Hous Repblicns Wrong On Intrnet Sales Tax Bill!

[Wyatt earp]

A sales tax is justifiable because people use roads and sewers to access the store. It costs a city to provide the brick and morter store. This is true whether the city where I make purchases is my home city or not. Consequently, a sales tax actually increases econ activity by allowing customers to access stores.

If I can buy an item without the store, at a cheaper price, my doing so actually benefits the overall economy because I will have money to spend on more stuff and increase econ activity.

If a city needs to raise more revenue for something, it can get that via property taxes or even raising fees, such as water and garbabe.

and? so how do the 5 states with no sales tax do it? love to see you answer this one.

You'd have to research each state without a sales tax and how they do it. IIRC that would be Alaska, Delaware, Montanna, New Hampshire, and Oregon.

For example, Alaska makes a lot of revenue from the Alaskan pipeline. So basically they are taxing the oil that flows out to make fuel that the other states purchase. Funds flow from the other states to Alaska.

For Delaware, they encourage businesses to incorporate there because there is no sales tax - but they charge the businesses incorporation fees. They charge tolls on sections of interstate highways that run through the state to fund transportation and they have a "Gross Receipts Tax" which is a tax the business pays on their amount of sales. Basically a backdoor sales tax since the customer is of course the one that pays the business.



>>>>

All this post suggest to me is: The Democrats are in favor of high taxes and no jobs for anyone. You want to destroy compays that left your state. kind of plain and simple. right?

 

[auditor0007]

I cant believe there are ass clowns out there who WANT more taxation.
OF ANY KIND!!!!!

Ol JimOfPenisAnal really stepped in it.

I don't have an issue with the tax itself. Internet companies that do not charge sales tax cost local businesses a lot of lost business, directly due to the fact they do not charge sales tax. The problem is that there is no simple way to collect the tax and pay it to the correct governing body. Unlike a retail store where they only collect their local sales tax rate, an Internet company would need to collect taxes and pay them based on where their customers live. This would be a nightmare even with good software programs.

 

[Desperado]

This bill in Congress requiring internet companies to collect state sales taxes on merchandise they sell through the internet should have sailed through to enactment. Instead, the bill which passed the Senate is hung-up in the House and you guessed it right the obstacle is the House Republicans. The House Republicans if asked will give you all kinds of baloney why they cannot vote in favor of the bill like this requirement that internet company's collect out of state sales taxes for orders on deliveries out of state is too onerous on small internet businesses. The truth of the matter on why the Republicans won't support this bill is that collectively the Republican caucus has sold their soul to the business lobby and the business lobby doesn't want this sales tax obligation because it will increase internet customers bills on internet purchases and thereby cause these customers to purchase less!



Somebody needs to tell House Republicans that their job is to do the right thing when it comes to voting on bills and it is a no brainer that the right thing is that this bill become law. Presently, out of state internet companies have an advantage over in-state retailers in a state because they don't collect a state sales tax for internet orders where the delivery is in-state and there is no valid reasoning for this advantage. Further, this is unfair to the state in question for if a company sells an item of merchandise to a customer where the customer takes possession of the merchandise in state X it doesn't matter where the order was made whether it was made in-person, over the phone, by mail, by internet inside or outside state X because it is a sale in state X that is where the customer takes possession of the merchandise. States have a right to tax sales within their state this is a simple matter of states rights. The Republican criticism that this is too onerous on small internet companies who will have the task of applying all the states in America different sales tax schemes give me a break the Republicans have got to be kidding with this one were not talking about applying the Federal income tax code here these are state sales tax standards hundreds of millions of people across America understand these standards. With many states really hard up for revenue making education cuts, making cuts in the criminal justice system, etc. House Republicans where is your brains here why incur the anger of a lot of people who will benefit from states sales tax money for an indefensible position from a justice standpoint! Come to think of it one can expect this behavior by many rank and file House Republican who won't support this legislation because their track record indicates clearly their under the control of the business lobby in America, they have sold their soul to this lobby unfortunately. But House Speaker John Boehner coming out saying he is not sure he can support the Senate bill here, where is your courage John? Speaker Boehner you're supposed to be a first rate representative doing the right thing for the American people no matter who is for or against the issue! John if you make the effort to hear past the clanging of chains which shackle your caucus' colleagues you'll hear grass roots America proclaiming loudly and clearly the message "John Grow A Spine And Pass This Legislation"!!!

Yay... More Taxes. You pro tax kooks are crazy.

Amazing that there are some people that re actually glad that taxes are being increased.
I still don't see why a company in Florida has to send a check to New York. New York has not provided one thing to make that internet business in Florida any better.

 

[auditor0007]

Right, it would be so easy to collect sales taxes for more than 6,900 different taxing authorities and have to answer to each taxing authority if some how you make a mistake. In theory it sounds great, kind of like Maobamacare, but when it comes down to implementation it will be a nightmare. I've asked my congressman to vote no.

If they really want to pursue this, I have a better idea. Instead of making the retailer collect the tax, make the individual who makes the purchase responsible. In Ohio, you are supposed to pay taxes on all out of state purchases. You are to document this on your tax return and pay the tax. Of course, very few do unless it is a big item purchase that could be easily tracked by the government.

But rather than make the Internet retailer collect the tax, just have them report the names of customers and how much they purchased to each state. Then the states can go after each person for the tax. That would put the onus of collecting the tax on each state. Something tells me the states would want no part of such a plan, but it would be much easier for a retailer to report it's sales to each state. Still a headache but much easier than tracking and paying thousands of taxing authorities with different rates. Just finding out the right rate to tax the customer at would be a nightmare.

 

[WorldWatcher]

and? so how do the 5 states with no sales tax do it? love to see you answer this one.

You'd have to research each state without a sales tax and how they do it. IIRC that would be Alaska, Delaware, Montanna, New Hampshire, and Oregon.

For example, Alaska makes a lot of revenue from the Alaskan pipeline. So basically they are taxing the oil that flows out to make fuel that the other states purchase. Funds flow from the other states to Alaska.

For Delaware, they encourage businesses to incorporate there because there is no sales tax - but they charge the businesses incorporation fees. They charge tolls on sections of interstate highways that run through the state to fund transportation and they have a "Gross Receipts Tax" which is a tax the business pays on their amount of sales. Basically a backdoor sales tax since the customer is of course the one that pays the business.



>>>>

All this post suggest to me is: The Democrats are in favor of high taxes and no jobs for anyone. You want to destroy compays that left your state. kind of plain and simple. right?

You seem to not get it right.


1. I'm not a Democrat.

2. The sponsor of the Bill was a Republican and there were numerous Republican co-sponsors.

3. The bill passed the Senate with bipartisan support. (Whether it passes the house is another issue.)

4. It has nothing to do with "companies" that left the State of Virginia (where I live), it's about customers illegally evading required tax remittance (which I admit I'm one) for taxes already on the books. Does anyone really think that the same model should be applied to Brick and Mortar stores? That is, collect no sales taxes at the time of sale, just expect customers to track their own purchases and cut a check to the state once a month? This just applies the same paradigm to online sellers that is used for B&M stores, thereby closing a loopholes where people have been paying NO taxes on purchases.



>>>>

 

[auditor0007]

This bill in Congress requiring internet companies to collect state sales taxes on merchandise they sell through the internet should have sailed through to enactment. Instead, the bill which passed the Senate is hung-up in the House and you guessed it right the obstacle is the House Republicans. The House Republicans if asked will give you all kinds of baloney why they cannot vote in favor of the bill like this requirement that internet company's collect out of state sales taxes for orders on deliveries out of state is too onerous on small internet businesses. The truth of the matter on why the Republicans won't support this bill is that collectively the Republican caucus has sold their soul to the business lobby and the business lobby doesn't want this sales tax obligation because it will increase internet customers bills on internet purchases and thereby cause these customers to purchase less!



Somebody needs to tell House Republicans that their job is to do the right thing when it comes to voting on bills and it is a no brainer that the right thing is that this bill become law. Presently, out of state internet companies have an advantage over in-state retailers in a state because they don't collect a state sales tax for internet orders where the delivery is in-state and there is no valid reasoning for this advantage. Further, this is unfair to the state in question for if a company sells an item of merchandise to a customer where the customer takes possession of the merchandise in state X it doesn't matter where the order was made whether it was made in-person, over the phone, by mail, by internet inside or outside state X because it is a sale in state X that is where the customer takes possession of the merchandise. States have a right to tax sales within their state this is a simple matter of states rights. The Republican criticism that this is too onerous on small internet companies who will have the task of applying all the states in America different sales tax schemes give me a break the Republicans have got to be kidding with this one were not talking about applying the Federal income tax code here these are state sales tax standards hundreds of millions of people across America understand these standards. With many states really hard up for revenue making education cuts, making cuts in the criminal justice system, etc. House Republicans where is your brains here why incur the anger of a lot of people who will benefit from states sales tax money for an indefensible position from a justice standpoint! Come to think of it one can expect this behavior by many rank and file House Republican who won't support this legislation because their track record indicates clearly their under the control of the business lobby in America, they have sold their soul to this lobby unfortunately. But House Speaker John Boehner coming out saying he is not sure he can support the Senate bill here, where is your courage John? Speaker Boehner you're supposed to be a first rate representative doing the right thing for the American people no matter who is for or against the issue! John if you make the effort to hear past the clanging of chains which shackle your caucus' colleagues you'll hear grass roots America proclaiming loudly and clearly the message "John Grow A Spine And Pass This Legislation"!!!

Sorry, but on this one you are completely wrong. Collecting different tax rates for every single taxing authority and having to write out checks to make payments to as many as a few hundred taxing authorities per month would be one massive headache for any Internet company.

It's not as if they just need to collect sales tax for their own state; they have to collect it for every state where they ship their product.

My apologies, but you are incorrect. What you post is not in the bill.

1. They will only have to interface with 45 Taxing Administration points. The bill requires simplified tax filing and a single point for each state. There are currently on 45 states that have sales tax.

2. Secondly, they will not be writing checks to remitting payment to the 9,600 taxing authorities (or even hundreds as you claim). They will file with one tax administration entity for each state.

3. The law requires that States that want to participate in the program provide software that allows for the automatic computation of the tax at the time of sale and files the state tax returns. States already have online funds transfer when it comes to the payment portion.

4. The legislation exempts online retailers with less than $1,000,000 in sales during the previous tax year, any business doing online sales through the internet so electronic filing and remittance will not be that much of a headache and no one is going to have to sit down and right hundreds of checks each month.



>>>>

Thanks for the info; that does make a bit more sense. I still see numerous problems with it though. And what happens to companies who move their business offshore? I already purchase a substantial amount of my clothes from the UK. A lot of the time, they even give me free shipping.

 

[tjvh]

I cant believe there are ass clowns out there who WANT more taxation.
OF ANY KIND!!!!!

Ol JimOfPenisAnal really stepped in it.

I don't have an issue with the tax itself. Internet companies that do not charge sales tax cost local businesses a lot of lost business, directly due to the fact they do not charge sales tax. The problem is that there is no simple way to collect the tax and pay it to the correct governing body. Unlike a retail store where they only collect their local sales tax rate, an Internet company would need to collect taxes and pay them based on where their customers live. This would be a nightmare even with good software programs.

It's called free enterprise. Nobody is stopping the local companies you speak of from selling their goods on the internet.

 

[WorldWatcher]

Right, it would be so easy to collect sales taxes for more than 6,900 different taxing authorities and have to answer to each taxing authority if some how you make a mistake. In theory it sounds great, kind of like Maobamacare, but when it comes down to implementation it will be a nightmare. I've asked my congressman to vote no.

If they really want to pursue this, I have a better idea. Instead of making the retailer collect the tax, make the individual who makes the purchase responsible. In Ohio, you are supposed to pay taxes on all out of state purchases. You are to document this on your tax return and pay the tax. Of course, very few do unless it is a big item purchase that could be easily tracked by the government.

But rather than make the Internet retailer collect the tax, just have them report the names of customers and how much they purchased to each state. Then the states can go after each person for the tax. That would put the onus of collecting the tax on each state. Something tells me the states would want no part of such a plan, but it would be much easier for a retailer to report it's sales to each state. Still a headache but much easier than tracking and paying thousands of taxing authorities with different rates. Just finding out the right rate to tax the customer at would be a nightmare.

That is not what is required to happen. Not "thousands" of taxing authorities with different rates. Each state is mandated to have a single taxing administration point. They are also required to provide the software free of charge that will calculate the tax automatically at the time of sale AND to electronically file the returns.

Calculating the sales tax will not be burden on the seller as the software will handle it based on the delivery address. The basis of this software ALREADY exists as companies already have to calculate it for instate tax collections based on delivery address. The software is already doing it. These data files will then be made available to the transaction software that is powering the internet sellers site. If it's a small Mom & Pop shop, not a problem - they are exempt.



>>>>

 

[WorldWatcher]

Sorry, but on this one you are completely wrong. Collecting different tax rates for every single taxing authority and having to write out checks to make payments to as many as a few hundred taxing authorities per month would be one massive headache for any Internet company.

It's not as if they just need to collect sales tax for their own state; they have to collect it for every state where they ship their product.

My apologies, but you are incorrect. What you post is not in the bill.

1. They will only have to interface with 45 Taxing Administration points. The bill requires simplified tax filing and a single point for each state. There are currently on 45 states that have sales tax.

2. Secondly, they will not be writing checks to remitting payment to the 9,600 taxing authorities (or even hundreds as you claim). They will file with one tax administration entity for each state.

3. The law requires that States that want to participate in the program provide software that allows for the automatic computation of the tax at the time of sale and files the state tax returns. States already have online funds transfer when it comes to the payment portion.

4. The legislation exempts online retailers with less than $1,000,000 in sales during the previous tax year, any business doing online sales through the internet so electronic filing and remittance will not be that much of a headache and no one is going to have to sit down and right hundreds of checks each month.



>>>>

Thanks for the info; that does make a bit more sense. I still see numerous problems with it though. And what happens to companies who move their business offshore? I already purchase a substantial amount of my clothes from the UK. A lot of the time, they even give me free shipping.

That's an international issue and not an interstate commerce issue

But if you can make individual sales to individuals (as opposed to bulk sales to businesses) and make a business model that provides the same goods at a lower cost even once you include international tariffs, custom fees, and international shipping costs - give it a shoot. Good luck if you can make it work. But I bet that in country online sellers will still be beating your prices even if their sales price now includes state sales tax. That and as a consumer I'd be very leery of international sales for returns.


>>>>

 

[OriginalShroom]

Just because some Republicans also supported the bill doesn't make it right.

It is for that reason alone I do not claim to be a Republican. I disagree with too much. Not as often as I disagree with Democrats, but too often to support them.

 

[OriginalShroom]

BTW, How long will it take for some of these companies to move to out of country locations where they don't have to pay any taxes?

 

[bripat9643]

All this post suggest to me is: The Democrats are in favor of high taxes and no jobs for anyone. You want to destroy compays that left your state. kind of plain and simple. right?

In the liberal mentality, voting against a tax increase is worse than giving nuclear secrets to the Soviet Union.

 

[bripat9643]

A sales tax is justifiable because people use roads and sewers to access the store. It costs a city to provide the brick and morter store. This is true whether the city where I make purchases is my home city or not. Consequently, a sales tax actually increases econ activity by allowing customers to access stores.

If I can buy an item without the store, at a cheaper price, my doing so actually benefits the overall economy because I will have money to spend on more stuff and increase econ activity.

If a city needs to raise more revenue for something, it can get that via property taxes or even raising fees, such as water and garbabe.

Unfortunately for your theory, sewage is paid for by the user. You get charged by the local utility every month for your sewage. Most of all sales taxes goes to pay for stuff other than roads.

 

[thereisnospoon]

The transaction takes place at the POS of the store.

And the other view is that the transaction takes place where the customer does the purchase, which is their computer room located in the state where the taxes will be collected.

I will if you will

I don't, but I'm honest about it (VA also has a Use Tax). Which is why states want to change the process to the SAME paradigm used for B&M stores, from honors system after the fact to at the time of sale.

They pay sales taxes on things they buy within the borders of their own state.
Internet purchases from businesses in other states are not purchases within those borders.

Sure they are, that is where the customer is located. Logically speaking it could be argued either way location of the seller or location of the purchaser - either are equally valid.

Location of the seller would tend to concentrate large high volume sellers into a couple of states and benefit mostly those states generating revenue in sales tax where the business is located - but as your state of CT shows - customers would still be liable for Use Tax. Those states where the customer resides would still be on the "honor system" for out of state purchases where merchandize was moved into the state.

The customer location model reduces the tax liability from two states in some cases (sales tax and use tax) to a single liability and where the revenue actually goes to the location where the customers is supporting services they use.


>>>>

And the other view is that the transaction takes place where the customer does the purchase, which is their computer room located in the state where the taxes will be collected.
This was the same reasoning the telcos used when dial-up was the sole method to connect to the internet. The telcos claimed that any internet signal that traveled to and from another state was in effect a 'long distance phone call' and by their estimate should be permitted to bill the user for LD charges. Of course the federal government saw it another way and the idea withered on the vine.
I think your interpretation is incorrect. The product is located elsewhere. In this case the seller's distribution center. That is the point of sale.
For example. Tiger Direct is an on line seller of computers computer hardware and electronics. This company also has a very large retail center connected with their distribution center near Greenville, SC....Now that is not far from where I live. I can go to the retail center and make a purchase. I would have to pay SC state sales tax. I can also buy on line and pay NO sales tax because Tiger Direct has no retail presence in NC.
The way I see this bill is in this example Tiger Direct would have to collect NC sales tax, process it and send the money to Raleigh, NC....And any other state from which a customer makes a purchase. So if say there is a guy in Hawaii, one in California and one in Indiana. Under this bill Tiger Direct would have to collect sales tax for each of those states ,process the money and send it along.
That's crap.

 

[Brain357]

This bill in Congress requiring internet companies to collect state sales taxes on merchandise they sell through the internet should have sailed through to enactment. Instead, the bill which passed the Senate is hung-up in the House and you guessed it right the obstacle is the House Republicans. The House Republicans if asked will give you all kinds of baloney why they cannot vote in favor of the bill like this requirement that internet company's collect out of state sales taxes for orders on deliveries out of state is too onerous on small internet businesses. The truth of the matter on why the Republicans won't support this bill is that collectively the Republican caucus has sold their soul to the business lobby and the business lobby doesn't want this sales tax obligation because it will increase internet customers bills on internet purchases and thereby cause these customers to purchase less!



Somebody needs to tell House Republicans that their job is to do the right thing when it comes to voting on bills and it is a no brainer that the right thing is that this bill become law. Presently, out of state internet companies have an advantage over in-state retailers in a state because they don't collect a state sales tax for internet orders where the delivery is in-state and there is no valid reasoning for this advantage. Further, this is unfair to the state in question for if a company sells an item of merchandise to a customer where the customer takes possession of the merchandise in state X it doesn't matter where the order was made whether it was made in-person, over the phone, by mail, by internet inside or outside state X because it is a sale in state X that is where the customer takes possession of the merchandise. States have a right to tax sales within their state this is a simple matter of states rights. The Republican criticism that this is too onerous on small internet companies who will have the task of applying all the states in America different sales tax schemes give me a break the Republicans have got to be kidding with this one were not talking about applying the Federal income tax code here these are state sales tax standards hundreds of millions of people across America understand these standards. With many states really hard up for revenue making education cuts, making cuts in the criminal justice system, etc. House Republicans where is your brains here why incur the anger of a lot of people who will benefit from states sales tax money for an indefensible position from a justice standpoint! Come to think of it one can expect this behavior by many rank and file House Republican who won't support this legislation because their track record indicates clearly their under the control of the business lobby in America, they have sold their soul to this lobby unfortunately. But House Speaker John Boehner coming out saying he is not sure he can support the Senate bill here, where is your courage John? Speaker Boehner you're supposed to be a first rate representative doing the right thing for the American people no matter who is for or against the issue! John if you make the effort to hear past the clanging of chains which shackle your caucus' colleagues you'll hear grass roots America proclaiming loudly and clearly the message "John Grow A Spine And Pass This Legislation"!!!

Sorry, but on this one you are completely wrong. Collecting different tax rates for every single taxing authority and having to write out checks to make payments to as many as a few hundred taxing authorities per month would be one massive headache for any Internet company.

It's not as if they just need to collect sales tax for their own state; they have to collect it for every state where they ship their product.

My apologies, but you are incorrect. What you post is not in the bill.

1. They will only have to interface with 45 Taxing Administration points. The bill requires simplified tax filing and a single point for each state. There are currently on 45 states that have sales tax.

2. Secondly, they will not be writing checks to remitting payment to the 9,600 taxing authorities (or even hundreds as you claim). They will file with one tax administration entity for each state.

3. The law requires that States that want to participate in the program provide software that allows for the automatic computation of the tax at the time of sale and files the state tax returns. States already have online funds transfer when it comes to the payment portion.

4. The legislation exempts online retailers with less than $1,000,000 in sales during the previous tax year, any business doing online sales through the internet so electronic filing and remittance will not be that much of a headache and no one is going to have to sit down and right hundreds of checks each month.



>>>>

Yes only 45. Great use of time. How would you like to do your taxes 45 times at the end of the year?

What exactly is this software going to do? The shopping cart is where the tax will have to be calculated and collected. Will this software provide the programming for every website? Something tells me no. Many shopping carts will have to be upgraded just for this. All the taxes will have to be manually setup in the shopping cart. It's a huge mess. If states want all this work done then they should pay companies to collect it.

 

[Brain357]

The truth of the matter on why the Republicans won't support this bill is that collectively the Republican caucus has sold their soul to the business lobby and the business lobby doesn't want this sales tax obligation because it will increase internet customers bills on internet purchases and thereby cause these customers to purchase less!

Yes it will cause customers to purchase less. Not a good idea in our fragile economy.

 

[Brain357]

I cant believe there are ass clowns out there who WANT more taxation.
OF ANY KIND!!!!!

Ol JimOfPenisAnal really stepped in it.

I don't have an issue with the tax itself. Internet companies that do not charge sales tax cost local businesses a lot of lost business, directly due to the fact they do not charge sales tax. The problem is that there is no simple way to collect the tax and pay it to the correct governing body. Unlike a retail store where they only collect their local sales tax rate, an Internet company would need to collect taxes and pay them based on where their customers live. This would be a nightmare even with good software programs.

You greatly exaggerate how much local business loses. I buy online either because the items aren't available locally or local companies have rediculous pricing. Paying sales tax isn't going to change my shopping habits. The local business has the benefit of letting you see the product, you can get it now, much easier returns, have sales people right there to talk to... Shipping charge levels the playing field on price. If the local company is charging a lot more than you can buy it online with shipping then they are screwing customers.

 

[Mr. H.]

I'm a Republican and I heartily endorse this Bill.

Shirley, I do. Bill.

 

[Brain357]

I hope liberals realize this tax hurts the poor more than the rich. It is the same % for everyone regardless of income.

 

[Wildman]

Pass This Legislation"!!!

are you out of your fucking mind ?

oooooh !! excuse me.., you being a flaming fucking liarberal tells me you have no mind..!!