April 17, 2007 4:00 AM PDT
Days numbered for tax-free Net sales
- Related Stories
-
IRS warns of online tax filing scams
April 16, 2007 -
Selling stuff online? Here comes the IRS
April 13, 2007 -
IRS trudges on with aging computers
April 12, 2007 -
Senators mull new taxes to fund 911 Net upgrade
April 10, 2007 -
Silicon money
March 27, 2006 -
Senators propose taxing Internet shopping
December 21, 2005 -
Phishers use IRS tax refund as bait
November 30, 2005 -
States yearn to collect online sales taxes
April 15, 2005 -
States push for piece of online sales
April 9, 2004 -
The Massachusetts Internet tax mystery
November 10, 2003 -
Fighting Internet taxes to the end
January 4, 2002 -
Selling a new Net tax system
November 15, 2001 -
Net taxes may be inevitable
October 30, 2001
A powerful alliance of politicians, including key U.S. senators and the National Governors Association, is arguing that out-of-state retailers must be required to
This is hardly a new debate: officials from the governors' association have been
What has changed, however, is the political dynamic. While its precise contours are difficult to map, a Democrat-controlled Congress is seen as more likely to agree to the idea than one controlled by Republicans.
"When you have a Democratic majority in Congress, that Congress will be more friendly to imposing new burdens on business if it means additional tax collection," said Steve DelBianco, executive director of the
Another factor that could tip the scales in Washington in favor of the pro-sales tax forces is a concept called the
"Without any doubt, Congress will eventually approve legislation to give states that comply with the (agreement) mandatory collection authority for out-of-state transactions," said Neal Osten, federal affairs counsel for the National Conference of State Legislatures. "We expect that the legislation will be introduced shortly in this Congress."
So far, 22 states have signed onto the project by enacting legislation to simplify their tax codes, Osten said. "We believe that with the system operational, with software and online collection available, sellers volunteering and revenues being collected, Congress will consider the legislation and indeed approve it," he added in an e-mail message.
Sticky debate over "candy" definition
A simplification effort is key because of the dizzying complexity of state tax laws. One example is the Streamlined Sales Tax Project's "
Flour as an ingredient became a sticky point. In 2003, a representative of Indiana, James Turner, noted that a proposed definition of candy would have taxed the Milky Way Midnight candy bar but not the original Milky Way bar. But further investigation showed that Turner's counter-proposal would have treated "certain flavors of Pop Tarts" and Cookies and Twix Crunchy Cookie Bars as candy--but not Cookies and Snickers Crunchy Cookie Bars. Peanut butter Girl Scout cookies would be candy, but
Bizarre distinctions like this, coupled with the existence of more than 7,000 different tax agencies, explain why the U.S. Supreme Court ruled, in a 1992 case called
One exception to that is a legal concept called "
See more CNET content tagged:
tax,
Governor,
legislation,
retailer,
food
One would assume that as the world's most powerful nation we need governmnt to keep our standard of living so high, at least subconsciously we do.
Accountability is always being fostered on any revenue generating entity, be it person or business.
There are too, too many business that whine and complain and lobby that they are so hard done by and in conjunction with the governments themselves who do the same and get downright mean and nasty, partly enforced by the no-mind public adminstration that has been instituted, that is just greedy, grabby glutonous, godless goofing on the over burden half of the population that can not really afford it.
The time is neigh to start making use of your citizenships and vote no for anyone in favor of further taxation.
Without a public scrutiny in place, without the government acting accountably, without the public e-mailing, phoning, writing your representative, it will just be another nail in the coffin of a free and just society, one that has real representation.
In the end, it's all about the money. The Government, wether local or national, sees a way to make alot of money with very little effort, just tax everything.
I have no objection to the streamlined sales tax initiative,per se, but anymsolution that presumes to take my time and effort to give the State its "due" is one I don't care to support.
If I open a company that selles exclusively on the internet, it's not practical for me to be expected to know and apply sales tax regulations for all 413+ sovereign countries of the world, every one of the thousands of states, territories, counties parrishes, cities, townships, etc.
Adding a qualifier of "significant presence" automatically means an unfair, subjective, discriminatory burden has placed on a business.
Taxes, no matter who levies them, should always be equitably and fairly applied, and should always be earmarked for a specific purpose. Otherwise, they are a tool of greedy politicians to steal other people's hard-earned money for their own selfish, pork-barrelled interests that ultimately benefit them and their small circles of cronies.
You're telling me they are doing this out of the goodness of their hearts? I don't think so. The reason why this law is irrelevant is that individual states already have their own online sales tax laws in place. And if the online business operates outside of the US the law is unenforceable anyway.
Here's a new idea. How about cut spending?
Sell your Google stock if this happens because most of their advertisers are ecommerce and will be less likely to advertise to an audience that is no longer their base.
As for this killing the sellings of things on the net, please people get a brain. When you end up spending $200 more for something by buying it locally plus tax verses buying it online for $200 less plus tax and shipping you are still going to go with the online purchase. Unless of course your a moron.
I just went through this. I bought a Sony camcorder. To buy it locally it would have been over $700. I got it only for less than $500. Even if the place where I bought it collected tax and even with shipping costs I would have saved a great deal of money.
Most local stores charge suggested retail. Frankly they are the ones I can figure out how they stay in business.
Either way the sellers should have to deal with the tax, they are the ones selling and in business no the consumers.
Maybe the states should consider collecting only half the tax amount for online sales.
Robert
It is too bad all of you swallow and none of you knows how to keep track of all the things the various levels of government are spending tax dollars on. None of you really has a clue even when brought to the brink for a drink.
Do you for half a second imagine the government is losing out? NO!!! They see an opportunity to exploit the dimbulbs and are making a play for it. If you guys let them, then that just continues to be your hard luck.
Maybe you should kneel while you are swallowing all that malarky they are feeding you.
I guess if it feels good then why bother asking to even see the books or get an explanation - hahahah the ol' u.s. of a. comes out of the closet.
A
SO unless this gets repealed, I say to the rest of the country, welcome to our world.
And I dont want to hear any complaining - this is the 'change' everyone appearently wanted. I hope you enjoy.
- Its called Politics
-
by Zupek
April 17, 2007 2:01 PM PDT
- You wont find any politician actually looking our for the true good of the people(MAYBE russ feingold). There has never been a democracy that has looked out for its people, just the illusion that it is....do some research you'll find out how "great" this country ISNT
-
Reply to this comment
View
reply
-
-
See all 72 Comments >>