More States Propose Internet Sales Taxes

Status
Not open for further replies.
nilepez said:
That's not how I read that quote.
Click to expand...

The benefits of "reading the article" are little nuggets of info and handly links that explain stuff like:

  1. Frustrated by their inability to impose tax collection obligations on companies with no substantial connection to their state, several states are considering the adoption of “Amazon” tax laws. Such laws currently exist in New York, Rhode Island, North Carolina, and Colorado.
  2. An Amazon tax law requires retailers that have contracts with “affiliates”—independent persons within the state who post a link to an out-of-state business on their website and get a share of revenues from the out-of-state business—to collect the state’s sales and use tax.
  3. Amazon taxes are unlikely to produce revenue in the near term. New York continues to face a lengthy legal constitutional.
  4. Amazon taxes do not level the playing field between brick-and-mortar and Internet-based businesses because they require Internet-based businesses to track thousands of sales tax bases and rates while brick-and-mortar businesses need to track.
  5. Unconstitutionally expansive nexus standards like the Amazon tax undermine legal certainty, burden interstate commerce, and harm economic growth.
Click to expand...

Quick...five years ago...three years ago...two years ago....how big of a deal was this? First it was one state. Then two...now FIFTEEN...
 
I live in missouri
apparently here they are not allowed to operate in deficit
 
Would be nice to see some sort of responsibility in government spending instead of just finding more ways to pay for outdated, overbudgeted programs and departments. Sign... maybe we should just start over from scratch....
 
Steve said:
Quick...five years ago...three years ago...two years ago....how big of a deal was this? First it was one state. Then two...now FIFTEEN...
Click to expand...

Steve - that doesn't change the basic legal issue that in ALL of these states, the consumers are currently required to pay use tax on goods purchased out of state, including from online retailers. It is the failure of the majority of consumers to follow the law (either through ignorance, or as seems to be the case with many here, negligence or a sense of vigilante 'justice') that is leading states to resort to the highly questionable Amazon-type tax.
 
Well. Im going to say NO to more taxes..

By the time Uncle Sam Hits me up for Income taxes, SS, Medicare and takes 1/2 of any bonuses, 40% of my income is gone.. (That means i'm working 22 weeks a year for the government's take of my pay) add on that Sales Tax, $4,000 Property Taxes, Gasoline Taxes, Tolls, Fishing License, Driver's License, Vice Taxes... well damn.. i have to pay another 9% State tax on that $1 double cheese burger i can barely afford at McDs..

So take my personal experience and advice, those of you youngsters just starting out in IT, even making 6 figures.. your pretty much fucking broke after everyone gets their share..

So please.. if you know anyone that is contemplating shitting out their 9th welfare baby, ask-em to reconsider..
 
LhasaCM said:
Steve - that doesn't change the basic legal issue that in ALL of these states, the consumers are currently required to pay use tax on goods purchased out of state, including from online retailers. It is the failure of the majority of consumers to follow the law.
Click to expand...

If it is THE LAW like you say, why not enforce the current law? Why are they trying to enact NEW laws? I'll tell you why, the current law doesn't cover businesses that do not have a substantial business presence in their state.

The law clearly reads that you had to have a business presence in the state with the tax. What they are trying to pull here is claiming anything constitutes a business presence (in this case, affiliate programs) in their state so they can collect taxes on online sales.

Amazon is now cutting affiliate programs, others will follow suit...real nice.

That is exactly what the article says.

Anyhow, you are free to like all the taxes you want, advocate the enforcement of taxes on a state because they have "affiliate" programs and so on...

...and I am free to not like them.
 
TheBluePill said:
By the time Uncle Sam Hits me up for Income taxes, SS, Medicare and takes 1/2 of any bonuses, 40% of my income is gone.. (That means i'm working 22 weeks a year for the government's take of my pay) add on that Sales Tax, $4,000 Property Taxes, Gasoline Taxes, Tolls, Fishing License, Driver's License, Vice Taxes... well damn.. i have to pay another 9% State tax on that $1 double cheese burger i can barely afford at McDs..
Click to expand...


CLEARLY you are not paying your fair share you scumbag. :rolleyes:

Next up, a sin tax on that McD's you can barely afford...(they are trying)

:D
 
Steve said:
If it is THE LAW like you say, why not enforce the current law? Why are they trying to enact NEW laws? I'll tell you why, the current law doesn't cover businesses that do not have a substantial business presence in their state.

The law clearly reads that you had to have a business presence in the state with the tax. What they are trying to pull here is claiming anything constitutes a business presence (in this case, affiliate programs) in their state so they can collect taxes on online sales.

That is exactly what the article says.

Anyhow, you are free to like all the taxes you want, advocate the enforcement of taxes on a state because they have "affiliate" programs and so on...

...and I am free to not like them.
Click to expand...

The current law is too costly to enforce - it is out of date (when the big threat was the Montgomery Ward or Sears catalog), relies on the taxpayers to police themselves, or would prove too onerous for the states to properly police. (Do you want to attach your credit card statements/PayPal details with your tax forms to prove you've correctly accounted for any out of state goods? I think not.) So, they're trying to play loosey-goosey with terminology and rest on past precedent in an attempt to get businesses to do the dirty work. Until it gets struck down in one state, there's no reason why other states wouldn't follow suit. It's rational behavior, though ultimately a waste of time.

Also, if you read my posts carefully on this and other past discussions on this topic, I never said this course of action was good; I'm just trying to explain the rationale and why this shouldn't be considered a new tax. Even in the most recent post of mine you quoted you left out the part where I called it "highly questionable." Let me reiterate: I don't think this is the right fix for the problem...but it's the simplest to enact. (Lawmakers never seem to care about enforcement.) The entire system needs to be overhauled to make it right. But that's difficult.

In fact - if I were truly selfish - I'd be LOVING this idea. Since I pay the use tax anyway in my state (VA), I won't be paying any more out of pocket than I am now. But, because this would force those who fail to properly account for use taxes in their returns to actually pay up, this helps level the playing field.

Let's face it. There are a lot of things that are broken. This is one of them. I just don't see this as that big of a deal, given everything else that's broken.
 
I can understand the disdain for overspending at the Federal level. They don't have to walk away with balanced budgets at the end of the year. However, States do. Every fiscal year States must actually try to balance their budget. While I understand the desire for less taxes, there is actually not much evidence that you are paying more taxes on the federal level at all. In fact probably from 2004 to present most of us (not all) have been paying lower taxes on the federal level not higher.

Now on the State level it varies from State to State. However every state from coast to coast is facing deficits not necessarily because of overspending per se (some states excluded like California) but has much more to do with loss of revenue due to being in a recession. If you actually believe that states are not cutting services you are very mistaken. In my state the current debate is whether to lay off teachers upping the classroom size considerably or changing school days from 5 to 4 days a week which I'm sure isn't going to do much to help children in our current economy.

Everyone likes lower taxes, that's a given. Just like everyone likes sex. However, not everyone wants to face the consequences of getting something you didn't think you'd get as a result of your own actions. Just because most of us have good jobs does not mean for a second that your taxes don't go towards something that effects you. If you have children, it's your schools. If you commute to work it's the roads or public transit. If you live in a dangerous neighborhood, it's your police officers. If you live in a place of inclement weather is your snow plows or salt trucks.

Speaking of snow trucks, just before the last blast of snow our state was talking about this issue of taxes in particular. Everyone was saying the State should live within it's means, and reduce spending. But guess what happened when we got a foot of snow? Everyone called their local representative for.. you guessed it snow trucks. As if they were powered by the sun and driven by robots.

No one likes to spend their hard earned money on something they think they don't need. However, a lot of people don't realize they'll need something until they actually do and that's the rub. Personally the cost of my electric bill, the loss of my 401k, and healthcare costs are far worse than my damn taxes. That's what Roth IRA's are for.
 
There's simply not enough words in the english lexicon to adequately delineate my level of absolute disgust for these filthy parasite law makers and the egregiously deplorable state and federal governments that collude with them.

Im sick to my stomach, and will immediately proceed to ordering something expensive from out of state to make myself feel a little bit better.
 
nilepez said:
Although I think that in this case, the law is pointless, because Amazon can live without these affiliates, I fail to see how you can argue that the states are way off base. How much money did you pay to your state/local government for Amazon and Newegg purchases? For most of us, the answer is $0.00. Legally we're supposed to pay it. The states are merely trying to find a way to get that money....and the only practical way to do it is to get the companies to collect it.

that doesn't mean I want this to happen, but calling it a new way to reach into out pockets is a bit melodramatic, even for you Steve.

What's more, as soon as states start cutting on roads, schools, cops, fire and other basic services, most of the whiners will be whining about the government not providing those services.

Let's not forget, that plenty of mail order companies (e.g. BMG/Columbia Music Clubs) have charged sales tax for at least 15 or 20 years, and last time I checked, neither company had a storefront in any of the states I lived in (except for that summer I lived in Indiana).
Click to expand...

BMG and Columbia all have a “presence” in most states, they don’t need a store front, a warehouse or shipping facility is all that’s required.

That said, let’s suppose everyone did their due diligence and paid sales tax on everything they purchased on line. Tell me please, how would that change the debt in CA, or NY or any other state? It wouldn’t even make a dent not to mention all the new expanded bureaucracy that would necessarily be created to track that additional tax money would probably be greater than the taxes collected.

For the first time in our history as a country government employees outnumber private sector employees…That’s just all wrong.
 
kac77 said:
I can understand the disdain for overspending at the Federal level. They don't have to walk away with balanced budgets at the end of the year. However, States do. Every fiscal year States must actually try to balance their budget. While I understand the desire for less taxes, there is actually not much evidence that you are paying more taxes on the federal level at all. In fact probably from 2004 to present most of us (not all) have been paying lower taxes on the federal level not higher.

Now on the State level it varies from State to State. However every state from coast to coast is facing deficits not necessarily because of overspending per se (some states excluded like California) but has much more to do with loss of revenue due to being in a recession. If you actually believe that states are not cutting services you are very mistaken. In my state the current debate is whether to lay off teachers upping the classroom size considerably or changing school days from 5 to 4 days a week which I'm sure isn't going to do much to help children in our current economy.

Everyone likes lower taxes, that's a given. Just like everyone likes sex. However, not everyone wants to face the consequences of getting something you didn't think you'd get as a result of your own actions. Just because most of us have good jobs does not mean for a second that your taxes don't go towards something that effects you. If you have children, it's your schools. If you commute to work it's the roads or public transit. If you live in a dangerous neighborhood, it's your police officers. If you live in a place of inclement weather is your snow plows or salt trucks.

Speaking of snow trucks, just before the last blast of snow our state was talking about this issue of taxes in particular. Everyone was saying the State should live within it's means, and reduce spending. But guess what happened when we got a foot of snow? Everyone called their local representative for.. you guessed it snow trucks. As if they were powered by the sun and driven by robots.

No one likes to spend their hard earned money on something they think they don't need. However, a lot of people don't realize they'll need something until they actually do and that's the rub. Personally the cost of my electric bill, the loss of my 401k, and healthcare costs are far worse than my damn taxes. That's what Roth IRA's are for.
Click to expand...

You make some good points, however I find them inapplicable. I dont think anyone is bitching about their tax dollars going to pay for roads, police, schools, etc.

My main problem and bitching is about tax dollars going to state/union/federal workers. The bastards taht are double dipping on retirement/pension funds, or already-overpaid prison nurses working ridiculous overtime during a statewide furlough. How about the legislature office-paper-pushers getting pay increases, and nearly every single one of the state and federal government's THOUSANDS of bureaus/departments/agencies/etc continuing to expand like a cancer on the backs of the taxpayer as we [in the private sector] continue to suffer layoffs and while the country is on the brink of economic collapse.

Its time to draw the line. THere is no compromise. We need to remind these scum who works for who, and that we are sick of it...
 
Defending the morality or the principal of a thing by stating "it's the law" is intellectually lazy and, indeed, stupid. Simply because something is law doesn't make it right. The principal that is being debate in here is how big and intrusive should our government be, and many of us (I would argue a majority of Americans) feel the Gov is too big and controls too much of our daily lives and for the foreseeable future it looks as though it will only get bigger.

I don't care what the law says, more taxes and hugely increased deficit spending is unconscionable and indefensible. Internet taxes like this one are simply a microcosm of the bigger problem and a lot of us have a raw nerve or two on the subject. That is why I reject and argue so fervently against money-grabs like this.
 
bosorio said:
My main problem and bitching is about tax dollars going to state/union/federal workers.
Click to expand...
Who do you think builds the roads and runs the schools, or clears the roads? Elves? It's not magical. There's actual people that make it happen.

bosorio said:
The bastards taht are double dipping on retirement/pension funds, or already-overpaid prison nurses working ridiculous overtime during a statewide furlough.
Click to expand...
Double-dipping on retirement? That sounds good in sound bites but isn't much for reality, and is far from the norm. As far as being overpaid, have you actually taken a look at what they pay in salary? It's a good 25% less than the private sector. The trade off is pension. Something the private sector used to offer, but no longer does. That's hardly a reason to get pissed off at people who do get it.

bosorio said:
How about the legislature office-paper-pushers getting pay increases, and nearly every single one of the state and federal government's THOUSANDS of bureaus/departments/agencies/etc continuing to expand like a cancer on the backs of the taxpayer as we [in the private sector] continue to suffer layoffs and while the country is on the brink of economic collapse.
Click to expand...
What state is that happening in today? Not even the legislature is giving pay increases.

bosorio said:
Its time to draw the line. THere is no compromise. We need to remind these scum who works for who, and that we are sick of it...
Click to expand...
I'm pretty sure that while someone is clearing your road while you sleep is in full awareness of who they work for.
 
i bet they would want me to pay sales tax on craigslist purchases. on USED items. pisses me off to no end how greedy they are
 
Bohica69 said:
WTF???????? Making more in OVERTIME than you make in base salary... There is something DEFINITELY wrong with that picture. Several things come to mind: Lack of supervisor oversight, as well as - WHY aren't these people salaried exempt? Of course there are hazards with THAT as well, but paying people more in OT than in regular salary is just RETARDED.
Click to expand...

Its worse with firefighters and other servants like that. I know... oooh firefighters risk their lives etc etc... little known fact their pensions are based upon their last 3 years salaries, so they do an absolute shit ton of overtime to boost their salaries up then bam, pension so fucking high they end up bankrupting cities.
 
Here's an article talking about Vallejo, CA

By declaring Chapter 9 bankruptcy, the city hopes to freeze its debts and gain time to renegotiate its police and fire contracts, which comprise about 74 percent of its $80 million general fund budget. It also hopes a judge will void part or all of the contracts, allowing the city and unions to start from scratch.
Click to expand...

74% of the city budget is police and fire FFS! I mean really a $60 million budget for a relatively small city 120k or so. Geezus!
 
Taxed for being born. Taxed for working. Taxed for owning your own home. Taxed for living. Taxed for enjoying yourself. Taxed for entertainment. Taxed for buying things. Taxed for dying.

I'm sure I'm missing something. But I think the stuff listed above is enough to piss someone off. All these damn taxes and not a damn thing to show for it is what REALLY pisses me off. The only thing we're #1 at seems to be having drug-addled obese kids, pill popping elderly people who can't afford all their meds without sacrificing other things, corporations more or less telling their own consumer base what, when, and where they WILL be buying and they don't have a choice, and overcrowded prisons.

Its all spiraling out of control and when we can no longer bear it, everyone loses.
 
Addendum:

To add yet another tax to this mess is a completely fucking stupid idea, and more headache than its worth. Because as soon as this motherfucker gets through, even IF they made a simplified way of doing it, you can be SURE there will be more taxes, and more taxes, and MORE taxes, until shopping online is a luxury left only for those who feel like paying $100 for a ten dollar game they can get in the bargain bin.

we don't need more taxes. We need properly focused spending. Stop throwing money at things that aren't producing results. Cut your losses on those things and put that money into something like, oh I don't know, education? There are kids out there that still can't READ. How about constructing or adding onto the interstate system and make it more efficient? What about dumping all that saved money into veteran healthcare so they can get the fucking help they need in the first fucking place?
 
You want to change your country?

they do this because they have no fear of retribution, there trials and commision are all a farce with a pre-determined outcome anyway

You want change?

Grab a sniper rifle
12 skulls, 12 months, don't get caught, don't tell a soul

YOU have to be the fear of death
 
Don't forget Cap and Trade taxes they still want to impose so Al Gore can get even more money from fearmongering Climate Change!
 
bosorio said:
There's simply not enough words in the english lexicon to adequately delineate my level of absolute disgust for these filthy parasite law makers and the egregiously deplorable state and federal governments that collude with them.

Im sick to my stomach, and will immediately proceed to ordering something expensive from out of state to make myself feel a little bit better.
Click to expand...

What is the difference between a man and a parasite? A man builds, a parasite asks, 'Where's my share?' A man creates, a parasite says, 'What will the neighbors think?' A man invents, a parasite says, 'Watch out, or you might tread on the toes of God...
 
Steve said:
C'mon, at least READ the article before flipping out:



This is a push for all states to require sales tax on internet purchases, currently 15 states are considering it.

How fair is it to people that live in a state with no sales tax and buy items over the internet from a state with no sales tax? Hell, how fair are taxes as it is? We are literally being taxed to death and I have yet to hear ANY goverment official talk about cutting spending...it is always tax, tax, tax.
Click to expand...
Men of reason are out there, working toward things. They just seem to be out numbered some days. Just clicked over here from reading this interview with one of my state reps, and left it unusually quite pleased:
http://www.ajc.com/opinion/on-the-record-state-342964.html
Q: How will you approach balancing the budget?
A: You’ve got to make sure that the constitutional mandates are taken care of first. Some of those teacher mandates are public education and public safety. Now it’s to the point where if this is not essential, those items need to be cut.
Click to expand...
Q: What about a cigarette tax?
A: We would do like many other states, we raise tobacco tax by $1 a pack, and we’ll lose revenue in the state. They’ll go to bordering states like Alabama, South Carolina and the Internet for those purchases. So we’ve got to be very careful when we start looking at raising taxes on an item that we don’t actually lose revenue, which we would. Tobacco is an easy target. If you target that, obesity is actually the No. 1 in heart disease, No. 1 killer. Start taxing fried foods, so we just need to be very careful when you pick an easy target. But we need to make sure that anything that we decide to do, it’s for the best for this state, and raising taxes right now is not the best thing to do.
Click to expand...
Q: What about raising the gas tax?
A: Georgia probably has one of the lowest gas taxes in the nation. Right now, in every household, every penny counts. ... We don’t need to put that extra burden on families at this point nor in the future.
Click to expand...
 
Acoustique said:
You want to change your country?

they do this because they have no fear of retribution, there trials and commision are all a farce with a pre-determined outcome anyway

You want change?

Grab a sniper rifle
12 skulls, 12 months, don't get caught, don't tell a soul

YOU have to be the fear of death
Click to expand...
It's people like you, who belong in an asylum, that drive rational sane people, to supporting those who campaign on dismantling the constitution and our freedoms (2nd amendment).
 
actually the french revolution started over finances and ended up with the bloody deaths of their leaders and overall in the long run it was for the best

freedoms?

freeing yourself from your current climate is the only chance at freedom you have
 
kac77 said:
No one likes to spend their hard earned money on something they think they don't need. However, a lot of people don't realize they'll need something until they actually do and that's the rub. Personally the cost of my electric bill, the loss of my 401k, and healthcare costs are far worse than my damn taxes. That's what Roth IRA's are for.
Click to expand...
Assuming they don't change the rules down the road, and add some new tax to Roth withdrawals.

There are already talks in the fed, about taking control of people's 401K's, forcing investment in government controlled securities, etc.

I'm almost convinced a trad IRA is safer... though I am still personally contributing to a Roth based on what the 'experts' are preaching and the math shows.
 
petertew said:
Defending the morality or the principal of a thing by stating "it's the law" is intellectually lazy and, indeed, stupid. Simply because something is law doesn't make it right. The principal that is being debate in here is how big and intrusive should our government be, and many of us (I would argue a majority of Americans) feel the Gov is too big and controls too much of our daily lives and for the foreseeable future it looks as though it will only get bigger.

I don't care what the law says, more taxes and hugely increased deficit spending is unconscionable and indefensible. Internet taxes like this one are simply a microcosm of the bigger problem and a lot of us have a raw nerve or two on the subject. That is why I reject and argue so fervently against money-grabs like this.
Click to expand...

No - I'm not defending the morality or the principal of the thing by stating it's the law. I'm explaining why this is a perfectly reasonable course of action, though probably doomed to failure. And this particular issue is a very separate argument than "I hate all taxes."

Let me very clear. This is NOT a new tax. This is a new attempt to collect an already existing tax that is nearly impossible to enforce. The alternative to what the states hope is a quick fix would require actual hard work. Given the way our politcal system is set up, that is nearly impossible to accomplish because it is not rewarded.

Yes, there's a bigger problem, and I think many people have a very valid point that the government needs to do a better job of keeping cost down. I just don't think this foolish attempt to shift the burden for collecting use taxes is the tipping point some people are making it out to be.
 
Menelmarar said:
Assuming they don't change the rules down the road, and add some new tax to Roth withdrawals.

There are already talks in the fed, about taking control of people's 401K's, forcing investment in government controlled securities, etc.

I'm almost convinced a trad IRA is safer... though I am still personally contributing to a Roth based on what the 'experts' are preaching and the math shows.
Click to expand...

Well, the current proposal is a few steps removed from what you described, but a puzzling one nonetheless. The current proposal is whether or not allowing conversions of 401k or IRA savings into annuities should be allowed, and what role (if any) the government should have. This has the positive of providing more certainty that the retirement savings will be there when needed, but with the loss of risk also reduces the possible growth. Many annuities (managed by private corporations) do invest in US Treasury securities, since they have a fairly reliable rate of return. So indirectly, this proposal could shift savings in that direction. But that's not taking control, nor forcing investment.
 
Ughh.. the government as a whole has gone beyond what it was intended to do. Kinda like this healthcare bill.

If the constitution does not SPECIFICALLY state the federal government has a right to do so THEN IT DOESN'T have the right to have any say so in the matter. Which means this whole healthcare bill is an act of treason and anyone that votes for it is also guilty. But what is gonna happen? They are gonna keep trying to pass it then when it does tax us even more heavily than they do now.
 
Acoustique said:
actually the french revolution started over finances and ended up with the bloody deaths of their leaders and overall in the long run it was for the best

freedoms?

freeing yourself from your current climate is the only chance at freedom you have
Click to expand...

Revolution <> Terrorism. How much change has there been since the Beltway attacks?
 
well here is your options

a ) use their system to get through the changes and reforms required to free yourself from their ever increasing greed, if anything was ever done through this way it would be all a farce because it is their system

b ) Revolt, wipe out everything to do with the previous government, they basically act as if they are nobles back in the day, anyone new put in to power i can guarantee has a long line of links to that party via family or friends, they are the new nobles, so they need to be removed entirely.

something needs to be done and it should not be done by their methods, however the future pans out is up to you from that point onwards but at the moment all i see in the future is slavery with perceived freedom if you choose to do nothing at all.

They will just take & take & take
 
Acoustique said:
well here is your options

a ) use their system to get through the changes and reforms required to free yourself from their ever increasing greed, if anything was ever done through this way it would be all a farce because it is their system

b ) Revolt, wipe out everything to do with the previous government, they basically act as if they are nobles back in the day, anyone new put in to power i can guarantee has a long line of links to that party via family or friends, they are the new nobles, so they need to be removed entirely.

something needs to be done and it should not be done by their methods, however the future pans out is up to you from that point onwards but at the moment all i see in the future is slavery with perceived freedom if you choose to do nothing at all.

They will just take & take & take
Click to expand...

Nathan Holn, is that you?
 
In North Carolina, it's called the "Use Tax" which has been around since the 30's or so. It means that if I get a laptop at a Best Buy in South Carolina, I still must report that purchase to the state of North Carolina. There's plenty of other dumb laws that North Carolina doesn't enforce.

And to all the tax apologists here, sure the cops and roads need the money, and I can't speak for other states but North Carolina has a lot of fat to trim before they even think about the bare necessities like roads and such. There are too many expensive pet projects that do little and only for a very small percentage of people. Plus, as a general principle with taxes, less tax ends up yielding more government revenue. I'm voting out Governer Perdue the first chance I get. (Didn't vote her in, in the first place).
 
Parmenides said:
Plus, as a general principle with taxes, less tax ends up yielding more government revenue.
Click to expand...

Not true as a general principle - at best, it depends on where we reside on the Laffer curve. Given the current marginal tax rates in the US, I'd be shocked if that were the case now. (I don't think there are too many people here who are working less because of how much we pay in taxes. That primarily only happens with the wealthy.)
 
Hamish Campbell said:
California's budget crisis is a direct result of that states inability to raise or implement any new state taxes.
Click to expand...

They did raise taxes last year in California, and now we are facing an even bigger deficit!

1. Raised the sales tax by 1%
2. Raised in income tax rate by .25%
3. Raised the income tax rate on the “rich” even more
4. Lowered the personal exemption (net effect is $210 more taxes per kid)
5. Raised the car registration tax

Alot of people have been complaining that they owe the state money this year instead of the expected refund. This is going to depress sales even more...
 
I welcome any new taxes because government does a much better job spending my money than I ever could.

Because taxes go to roads, the police, firefighters, and super neat social programs, don't you think it might be immoral to make a fireperson loose his or her job just because you're being selfish with your money?

If you think about it, people should hand over all of their paycheck to the government (maybe getting to keep a little bit back to buy gum or socks and stuff). Then, we could have the government take care of us. Everyone would be stress free! Everyone would be truly free! Why hasn't anyone ever thought of this before? It could be so perfect. I mean, who wants to have to worry about paying for their own health insurance or car insurance, for that matter? This is going to be SO cool!

It will be just like summer camp!

Let's take this trend all the way. Who's with me!?!
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top