Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

Supreme Court hears case on online sales tax
CBS "News" ^ | April 16, 2018

Posted on 04/16/2018 6:52:39 AM PDT by Oldeconomybuyer

Sales Tax: $0.

Online shoppers have gotten used to seeing that line on checkout screens before they click "purchase." But a case before the Supreme Court could change that.

At issue is a rule stemming from two, decades-old Supreme Court cases: If a business is shipping to a state where it doesn't have an office, warehouse or other physical presence, it doesn't have to collect the state's sales tax.

That means large retailers such as Apple, Macy's, Target and Walmart, which have brick-and-mortar stores nationwide, generally collect sales tax from customers who buy from them online. But other online sellers, from 1-800 Contacts to home goods site Wayfair, can often sidestep charging the tax.

The case now before the Supreme Court involves South Dakota, which has no income tax and relies heavily on sales tax for revenue. South Dakota's governor has said the state loses out on an estimated $50 million a year in sales tax that doesn't get collected by out-of-state sellers.

(Excerpt) Read more at cbsnews.com ...


TOPICS: Business/Economy; Constitution/Conservatism; Government; News/Current Events
KEYWORDS: governmentgreed; internettax; nexus; online; quill; quill1992; quillvsnd; rubegoldberg; salestax; scotus; states; tariff; tariffs; taxes
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-2021-4041-6061-80 ... 101-106 next last

1 posted on 04/16/2018 6:52:39 AM PDT by Oldeconomybuyer
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies]

To: Oldeconomybuyer

Good. Even the playing field. Tax everyone equally.


2 posted on 04/16/2018 6:55:20 AM PDT by shelterguy (Bigdeal)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: shelterguy

Good for higher taxes?


3 posted on 04/16/2018 6:57:32 AM PDT by frogjerk (We are conservatives. Not libertarians, not "fiscal conservatives", not moderates)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: shelterguy

Good for greedy state governments?


4 posted on 04/16/2018 6:58:14 AM PDT by frogjerk (We are conservatives. Not libertarians, not "fiscal conservatives", not moderates)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: Oldeconomybuyer
So what happens if a small time Ebay seller living in Pennsylvania, trying to make a few extra bucks sells a used book and a jacket to a guy in Indiana?
5 posted on 04/16/2018 7:00:01 AM PDT by 4yearlurker ("There stands mother under the oleanders,open the windows." A dying cowboys last words,1879.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Oldeconomybuyer

I don’t know about others, but my state and local taxes over the past 20 years has gone up WAY MORE than my federal taxes.

I guess the states and cities simply have very, very, good lobbyists in DC.


6 posted on 04/16/2018 7:00:25 AM PDT by BobL (I shop at Walmart and eat at McDonald's...I just don't tell anyone)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Oldeconomybuyer
The end of Amazon? 🤔💰⚖. Nah!
7 posted on 04/16/2018 7:01:17 AM PDT by rktman (Enlisted in the Navy in '67 to protect folks rights to strip my rights. WTH?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Oldeconomybuyer

$50 million out of a total of $2 Billion. Yeah, that’s a good reason to add $billions in regulatory overhead to stores in other states to collect taxes for you.

Sorry, but the playing field is already level... I do a few online sales and collect tax in my state just like any other store. If someone from South Dakota comes to my store (or any other store in my state) it’s not up to us to find out what the tax should be and file a return for every municipality in the country.


8 posted on 04/16/2018 7:01:57 AM PDT by fluffy
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: shelterguy
Good. Even the playing field. Tax everyone equally.

But, Better: Require a strict accounting of every dollar collected in taxes at all levels. No more tens or hundreds of thousands, millions or billions disappearing down local, state and federal rabbit holes! No more public spending on anything not specifically authorized in local, state of federal legislation.

9 posted on 04/16/2018 7:02:00 AM PDT by JimRed ( TERM LIMITS, NOW! Build the Wall Faster! TRUTH is the new HATE SPEECH.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: frogjerk

Not at all. It means every business that sells to me in my town pays and collects the tax equally.


10 posted on 04/16/2018 7:02:59 AM PDT by shelterguy (Bigdeal)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies]

To: JimRed

That’s OR federal...


11 posted on 04/16/2018 7:04:53 AM PDT by JimRed ( TERM LIMITS, NOW! Build the Wall Faster! TRUTH is the new HATE SPEECH.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 9 | View Replies]

To: Oldeconomybuyer
an estimated $50 million a year in sales tax that doesn't get collected by out-of-state sellers

So what? The rationale behind charging sales tax for businesses in state is that they receive the dubious "benefits" of the local and state governments. An out of state business receives no such "benefits" why should they charge tax?

Just because a greedy government doesn't get to extort a fraction of some transaction is not sufficient reason to start the practice. If the state isn't getting $50 million, then that's $50 million that the citizens are keeping in their own pockets. Anything that leaves money in the citizens pockets rather than the government's coffers is a good thing.

All Democrats and most Republicans seem to think that everything of yours belongs to the government and you're only allowed to keep what little fraction you have as a generous gesture from government. They think that the citizens' role is to provide the government with unlimited funds to squander on things that benefit bureaucrats and politicians.

12 posted on 04/16/2018 7:05:35 AM PDT by from occupied ga (Your government is your most dangerous enemy)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: shelterguy

Good. Even the playing field. Tax everyone equally.


That is what they are already doing. If you do business in a state, you collect sales tax. If you send an item from your state to someone in another state you don’t have a relationship with the latter state so collecting sales tax on their behalf would be kinda dumb.


13 posted on 04/16/2018 7:07:55 AM PDT by robroys woman (So you're not confused, I'm using my wife's account.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: fluffy

The playing field is already level.

Shop in person, you pay sales tax.

Shop on line, and in most cases, you have to pay shipping.
(I’m a small eBay seller and I charge shipping).


14 posted on 04/16/2018 7:09:13 AM PDT by july4thfreedomfoundation (Washington is NOT a swamp.....It's a cesspool!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 8 | View Replies]

It shouldn’t matter what state or city the customer resides in or makes the purchase from online. If out of your business address you make a sale, you collect state and/or city taxes on that transaction. Why is this so hard? Every business license requires a business address.


15 posted on 04/16/2018 7:09:22 AM PDT by USCG SimTech
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 8 | View Replies]

To: Oldeconomybuyer

No reference to the Constitution in the article.

“No tax or duty shall be laid on articles exported from any state.”


16 posted on 04/16/2018 7:09:40 AM PDT by Seven_0 (You cannot fool all of the people, ever!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: shelterguy

Not at all. It means every business that sells to me in my town pays and collects the tax equally.


I believe that is how it already works. But if you contact someone from another state and send them money and they send you a product for that money, they have no relationship with your state’s government. You, however, do. That is why the state asks you to pay sales tax on items you purchased off the internet that did not charge you sales tax. :)


17 posted on 04/16/2018 7:10:59 AM PDT by robroys woman (So you're not confused, I'm using my wife's account.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 10 | View Replies]

To: Oldeconomybuyer
Wisconsin claims that only 1% of filers pay the required use tax for online purchases.

Some states used to double tax, but the SC shut that down in in 2015 Comptroller v. Wynne. Scalia and Thomas dissenting.

18 posted on 04/16/2018 7:13:17 AM PDT by aspasia
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Oldeconomybuyer

IF there is going to be an Internet sales tax, it should be a source / destination split at the state level. In other words, each state publishes a single source tax rate and a single destination tax rate and distributes the taxes collected appropriately.

That structure will work to drive businesses to ship from states with a low tax rates.


19 posted on 04/16/2018 7:13:40 AM PDT by taxcontrol (Stupid should hurt)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: BobL

I don’t know about others, but my state and local taxes over the past 20 years has gone up WAY MORE than my federal taxes.

I guess the states and cities simply have very, very, good lobbyists in DC.


Voting makes a difference. Just say’n.


20 posted on 04/16/2018 7:14:07 AM PDT by ptsal ( Get your facts first, then you can distort them as you please. - M. Twain)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 6 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-2021-4041-6061-80 ... 101-106 next last

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.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson