Posted on 02/27/2002 6:16:23 AM PST by SunTzu2000
STOP KANSAS ONLINE SALES TAX
| Hey Kansas Residents,
Call your Senators and ask them to oppose Online Taxes.Oppose SB-540Find your Senator http://skyways2.lib.ks.us/ksleg/ Local Johnson County Office will transfer your call to Topeka. The Goal of bIll - Internet Sales Tax Results: KANSAS MOVES TOWARD JOINING ONLINE SALES TAX PROJECThttp://www.imarketingnews.com By: Melissa Campanelli Kansas is one step closer to taxing online sales after the state Senate's Assessment and Taxation Committee approved a bill that would allow Kansas to participate in the Streamlined Sales Tax Project, an effort by 21 states to collect sales taxes on Internet and catalog sales. The bill, SB-540, goes to the full Senate for approval. The measure also directs the state Department of Revenue to develop changes to existing laws that would allow the state and local governments to tax sales made over the Internet by out-of-state sellers when the federal ban on Internet taxes expires Nov. 1, 2003. Missouri lawmakers also are trying to revive a bill that would allow taxes on Internet sales. Currently, companies with a physical presence in Kansas or Missouri have to charge sales tax on Internet purchases by state residents, but companies outside the two states do not. In those cases, buyers are asked to pay the sales tax, but they rarely do. Though the Kansas Senate is expected to approve the measure, the Kansas House of Representatives reportedly is less firmly behind the proposal. Republican State Sen. Les Donovan told the Kansas City Star he estimates the state is losing $100 million a year in taxes on Internet sales. But Republican Tony Powell, who chairs the House Taxation Committee, told the newspaper he wasn't "convinced that the state is losing that much revenue." More on the Senate |
Three little words....
Republican, The state...
They seem to go together quite well these days while two other words like "republican" and "conservative" seem to have NOTHING in common.
Article 1, Section 9, Clause 5 of the US Constitution...
No Tax or Duty shall be laid on Articles exported from any State
How does he know?
Sounds like another money grabbing politician.
If his bill passes, the goverment just got it's hands on internet freedoms even more.
It's the last free place in this country, and it's not even in this country, it's in cyberspace !!! What's next, cyberspace land taxes?
I wouldn't be surprised if they did try to come up with some kind of "property tax" on server space and bandwidth.
Hell, California tried to impose property taxes on satellites in space!
The trouble is, it's hard to tell the difference. (even if you knew what real Republicans stand for)
Amazon.com has the advantage of not having to charge tax while the local businesses are being hurt.
Same for other items we buy on the net.....the local store will most likely go out of business due to his high cost of doing business and the lack of people shopping in his establishment.
I like the idea of shopping online, it's cheaper, and I get to send gifts without having to leave my home. They pick it, pack it,and ship it for me.......but I do see how it hurts small and large so called brick and mortar businesses who must charge tax.
Besides, who really reads that old thing, anyway? It's not as if the population stands up for it, or that there's any "controlling legal authority" to make sure it's enforced. The sheep will bear it, just like everything else that gets crammed down their throats.
I prefer to buy books (and other stuff) at the store. The tax is cheaper than shipping costs that come with internet purcheses. (We homeschool and buy a LOT of books. The shipping costs almost as much as the books!).
It in no way hurts brick and mortar stores. They are opening new ones every day and the large retailers are seeing record sales numbers.
They fears they had of internet retailers were unfounded and have been shown to be non-existant. And how many of those internet retailers from 2, 3, 4 years ago are still in business? Not many.
Convienence and selection are the reasons that people shop at Amazon over the local book store. Many times, if a store doesnt have a book you want it will take them longer to get it in than it will for Amazon to ship it to you. And then when it does get in you have to take another trip to the store to pick it up. Too much of a hassle for me. I will stick with online shopping. And I do a lot of it. Though books are a very very small portion of what I buy online.
Please elaborate. I'd love to know what "real" Republicans stand for and what the difference is between the two. Thanks
I agree about the entire tax mess but since we all have the same burdens it seems unfair that the net gets a break.
Actually we don't get that much of a break in not taxing internet sales, but government would dearly have us believe we do.
We spend "disposable income", (i.e. "aftertax" income) which finances all income that is taxed. Viewing from the perspective of consumption dollars, where it is all generated, we get an entirely different perspective on what is being done to us.
Between business income taxes and payroll taxes, the burden on citizen as reflected through higher prices, lower wages, and lower return on investements are horrendous.
The following article covers the mechanism on how the current tax system propagates and is embedded consumption expenditure.
DO YOU PAY YOUR INCOME TAX
AT THE SUPERMARKET?
by D. Sherman Cox J.D. L.L.M. Taxation
The percentage used in the above article is somewhat off target in that it is based on a percentage that excludes individual income tax and SS/medicare contribution extracted out of individual wages & salaries. The 24% in the article considers only those factors actually paid to government out of impositions on the business in complying with the income, payroll, excise & tariff tax laws.
The total contribution of the federal tax system(including taxes in gross wage/salaries) to the price of retail consumption goods and services is 36% for federal taxes alone. Including cost of compliance at around $600billion/year, increases that percentage to about a 47% total burden out of family consumption expenditures induced by the federal tax system alone as it exists today.
I reckon I better tell the gas station owners I know hereabouts that they'd better not sell gas to anyone whose cars have Kansas plates. Wouldn't want them to get busted for Kansas tax evasion, and it's better not to take any chances....
-archy-/-
Fortunately, Oregon has no sales tax, so states instituting them on the internet will be giving me a huge leg up over their own online entrepreneurs.
Be sure to thank your legislators for me!
Trent Lott=RINO
Don Nichols=Repub
Feel Better now Thomas?
Nope
Care to take up the challenge on the specifics?
"Please elaborate. I'd love to know what "real" Republicans stand for and what the difference is between the two. Thanks"
I'm out of here for a few hours, anyone want to take a crack at it, I'll check back later. Thanks
Vigorous competition will result in the market itself determining the viability of any good or service, and will, over the long run, result in the betterment of both!!!
It's EASY to tell the difference. One starts with an "R" and the other one starts with a "D". That's the major difference. Other minor diffences are that one has four syllables while the other has only three, and one has ten letters to the other one's eight. Beyond that, it's hard to see a difference.
Vigorous competition will result in the market itself determining the viability of any good or service, and will, over the long run, result in the betterment of both!!!
That may be true when all sides are playing with the same deck of cards. Unfortunately, there is what amounts to a protective Tarrif sitting against Brick & Mortar shops imposed by default as long as Internet shops do not collect the same visible taxes.
As far as I am concerned I would prefer to see all in-the-background business taxes (income & payroll) removed totally. The customer finances the tax bill regardless, either do not impose any tax on business whatsoever, or lay clear and visible taxes in the customer's (i.e. Voter) view as excises or pure Retail Sales Taxes. Only when the "Voter" perceives the butchers bill will he ever move to reign in government excess.
The biggest problem with growth of government lays with the fact that over 60% of the populace does not percieve the burdens laid on them. Their view is limited only to that individual income tax which for byfar the majority pay little to nothing or even get subsidized via the EITC. As long as that is the case, you can expect government to grow without bound.
The Honorable James DeMint (R-SC)
United States House of RepresentativesTHURSDAY, APRIL 5, 2001
12:00 noon"In 1996, Congress passed a historic welfare reform law that has dramatically reduced the number of Americans who depend on welfare. In spite of this positive development, Representative DeMint is concerned about the steady growth of a welfare/entitlement state that extends well beyond the poor and is forcing millions of middle income Americans into dependency.
There has been a shift in the relationship between individuals and government, he argues, such that fewer and fewer are paying taxes at the same time that more and more are receiving increasingly generous benefits. If it becomes the case that most voters do not bear a financial burden for this largess, then there will be little to restrain--and significant political incentives to encourage--the continued growth of government. And at that point, DeMint warns, we have reached a major crisis in our democracy."
Milton Friedman as quoted by Northwest Florida Daily News, 10-16-2000:
Walter Williams, World Net Daily, 10-25-2000
According to the most recent U.S. Treasury Department figures, in 1997 the top 1 percent of income-earners (those with income of $250,000 and higher) paid 33 percent of all federal income taxes. The top 5 percent of income-earners ($108,000 and over) paid 52 percent, and the top 50 percent ($36,000 and over) paid 96 percent of income taxes. Guess what the bottom 50 percent of income earners paid?
If you're among those who pay little or no federal income taxes, what do you care about tax cuts? Moreover, if you think tax cuts pose a threat to government handout programs, you might be openly hostile and support Al Gore's silly "risky scheme" talk. So many Americans paying little or no federal taxes makes for a natural spending constituency. It's like me in the restaurant: What do I care about extravagance if you're footing the bill?
To remove taxation of the individual, is to remove the goad which assures accountability of government to the electorate. Federal taxes are high because a majority of the electorate do not share proportionately in the burden their demand for largesse imposes on the minority of citizens.
The trend to representation without taxation is the formula that got us where we are at today. The ability to hide or disguise taxation from the view of large sectors of the electorate allows the Congress to get away with the creation of the evergrowing monster that it fosters.
A government which robs Peter to pay Paul can always depend on the support of Paul.
-George Bernard Shaw
Liberty and freedom have a price, responsibility. If that price is avoided there are no brakes on the growth of government, the ultimate result is the end of freedom through creeping socialism.
"A democracy cannot exist as a permanent form of government. It can only exist until the voters discover that they can vote themselves money from the public treasure. From that moment on the majority always votes for the candidates promising the most money from the public treasury, with the result that a democracy always collapses over loose fiscal policy followed by a dictatorship. The average age of the world's great civilizations has been two hundred years. These nations have progressed through the following sequence:
- from bondage to spiritual faith,
- from spiritual faith to great courage, from courage to liberty,
- from liberty to abundance,
- from abundance to selfishness,
- from selfishness to complacency,
- from complacency to apathy, from apathy to dependency,
- from dependency back to bondage."
Alexander Tyler
The same is true in this Republic dominated by a few political parties, which become indistinguishable from the worst of democracies contolled by faction and the demogogue.
Right now the bottom 60% perceive little to no "Individual Income Tax" burden,(in many cases even a handout) and 70% continue to clamor for more from government looking for the top 30% to pay for it, corroborated by many recent polls on the subject of people attitudes about tax reduction. That perception continues to grow ever stronger by eliminating even more participants from the Individual Income Tax rolls as proposed in the current tax reduction proposals currently on board through changes in personal exemption limits and other mechanisms such as the EITC.
Those who perceive little burden play the role of Poor little Paul:
| Effective Individual Federal Income Tax Rate (Percent of gross income) | |||||||||||
| Income Category | 1977 | 1979 | 1981 | 1983 | 1985 | 1987 | 1989 | 1991 | 1993 | 1995 | Projected 1999 |
| Lowest Quintile | -0.6 | -0.8 | -0.2 | -0.5 | -0.2 | -1.3 | -1.9 | -2.9 | -3.4 | -5.6 | -6.8 |
| Second Quintile | 3.6 | 3.9 | 4.6 | 3.5 | 3.9 | 3.2 | 3.3 | 2.7 | 1.8 | 1.8 | 0.9 |
| Middle Quintile | 7.1 | 7.5 | 8.3 | 6.8 | 6.8 | 6.1 | 6.5 | 6.3 | 5.9 | 6.1 | 5.4 |
Those that readily perceive some of the burden.
| Effective Individual Federal Income Tax Rate (Percent of gross income) | |||||||||||
| Income Category | 1977 | 1979 | 1981 | 1983 | 1985 | 1987 | 1989 | 1991 | 1993 | 1995 | Projected 1999 |
| Fourth Quintile | 9.7 | 10.4 | 11.3 | 9.5 | 9.3 | 8.7 | 8.9 | 8.7 | 8.5 | 8.7 | 8.4 |
| Highest Quintile | 15.8 | 16.3 | 17.1 | 14.5 | 14.3 | 15.1 | 15.1 | 14.8 | 15.5 | 16.2 | 16.1 |
To play the role of mean ole Rich Peter.
While Congress plays both ends against the middle; hiding the real burden in inflation, higher prices on all goods and services, lower takehome pay, lower return on investment, and higher interest rates. All keeping the poor right where they are and pushing for more freebees.
Consider that 15.3% SS/Medicare tax on the 1st $75K of wages/self-employment income, plus the 6% Federal/State Unemployment tax, all of which are but a portion of the effect of federal taxes embedded the price of all products we purchase. Taken together with the Individual tax rates above we all pay more than:
| Effective Total Federal Tax Rate (Percent of reported income) | |||||||||||
| Income Category | 1977 | 1979 | 1981 | 1983 | 1985 | 1987 | 1989 | 1991 | 1993 | 1995 | Projected 1999 |
| All Families | 22.8 | 23.4 | 23.5 | 21.4 | 21.8 | 22.6 | 22.5 | 22.6 | 23.5 | 24.7 | 24.2 |
Data from IRS collections statistics and The Bureau of Economic Analysis as compiled in tabular form by the Congressional Budget Office.
http://www.cbo.gov/showdoc.cfm?index=1545&from=4&sequence=0
We wonder why over 70% of the voters PERCEIVE no problem with the taxrates and vote for polidiots that promise to bring home the most bacon because they are the only ones that benefit from higher taxes with more spending on socialistic "gimme" programs. As this continues under Bush or anyone else for that matter, expect a tax and waste congress for many years to come.
We are all paying through the nose, rich and poor while politicians play the tune of envy and resentment that Americans continue to respond to not understanding the full picture what is happening to them.
http://www.kansascity.com/mld/kansascity/2758377.htm
TOPEKA - The Kansas Senate today voted 35-5 to join with other states looking at ways to collect taxes from Internet sales.
The measure would allow Kansas to become a voting member of the Streamlined Sales Tax Project, a consortium of 21 states working on an efficient way to collect sales taxes on Internet and catalog sales.
Congress currently has a moratorium on taxing Internet sales, but that is scheduled to end late next year.
If U.S. lawmakers don't extend the moratorium, states could begin taxing Internet sales.
Supporters of the bill passed by the Senate said it would not establish a tax on Internet sales. They said a future Legislature still would have to make that decision after a multistate collection method is determined.
That argument, however, didn't persuade Sen. Kay O'Connor, an Olathe Republican, to vote for the bill.
"This is an effort to establish an Internet tax, and I'm opposed to it," O'Connor said.
Missouri lawmakers are attempting to pass a similar bill.
The Kansas measure now goes to the House, where there has been considerable opposition to it. The Kansas Senate approved a similar bill last year, but the measure died in the House.
O'Connor was the only senator from Johnson or Wyandotte counties to votes against the bill.
The bill is S.B. 540. Bills are available on the Internet at http://www.kslegislature.org/cgi-bin/index.cgi.
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.