Republicans flip-flop, now support MORE taxes

[BigTex]

Wheres Grover Norquist when you need him?

A price break for online shoppers may be ending soon, with growing support for sales taxes on purchases made on the internet. This means many online shoppers would pay at least 5 percent more than they do today. Republicans in Congress have joined Democrats to support a bill that would give states authority to force Amazon, eBay, and other online companies to collect sales taxes. Now, says The Wall Street Journal, Republican governors “eager for new revenue to ease budget strains, are dropping their longtime opposition to imposing sales taxes on online purchases.”  The Journal calls it “a significant political shift” that could lead to a change in federal law. Brick-and-mortar retailers have long argued that they face an unfair price disadvantage. But the change amounts to a tax hike for many consumers.

http://abcnews.go.com/blogs/business/2012/07/get-ready-to-pay-online-sales-tax/

[CG6468]

This has already happened in Illinois. Amazon pulled all of its warehouses out of Illinois and went to other states.

[rich_t]

Not a federal issue.  Congress needs to stay out of it.

[BigTex]

Not a federal issue.  Congress needs to stay out of it.

What? I know we all dont like the super expansion of commerce clause that has happened in modern times, but internet commerce seems to be exactly what the commerce clause was intended for.

[obumazombie]

Politicians usually can't tell the difference between choking the gold egg laying goose, and killing it.

[thundley4]

This has already happened in Illinois. Amazon pulled all of its warehouses out of Illinois and went to other states.

I'm waiting for Illinois to put road blocks up to check people for cigarettes bought in neighboring states.



If they pass a law letting states impose the taxes, then how long before the feds want a cut?

[rich_t]

What? I know we all dont like the super expansion of commerce clause that has happened in modern times, but internet commerce seems to be exactly what the commerce clause was intended for.

IMO I don't think it was originally intended to cover the collection of State sales taxes, but I may be in error.

The “dormant” Commerce Clause refers to the prohibition, implied in the Commerce Clause, against states passing legislation that discriminates against or excessively burdens interstate commerce.

http://www.law.cornell.edu/wex/commerce_clause

[JohnnyReb]

If a state charges sales tax, then collect them on the innernet sales, if not, don't.

[BigTex]

IMO I don't think it was originally intended to cover the collection of State sales taxes, but I may be in error.

Its not about the states collecting sales tax, its whether one state can collect sales tax from business in another state. Interstate commerce disputes like that are what the commerce clause was intended for.

Like for instance a person physically in Oklahoma uses a cell phone to buy an item that is shipped/billed to a Texas address from a website based in California from a company based in Ohio. Which state gets the tax, or should there even be allowed have a sales tax on it? IMO that is the type of situation the commerce clause allows the federal govt to solve.

[rich_t]

If a state charges sales tax, then collect them on the innernet sales, if not, don't.

The 64 thousand dollar question is....

Which state gets to keep the tax?

The point of sale or the point of delivery?

[JohnnyReb]

The 64 thousand dollar question is....

Which state gets to keep the tax?

The point of sale or the point of delivery?

The state wherein resides the purchaser. Would you want some blue state collecting sales tax off of the other 49?

[BigTex]

The 64 thousand dollar question is....

Which state gets to keep the tax?

The point of sale or the point of delivery?

Exactly why I think it is a federal issue. If the federal govt couldnt get involved then both states could change the sales tax and customer would pay double.

[rich_t]

BTW...

Here is the text of the bill in question.

http://www.govtrack.us/congress/bills/112/s1832/text

[rich_t]

Here is an interesting article on the issue:

http://news.cnet.com/8301-31921_3-57321515-281/senate-bill-reignites-internet-sales-tax-debate/

On the other hand, a 1992 Supreme Court ruling says that, in general, retailers currently can't be forced to collect sales tax on out-of-state shipments unless they have offices in those states. And with over 7,500 taxing jurisdictions, each with its own rules and ability to conduct audits, compliance with each is not a trivial task.

[rich_t]

The state wherein resides the purchaser. Would you want some blue state collecting sales tax off of the other 49?

I don't view this as a blue state/red state issue at all.

As for myself, I don't make any internet purchases with an eye on avoiding a state sales tax.  When I make an internet purchase it is typically for items that I can't find locally or because the purchase price is significantly lower than what I would pay for a local purchase.

I don't think that this new legislation, if passed, would cause me to change my online purchasing to any major extent.

What I do know is that this legislation will result in another large bureaucracy that will ultimately cost more than it is worth.

[BigTex]

I don't view this as a blue state/red state issue at all.

As for myself, I don't make any internet purchases with an eye on avoiding a state sales tax.  When I make an internet purchase it is typically for items that I can't find locally or because the purchase price is significantly lower than what I would pay for a local purchase.

I don't think that this new legislation, if passed, would cause me to change my online purchasing to any major extent.

What I do know is that this legislation will result in another large bureaucracy that will ultimately cost more than it is worth.

You would voluntarily give your money to your state govt if you can easily avoid it? I dont specifically try to avoid sales tax but saving over 8% on my large purchases always helps (for small purchases I only shop online if its not available locally). Its also not like I'm talking that 8% and burying it in the back yard, I'm spending it on other purchases. For big items I always do research online so I usually end up buying there also, you usually get a cheaper price cutting out the middle man anyways on top of cutting out the sales tax.

[rich_t]

You would voluntarily give your money to your state govt if you can easily avoid it? I dont specifically try to avoid sales tax but saving over 8% on my large purchases always helps (for small purchases I only shop online if its not available locally). Its also not like I'm talking that 8% and burying it in the back yard, I'm spending it on other purchases. For big items I always do research online so I usually end up buying there also, you usually get a cheaper price cutting out the middle man anyways on top of cutting out the sales tax.

I never said that.  I merely stated that I don't make online purchases with an eye toward avoiding a state sales tax.  If I can easily avoid paying a tax, I do so.  But that is not my primary reason when making online purchases.

I don't buy a lot of big ticket items online to begin with but when I do, it is with an eye on cost compared to what I can get locally.  The state sales tax never enters into my decision.  But if this legislation passes, it will certainly become part of my decision process.

[DumbAss Tanker]

I can see why governors, regardless of party, would be for it, whether Congress is on board for it may be another story.  The excerpt kind of mixes the two, trumpeting a change in Congress but then actually talking about governors.  Not gonna make or break me, but it would change the economic calculus of when it's worth buying on line to have tax on top of price and shipping, vs. price plus just tax for local purchase.

[obumazombie]

Taxing AlGore's (manBearPig's) invention will destroy it. At least the commercial side of it.

[NHSparky]

Or you could just move to a state that doesn't have a sales tax.

Or an income tax.

[BigTex]

Or you could just move to a state that doesn't have a sales tax.

Or an income tax.

There arent any with no tax. NH and AK have almost none but all have some amount

[NHSparky]

There arent any states with both no income and sales tax

Uh, yoo-hoo!!  Right heah!

Well, broad-based sales tax, anyway.  We do have a 9 percent "room and meals" tax, but if you don't go out to eat much, so much the better.

Granted, our property taxes and vehicle registrations are pretty steep, but I can deal with that.  Actually my state income tax burden here is less than half of what I was paying when I lived in CA, meaning my paycheck (which remained virtually unchanged when I moved here in 2006) actually went FARTHER, considering that and the lower cost of housing/insurance.

[Eupher]

There arent any with no tax. NH and AK have almost none but all have some amount

Not true. NH has neither sales nor income tax.

http://www.kiplinger.com/tools/retiree_map/index.html?map=2#anchor

[BigTex]

Not true. NH has neither sales nor income tax.

http://www.kiplinger.com/tools/retiree_map/index.html?map=2#anchor

They pay a sales tax on prepared food and an income tax on interest and dividends

[Eupher]

They pay a sales tax on prepared food and an income tax on interest and dividends

Yeah, I saw Sparky's post.

The link I posted does not quote that information, however. But I'll yield to the "special" sales and income taxes inasmuch as not everybody eats out and not everybody has investments that pay interest and dividends.