Replies

In general, they would all get the benefit, since businesses in other states would be remitting the taxes to their state, while they were remitting taxes to the other states.

Of course, net export states would come out ahead.

But the law could provide remittance to the out-of-state companies for collecting the taxes. Of course, if that was too high, it would be another thing that would bias the free market toward the out-of-state internet company.

This issue isn’t about the taxes. It is about collecting the taxes. The taxes are a state issue. If i don’t like my state sales tax, I can ask my representatives to change it or repeal it.

We are talking about aiding the state in tax enforcement.

It isn’t that different than federal and state collection of income tax withholding.

We are talking about aiding the state in tax enforcement.

In "THEORY" they would all get the benefit, but that isn't reality. With brick and mortar stores they get repaid for performing this service for THEIR state. There is no way that a state is going to remit back to out-of-state sellers for their services; it would not pass!

I simply don't think that a company formed in Idaho, subject to the laws thereof, should also be forced to be subject to the laws of all the other states - that is why they are in Idaho! If they wanted to be subject to the laws of Texas, they would pack-up and move to Texas.

Do you believe that a Sears store in North Carlina should demand to see your license so that they can collect Virginia taxes based on YOUR HOME ADDRESS? That would be an asinine suggestion, and so is this.

If anything, I could see where online sellers could collect sales taxes based on where the SELLER is located, since that is what brick & mortar stores are required to do. Anything else is extortion by out of state legislatures whom the seller cannot vote out or anything else - except refuse to sell people of that state - which will only benefit the big online stores and brick & mortars - which is what this is designed to do!