Posted on 05/07/2013 5:11:46 PM PDT by 2ndDivisionVet
Disgusted and fed up like the rest of us, Sarah Palin rips members of the Republican Party a new one over their support for the so-called “Marketplace Fairness Act” a sales tax on internet purchases.
More new taxes?
How can we be divided on new taxes? In this horribly weak economy with an over-reaching, over-spending, anti-small-business government continually making the wrong decisions, Republicans can’t even stay committed to “No New Taxes”?
Please step away from your Washington, DC bubble and get back in touch with the hard working people who sent you there. Read the planks in our party’s platform and then read our lips. Learn from history or face repeating it: NO NEW TAXES.
~ Sarah Palin
If passed, this new tax will hurt small businesses who do business online the most, as they will be required to keep up with the laws of nearly ten thousand taxing jurisdictions, and remit taxes to each one their customers live in. It will cause many to fold up shop, as they will no longer be profitable.
It should be noted that Wal-Mart, which has a sizable online business, supports this tax 100 percent. Of course, unlike most online retailers, Wal-Mart also has brick and mortar businesses in almost every state. [and thus already collects sales taxes and has the resources to handle this]
Brick and mortar retailers like Wal-Mart claim they are at a disadvantage to internet only retailers, who do not collect sales taxes, unless product is shipped inside the state they have a physical presence....
(Excerpt) Read more at thespeechatimeforchoosing.wordpress.com ...
Click this link and look at the 65 House members that are co-sponsors of the House version of this bill. Many maybe DEMs but some are GOP for sure that I recognize.
House Version:HR 684 including the 65 co-sponsors
http://thomas.loc.gov/cgi-bin/bdquery/z?d113:HR00684:@@@L&summ2=m&;;;;
Does anyone know if internet purchases shipping
charges figured into the discussions?
You and I live in the state with the most insane sales tax laws ever written. We win!!
I think I remember Amazon closing down a couple of physical locations here to avoid dealing with this issue.
When I had the utter misfortune of having to deal up close and personal with sales tax issues..I seem to remember that mail-order retailers weren’t required to collect sales tax, as you have said, but the consumer is required to remit sales tax on their purchases from these companies. Like that is enforceable.
Agreed: no new taxes, no tax increases.
If it passes, no local purchases of non-routine items for me despite the tax. I’ll buy from other, freer states and counties that have fewer regulations and taxes, and I’ll do so through telephone and/or mail order. I will also continue to become more self-sufficient and frugal every month. Simply position to consume less for a legal and honorable embargo against revenues.
When I had the utter misfortune of having to deal up close and personal with sales tax issues..I seem to remember that mail-order retailers weren’t required to collect sales tax, as you have said, but the consumer is required to remit sales tax on their purchases from these companies. Like that is enforceable.
************
That is the basis of most of this effort imo. Many states have a requirement for the paying of a ‘use tax’ which is for items purchased out of state and which no sales tax was collected and remitted back to that state by the seller. In other words someone purchasing stuff out of state via the internet or mail order and didn’t pay the sales tax to the seller then the purchaser was to file and pay the ‘use tax’ to their state at the end of that tax year. Some may have filed/paid but most never did.
Who knows where all this will wind up but the states are pushing for this as it’s tax money they want to have to spread about.
Or that internet stores don’t get to reap much if any “benefits” or “public services” from sales taxes such as roads and sewer lines, libraries, schools, fire and rescue and police and so on, as brick and mortar shops supposedly do thanks to their community taxers.
Under the Constitution States can charge taxes in interstate sales but Congress can claim the money. This is all about setting up the sales tax, blaming the Sates for it, then swooping in and taking the cash.
It is a tax on the time, effort, and bookkeeping of small internet businesses.
Individuals already owe the tax, but now it will be the small, one-state, one locality e-tailer that has to manage the nearly 10,000 separate taxing jurisdictions. Even if software “makes it easy”, the cost of that software is a direct tax on the business - which will jack up their prices, in addition to charging the tax that the customer is required to pay.
Voted for Internet Sales Tax
Alexander (R-TN)
Baldwin (D-WI)
Bennet (D-CO)
Blumenthal (D-CT)
Blunt (R-MO)
Boozman (R-AR)
Boxer (D-CA)
Brown (D-OH)
Burr (R-NC)
Cantwell (D-WA)
Cardin (D-MD)
Carper (D-DE)
Casey (D-PA)
Chambliss (R-GA)
Coats (R-IN)
Cochran (R-MS)
Collins (R-ME)
Coons (D-DE)
Corker (R-TN)
Cowan (D-MA)
Donnelly (D-IN)
Durbin (D-IL)
Enzi (R-WY) Feinstein (D-CA)
Fischer (R-NE)
Franken (D-MN)
Gillibrand (D-NY)
Graham (R-SC)
Hagan (D-NC)
Harkin (D-IA)
Heinrich (D-NM)
Heitkamp (D-ND)
Hirono (D-HI)
Hoeven (R-ND)
Isakson (R-GA)
Johanns (R-NE)
Johnson (D-SD)
Kaine (D-VA)
King (I-ME)
Klobuchar (D-MN)
Landrieu (D-LA)
Leahy (D-VT)
Levin (D-MI)
Manchin (D-WV)
McCain (R-AZ)
McCaskill (D-MO) Menendez (D-NJ)
Mikulski (D-MD)
Murphy (D-CT)
Murray (D-WA)
Nelson (D-FL)
Portman (R-OH)
Pryor (D-AR)
Reed (D-RI)
Reid (D-NV)
Rockefeller (D-WV)
Sanders (I-VT)
Schatz (D-HI)
Schumer (D-NY)
Sessions (R-AL)
Shelby (R-AL)
Stabenow (D-MI)
Thune (R-SD)
Udall (D-CO)
Udall (D-NM)
Warner (D-VA)
Warren (D-MA)
Whitehouse (D-RI)
Wicker (R-MS)
Internet sales inside a state where the seller has a physical presence requires the seller to charge tax *for the location of the seller*. Internet sales where the customer is in a state that the seller has no physical presence in are still taxed, but the buyer is responsible for declaring the purchase and paying the tax on April 15th.
Under this bill, the internet seller becomes a sales tax collector for all of the nearly 10,000 sales tax jurisdictions. And the seller would be punishable for not properly remitting the taxes, even though they may have never set foot in that particular state.
Large retailers like Walmart and Amazon, which have physical presences in just about every state, don’t mind the bill so much because they have already purchased a system to handle the collection and remittance - because they have physical presences in most of the jurisdictions. These huge stores want to push that cost onto their internet rivals, to “even the score”.
It has been remarked by some that “free” software will quickly become available to handle the issue. I doubt, quite seriously, that any company can afford to use “free” software to interface with government taxing entities, just because a mistake in the software would make the user liable - perhaps criminally liable - despite the fact that the mistake is in the software.
Individuals already owe the tax, but now it will be the small, one-state, one locality e-tailer that has to manage the nearly 10,000 separate taxing jurisdictions. Even if software “makes it easy”, the cost of that software is a direct tax on the business - which will jack up their prices, in addition to charging the tax that the customer is required to pay.
***************
It’s going to be a change for sure. But I think the 10,000 separate taxing jurisdictions is just hype, not the number but having to pay each one individually. I don’t think any retailer within a state has to break all that info out now on sales taxes they collect and remit. They pay the state the required total tax amount and the state separates into the taxing divisions. I maybe wrong on that, I believe that is how the process works.
Here’s a link to a web site offering the calucation of taxes based upon zip code.
http://www.zip2tax.com/z2t_lookup.asp?s=google&gclid=CLiX_dH6hLcCFQVV4AodcWQAMA
Here is the Organization to which 44 states set up back in 2002 and some 24 states now have their processes in place. This is the Organization referred to in the Legislation passed in the Senate which is designed to help the states collect the sales tax.
http://www.streamlinedsalestax.org/
Has anyone caught the fact that the internet tax bill changes the locale of the charged tax from the seller’s to the buyers? If you go to a store in a neighboring town, you pay that town’s rate. If you buy on the internet from a neighboring state, you pay your own locale’s rate.
Thank you both for your explantions (deport’s #27 post).
I have been having a very difficult time understanding why this is a federal issue instead of being handled at the state level.
I have been having a very difficult time understanding why this is a federal issue instead of being handled at the state level.
***************
I think it is the states that are putting the pressure on Congress to help them collect this some $11 billion dollars in sales taxes that aren’t being paid on internet/mail order sales. The money doesn’t go to the feds. Look at some of the supporters of this stuff and you’d think they would take a hands off approach but didn’t.
Some of the states have been trying going back to 2002 to solve this problem using the following organization. This is the organization that is referenced in the Congressional legislation. To date there are 24 states up and running out of 44 that signed on initially to try and collect these taxes.
http://www.streamlinedsalestax.org/
The gov’t federal/state/local are all going to push to collect tax money they deem they are owed. One big entity with separate branches.
Unless these 44 state governments indemnify anyone using their info, then there is a legal jeopardy that comes from using it.
With respect to the website, unless it is guaranteed accurate (and indemnifies users from mistakes), it is not worth betting the business on.
There are almost 10,000 separate sales tax jurisdictions in this country. Under this bill, the tax locale is no longer the location of the seller - it becomes the address of the buyer. That means that a buyer who lives in a city which charges additional sales tax over the state value must be charged more than one who lives in the same state but outside a local sales tax area.
The way brick-and-mortar stores, and internet retailers inside the same state, deal with this is that they charge the applicable tax for the location of their facility. They remit all of the money to the state, and the state divvies it up based on the retailer’s location (splitting out applicable local sales taxes).
Unless local sales taxes are explicitly ruled out under the bill, the internet retailer would have to remit all state and local sales taxes, along with specific data on the location (by tax jurisdiction) of the purchasers.
The state can deal with larger amounts posted by a store with an address in a specific jurisdiction - because they are a known entity. To do the same for internet sales means that the customer’s house becomes the point of sale, and each tax jurisdiction will require enough information to justify their “fair share”.
The more I think this through the less I like it - because it also has the capability of becoming a direct source of government knowledge (and thereafter control) of each individual’s internet purchasing habits.
Think about it this way - to “level the playing field”, a brick and mortar store would have to gather your mailing address and calculate your sales tax based on where you live - not on where their store actually is. That is the explicit effect of this bill on internet retailers - and compliance will be a nightmare.
By the way - I looked at the org website you linked to, and there is a “certified service provider” contract you can peruse. This is a contract between the providers of software that calculate sales taxes (”contractor”) and the organization. Stores who are looking to use those contractors’ services will have to pay said contractor for the privilege.
Let me restate that - Internet retailers who use the certified service provider “contractors” to remit sales taxes to the covered jurisdictions will have to pay the contractor for the privilege of being tax collectors for states they have no connection with.
“I don’t think any retailer has to break out...”
Sadly (only because it is a bookkeeping nightmare) when sales tax is reported and remitted, one must report by county...and collect any county/MTA tax due for each county. I wonder if county/MTA tax will figure into this.
This may not be the case in all states. Maybe other states have a standard rate thru out.
In some cases, the increased remittance could be sizable in total..but most individuals won’t challenge it.
In a state like Tx, where there is a variance from county to county (not to mention the rate due on different items purchased) it may be the state will rely on the fact that most companies will collect the full amount...even though it might not be due.
It's always been like that to some degree but the current level of corruption and decadence beats anything I've seen in my rather long lifetime. It's a given that liberals skew to lawlessness, deceit, dishonesty and thuggery (they win by any means necessary!) but they've infected the whole culture.
Now the very foundations of Western civilization are under relentless attack: marriage, sexual identity, the role of men in society, religious beliefs, the value of human life (abortion), the nature of truth and reality (postmodernism), the scientific method -- virtually all the positive values my life has been based on. Anarchy and moral relativism appear to be our society's future.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.