Posted on 01/14/2018 9:15:09 AM PST by Olog-hai
The Supreme Court agreed Friday to decide if states should be able to collect taxes on internet sales, which would generate billions in revenue for local governments, but also raise the cost of online shopping for consumers.
Just over a quarter-century ago, the court ruled that a state could not force mail order catalog companies to collect sales taxes unless they had a physical presence in the state. Led by South Dakota, 36 states want the court to take another look at the issue, arguing that the 1992 decision was issued “before Amazon was even selling books out of Jeff Bezos’s garage.” Part of the court’s logic was that it would be too difficult for mail order companies to compute the widely varying tax rates among, and even within, the 50 states.
But lawyers for South Dakota said that’s no longer an issue in the digital age. “Advances in computing have made it easy for retailers to collect different states’ sales taxes,” they wrote in a court brief. […]
Congress has considered a plan to allow states to collect taxes on purchases made by their residents through out-of-state companies, but no legislation has passed.
Lawyers for the states said they’re losing nearly $34 billion a year because of the physical presence rule, though estimates from the federal Government Accountability Office said the figure is much smaller. …
(Excerpt) Read more at nbcnews.com ...
NBC = Nothing But Counterfeit
Don’t believe these Lying Leftist Media outlets that proved themselves during the 2016 campaign to be operatives of the DNC and intentional liars. They are presumed to be lying and we should presume what they publish is a lie. The presumption can only be rebutted with the outlet providing clear and convincing evidence they are not lying.
Why don’t we follow Trump’s lead here on FR? Let’s limit posting headlines from these wretched Lying Leftist outlets. If this story is true and has some redeeming value, at least get the story from a reasonably reliable source, not from a known Lying Leftist operative posing as a “news” organization.
I hate taxes.
REMEMBER:
The Supreme Court has NO CONSTITUTIONAL AUTHORITY to make national law!
How else would we know what the left wing is up to?
Only the sleeper trolls would pretend it’s not fake news.
absolutely NO. Totally unconstitutional. No question about it.
Taxing good things out of existence is a majot pre-occupation of the Democrats. They’ll eventually kill free email and tax every click on Youtube, which will destroy it. Google’s left leanings will be its undoing.
“Only the sleeper trolls would pretend it’s not fake news.”
Ok so the SC is not taking up the issue? What makes this fake news?
I would also like to see a “Barf Alert” forum and move all of the Trump hate and fakes news stuff there. It’s out of control on here news/activism.
Do what Trump does. Read their crap, but don't pass along the lies. Find a reasonably reliable source or you as the source, to tell the truth about this story.
Amazon already collects sales taxes on purchases. What is this news report about?
Kinda like ObozoCare? But they did it anyway.
Current Supreme Court precedent holds that a retailer must have a physical presence in a state before sales tax can be charged on its interstate sales into that state. This seems both sound law and economically reasonable in that such sales do not provoke a need for government services that a retailer’s physical presence evokes. My guess is that the Court will again follow this rule and emphasize that Congress can use its commerce power to change it if they wish. In other words, the people’s elected representatives should make the final and binding decision on the issue.
Like that has stopped um in the past
It is up to US, through our state and federal representatives to stop it. Now.
The country is founded by WE THE PEOPLE and it is time for WE THE PEOPLE to re-commandeer the Constitution as the Supreme Law of the Land against the tyranny and lawlessness of the feds.
This one happens to be accurate. The court is indeed hearing the case.
I remember when we were a Constitutional Republic and we decide things through our representatives.
They bastardized marriage.
I do not think they can do that either, but they did.
Lawyers for the states said they’re losing nearly $34 billion a year because of the physical presence rule, though estimates from the federal Government Accountability Office said the figure is much smaller.
A pet peeve of mine, is people saying that some entity of government, is “losing” money, due to an inability to tax some sort of activity.
This implies that somehow this money belongs to the government, and the government has an unalienable absolute right to tax absolutely everything.
Anyone agree? Anyone disagree, and think that government should calculate that they “lose x amount”, if something isn’t taxed, and then figure out a way to impose a new tax?
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.