except it won't change anything for B&M. People go to Amazon because it's cheaper, has a better selection and easier to deal with than B&M. Even after taxes all still apply. Online retailers usually cheaper before any B&M taxes are factored in. It will still be cheaper to buy online which is why this is nothing to do with Fairness and all about state governments trying to get more money.
 
1 said:
I never said military nor did I give any reason for you to believe I meant that, but feel free to throw out hyperbolic bullshit to avoid a genuine argument if that helps you feel secure in your beliefs.
Click to expand...

You probably should have gone back and read what you wrote before making a fool of yourself. When you said that every program mentioned would be better off privatized when the person you responded to (and the sentence you quoted) specifically mentioned the FDA and the military, and then you called him part of the "big government cult mentality," did you just blackout for a little while? Maybe you were for it before you were against it? http://hardforum.com/showthread.php?p=1037339006#post1037339006

:rolleyes:
 
pgwalsh said:
Double dipping is bullshit and there should be one or the other, but not both. Either tax me for what I earn or tax me for what I spend, but don't tax me for both.
Click to expand...

Really. How about them taxing me on my income (I over-payed, so I get the overage back).......and then get told it's income and have to pay income tax on it again.:mad::confused:

I had already made the money and paid the tax - but I have to pay tax AGAIN.
 
Monkey34 said:
Really. How about them taxing me on my income (I over-payed, so I get the overage back).......and then get told it's income and have to pay income tax on it again.:mad::confused:

I had already made the money and paid the tax - but I have to pay tax AGAIN.
Click to expand...

What? You aren't taxed on a tax return.
 
I should mention its my state not the fed. Still shows a warped governmental attitude though. Governors end up in the fed.
 
J So said:
In California my wife and I currently pay

8.85% sales Tax
approx $2000.00 a year in State Income Tax
approx $650.00 a year in State Disability Insurance Tax
18 cents + 6% on every gallon of gas we buy Tax

We've never been on Welfafe, had Government assistance, we don't use ANY government programs State or Federal. In fact I'd say the only public things we use are the parks for my son to play in and the roads. When my Son was born I didn't even use my 30 days DI, which I should have becuase I've been paying my entire working life into that stupid program.

That's a lot of money for us to pay just to live here and of course I'm going to buy everything possible online to avoid even more taxes.

That being said, if Amazon has to start charging tax to us I don't really know how that will affect us. I'd probably cancel my Prime and buy a lot more things used to avoid the tax.
Click to expand...
Same but add 7K property Tax for me in CA.
 
Good. I work in retail and buying stuff tax free really hurts b&m. Since retail jobs are about the only thing a lot of people can find nowadays, this competition will help.
 
Politicians don't represent the people who put them in office. They only represent what is in their best interest and keeps them in office longest.

No taxation without representation of the people should be the new battle.
 
Staples said:
Good. I work in retail and buying stuff tax free really hurts b&m. Since retail jobs are about the only thing a lot of people can find nowadays, this competition will help.
Click to expand...

Except it won't. Most of the stuff I buy online is still cheaper even if I add on tax + shipping. So I'm still going to order it online and come out cheaper than if I went and picked the same item up at BestBuy, Walmart, etc. I just end up paying more for the item, that goes into the government's pockets, and the local businesses are still out of business....
 
I just read a few pages. Lots of angry people.

Apparently many think
1) The Gov hires millions of people and provides tons of services - and they are all free too so therefore the Gov does not need money to operate
2) This is the US, if you want to live here, you pay sales tax. Simple concept. You can move to another country if you want but you will probably pay higher tax so take your pick.

Was everyone this mad 15 years ago when there was no internet and you had to buy everything locally and gasp, had to pay sales tax on it? I don't think so. This is just laws catching up with the times.
 
It isn't just B&M even, it is internet retailers that play by the rules and actually charge sales tax in states where they have significant operations. Amazon doesn't want to pay the tax *anywhere*.

Many times I purchase through Amazon over Newegg because in CA, Newegg charges tax. That is a lost sale to another internet retailer solely based on the tax issue.

I'm not sure where I stand, TBH. At the end of the day I think our entire tax system needs to be scrapped and redone in a much simpler fashion. But it'll be a cold day in hell for that to happen.
 
farscapesg1 said:
Except it won't. Most of the stuff I buy online is still cheaper even if I add on tax + shipping. So I'm still going to order it online and come out cheaper than if I went and picked the same item up at BestBuy, Walmart, etc. I just end up paying more for the item, that goes into the government's pockets, and the local businesses are still out of business....
Click to expand...

It will lessen the gap. I and I think a lot of people do not mind spending a little extra for the added convenience of getting things locally but if the difference is more than 15% on an item that cost 300$, I will definitely get it where ever I can save $45. They will probably still be cheaper online because of the low overhead but the gap will be a lot narrower if at 8% sales tax was imposed.
 
Katalysis said:
Let's face it: our government is bought and sold on both sides of the aisle. We need term limits on congress, and cut those fuckers off from free life time health care and pensions. Maybe when serving the country is actually serving the country and not self-serving, shit will get fixed around here and people will think twice before we invade another desert shit hole for no reason for a couple decades.
Click to expand...

Stop spreading FUD. First they do pay for their own healthcare just like any other Federal Employee.

As for retirement there are other factors but basically if they were in federal service before 1984 they may not pay into Social Security and Medicare but they do pay 7.5% of their income into retirement if they stayed under the Civil Service Retirement System. After 1984 when the Federal Employees Retirement System came into effect, they pay 1.3% into FERS and then also still pay Medicare and Social Security taxes just like everybody else who works. The amount of pension is determined by length of service and age upon retirement and is a percentage of the average of their three highest years of earnings. To qualify for an immediate pension upon retirement, they need 25 years of Active Federal Service. After 20 years of service they can draw the pension at age 50. The minimum is 5 years of service but they can't draw it until age 62.
 
1 said:
Every one of those either has a much more successful private counter part,
Click to expand...
actually, you're flat out wrong. the USPS relies on zero tax dollars. It's also more reliable, often faster, and less expensive the its private counterparts for personal use. The private outfits can give significant discounts to high-volume businesses, but for ease and expense for those of us who aren't shipping out multiple packages USPS is the best option.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top