Isuzu SUV Forum banner
1 - 4 of 4 Posts

·
Registered
Joined
·
4,743 Posts
Discussion Starter · #1 ·
In California - lawmakers have sent to the governor a bill that for shoppers would mean the end of avoiding sales taxes by buying goods online.

Under federal law, retailers that do not have a physical presence in a state are not required to collect taxes in that state. But many cash-strapped states are attempting to change that.

Retailers such as Washington-based Amazon.com and Utah-based Overstock.com have threatened to dump their California affiliates â€" many of them small businesses â€" over the issue.

But Pat May of the Mercury News reports that many small businesses support the measure â€" even though some of them would lose the exposure and reach that the massive online retailers provide â€" because they Amazon and others have an unfair advantage.

Amazon has not hesitated to get rid of its affiliates elsewhere; it recently did so in Arkansas and Connecticut, where similar laws were enacted.

Here’s where the fighting words come in.

Mark Griffin of The Merc says of Overstock’s general counsel, who makes no pretense that his company views small businesses as expendable:
  • “What these legislators don’t seem to understand is that in every state that’s enacted such a law, we have discontinued our relationship with our affiliates and it hasn’t affected our business at all. … We understand the difficulty it creates for our affiliates, but it’s not a difficult decision for us to make.â€
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
7,284 Posts
SurferJoe said:
California's bill for collecting online taxes would bring in about $200 million a year to the economically struggling state.
If IF If...

Online buying by residents in that state, stays exactly the same.

If people have to start paying a sales tax, the online purchase becomes not so thrifty any more.

I would expect online buying from out of state sites, to decline. And the 'revenue' they can expect, to decline as well.

Although, they would still get a hefty chunk of change. It just wouldn't be as much as they expect.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
11,467 Posts
Colorado has something similar only they dont require the seller to collect the tax. We are supposed to report it on our state income taxes each year but nobody does. Its against the constitutional amendments to tax out of state commerce when the seller doesnt have a physical presence in the state. So they can just eff off.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
3,933 Posts
Selador AKA Tat said:
SurferJoe said:
California's bill for collecting online taxes would bring in about $200 million a year to the economically struggling state.
If IF If...

Online buying by residents in that state, stays exactly the same.

If people have to start paying a sales tax, the online purchase becomes not so thrifty any more.

I would expect online buying from out of state sites, to decline. And the 'revenue' they can expect, to decline as well.

Although, they would still get a hefty chunk of change. It just wouldn't be as much as they expect.
This is how liberals work, with their heads firmly planted in the sand. They assume that when they wish to raise or collect a tax, they assume that behaviors will not change to avoid or reduce the tax. They look at numbers of widgets produced per year and assume they can collect a certain amount of tax on each widget without considering the fact that the total numbers of widgets produced and sold might dramatically fall as a direct result of the tax. Looking at it from the other direction, when there is a tax on widgets, and someone considers lowering that tax, they don't consider how lowering the tax will impact the sale of widgets. Most of the time, the sales will increase when the tax is lowered, increasing revenue, increasing employment at the widget factory, increasing the tax base because more people are employed and easing the burden on public services.
 
1 - 4 of 4 Posts
This is an older thread, you may not receive a response, and could be reviving an old thread. Please consider creating a new thread.
Top