quote:

Originally posted by mutedblade:

For those that say the brick and mortar stores aren't charging 2x as much for the same thing, all I can say is: you need to get out more and compare the prices online. Something I ran into this week was a part my dad needed for a sickle bar mower. A simple 101" belt.... The 2 shops that were close enough to get it from (where they still had to order them) had them priced for $70 and $75 respectively....Amazon had them for $28.99 shipped (and taxed btw). Dad was pleased as pie that I was able to find such a great savings which was passed onto the farm owner. The savings are probably gonna be put back into the community by way of a donation or extra spending vs the measly $4.xx that would have resulted from the higher pre-tax price.
.

There's likely good reason why some items are half the price online than in stores. They're counterfeit.

In any case, I'm actually starting to see many items in stores priced the same or even cheaper than online. Recently for example I bought some Lavazza coffee off of Amazon. A few days later I just happen to see the same exact coffee in Walmart for a cheaper price. And that's not a one-off. I'm seeing it more and more.

quote:

Paper and hard currency will be a thing of the past very soon, you'll spend using your debit cards only, Big Banks, governments and mega e-tailers are pushing us to this type of world economy.

What about hookers and blow? No way.

quote:

Originally posted by ZSMICHAEL:

quote:

Paper and hard currency will be a thing of the past very soon, you'll spend using your debit cards only, Big Banks, governments and mega e-tailers are pushing us to this type of world economy.

What about hookers and blow? No way.

If you give a hooker your credit card, you're screwed.

By the way, do use-taxes apply to hookers?

quote:

The losers in this are the local brick and mortar who sell out of state. They will have to keep track of sales tax in each state plus can arguably any local taxes that are added on.

Government won't care about that burden because they just want the revenue.

There are over 10000 sales tax jurisdictions in the US according to Avalara. Small business can not afford the software & fees to handle the forms & remittances!

quote:

Originally posted by honestlou:
As a local retailer, I am happy to see the playing field leveled, and I pretty much agree with decision on a legal basis as well. Times have changed- the internet is the rule, not the exception. The old rulings requiring a physical presence in the state went back to a time when cross state purchases were the exception.

This is not the burden on business y’all seem to think it is. Computer is programmed with each jurisdiction’s sales tax rate, and spits out a report when its time to file. I have two locations, and two taxing jurisdictions. I print a report monthly and manually fill out four sales tax returns and cut two checks. It takes me about 20 minutes. That could be two days if I was selling in all 50 states, if I did it manually. I’m sure the more sophisticated programs can fill out the report, and submit the info and funds electronically.

Plus, I haven’t read the decision, but a news report I heard said that the ruling does not apply to smaller businesses, I think with less than 200 employees I haven’t read the decision, but a news report I heard said that the ruling does not apply to smaller businesses, I think with less than 200 employees.

hope that is the case

I sell a lot of stuff out of state on Gunbroker, Ebay, and my own website,

as a small business, (basically 2 of us,, 4 if you count a bit of help from the wife and a friend)

I do our local taxes, have to file with Va in several counties to keep everyone happy but that is still quick and easy on the state website,

if I have to do that for each state that I sell something to,, that could be a pain,,

Best play of the month - Avalara

https://www.cnbc.com/2018/06/2...ng-online-sales.html

They anticipated the decision and went public with their software for everyone to figure out all the sales tax jurisdictions throughout the country.

You could have doubled your money in a week

This must have Ebay in a tissy, got this e-mail today:


Dear ………..,
The U.S. Supreme Court has announced their decision on the S. Dakota v. Wayfair case, overturning the long-standing rule that states could not tax businesses or sellers outside of their borders. Now is the time for Congress to act on legislation that protects small businesses.
And we need your help.
Please consider signing our petition to show our country's political leaders that these new Internet tax burdens could permanently damage U.S. small businesses. The petition takes less than a minute to complete. We will soon deliver this petition to President Trump, key members of Congress, and select state governors, so we need you to participate now.
eBay has always supported tax policy that is fair to entrepreneurs, artisans, and small businesses. Rest assured that eBay will continue to fight this battle on behalf of all of our valued customers.
Sincerely,

eBay

quote:

Originally posted by lyman:

quote:

Originally posted by honestlou:
As a local retailer, I am happy to see the playing field leveled, and I pretty much agree with decision on a legal basis as well. Times have changed- the internet is the rule, not the exception. The old rulings requiring a physical presence in the state went back to a time when cross state purchases were the exception.

This is not the burden on business y’all seem to think it is. Computer is programmed with each jurisdiction’s sales tax rate, and spits out a report when its time to file. I have two locations, and two taxing jurisdictions. I print a report monthly and manually fill out four sales tax returns and cut two checks. It takes me about 20 minutes. That could be two days if I was selling in all 50 states, if I did it manually. I’m sure the more sophisticated programs can fill out the report, and submit the info and funds electronically.

Plus, I haven’t read the decision, but a news report I heard said that the ruling does not apply to smaller businesses, I think with less than 200 employees I haven’t read the decision, but a news report I heard said that the ruling does not apply to smaller businesses, I think with less than 200 employees.

hope that is the case

I sell a lot of stuff out of state on Gunbroker, Ebay, and my own website,

as a small business, (basically 2 of us,, 4 if you count a bit of help from the wife and a friend)

I do our local taxes, have to file with Va in several counties to keep everyone happy but that is still quick and easy on the state website,

if I have to do that for each state that I sell something to,, that could be a pain,,

It's going to be a pain if you sell online unless some legislation is enacted.

The scope limitations people are referring to apply ONLY in SD. I believe I read the SD small business exemption was less than $100k or 200 transactions. What if you're a growing company and November or December rolls along and you go over $100k? Do you only owe sales tax on the portion exceeding $100k? The law isn't clear on that, and SD will have to clarify that.

Regardless, that is ONLY in SD, what about the rest of the country? There are over 11,000 (sales) taxing jurisdictions in the country (44ish states) if you include state, county, city, what have you... I think we all know that everyone is going to want their piece of the pie...

Going to be a mess.

As stated above, this 200/$100K thing is for SD. Your state can do whatever the hell they want.

For those complaining that local stores are selling their items for more than you can find them for online. Of course they are. It's called overhead.

This overhead is the lifeblood of your community. It's the rent that goes to the landlord. The local taxes. The local employees.

The guy selling the stuff cheap online may be in his basement with no overhead. If you go with that model, where will your communities get their money? Life isn't going to be so great once that tax base has been lost because you'll be the ones expected to pay for the shortfall.

And.....

For those crying like you just lost a loophole, you didn't. I'm all for low taxes. I'm all for using the tax code to your advantage to pay as little as possible.

Buying online isn't a loophole. Not paying use tax isn't a loophole. That's tax evasion. These taxes aren't new. These are the taxes that you are already required to pay and have not been.

Lord Grenville, are you a member of this forum?

quote:

Originally posted by a1abdj:
For those complaining that local stores are selling their items for more than you can find them for online. Of course they are. It's called overhead.

This overhead is the lifeblood of your community. It's the rent that goes to the landlord. The local taxes. The local employees.

The guy selling the stuff cheap online may be in his basement with no overhead. If you go with that model, where will your communities get their money? Life isn't going to be so great once that tax base has been lost because you'll be the ones expected to pay for the shortfall.

And.....

For those crying like you just lost a loophole, you didn't. I'm all for low taxes. I'm all for using the tax code to your advantage to pay as little as possible.

Buying online isn't a loophole. Not paying use tax isn't a loophole. That's tax evasion. These taxes aren't new. These are the taxes that you are already required to pay and have not been.

I think the primary complaint isn't the loss of a tax loop hole. But nice straw man.

The complaints are that this will be an administrative nightmare for small sellers (thus further empowering Amazon, et al.) and is a terrible precedent of allowing extra-jurisdiction authority. There is a reason that the USC prohibited states from interfering with interstate commerce.

quote:

I think the primary complaint isn't the loss of a tax loop hole. But nice straw man.The complaints are that this will be an administrative nightmare for small sellers (thus further empowering Amazon, et al.) and is a terrible precedent of allowing extra-jurisdiction authority. There is a reason that the USC prohibited states from interfering with interstate commerce.

Yep. Article 10 Section 2 prohibits the states from imposing "imposts or duties" without the approval of Congress. This SCOTUS decision completely sidesteps Congress. Taken to its logical conclusion, this decision would give states extra-jurisdictional powers without any Federal matter involved. I mean, how do you know ALL the taxes are paid, and paid to the proper jurisdictions absent an audit? What about collection if the 'correct' taxes were not remitted? It is one (among many) reasons for the prohibition on interstate taxation. Also, any proceeds are (per the USC) required to be remitted to the US Treasury, NOT the treasury of the state.

No State shall, without the Consent of the Congress, lay any Imposts or Duties on Imports or Exports, except what may be absolutely necessary for executing it's inspection Laws: and the net Produce of all Duties and Imposts, laid by any State on Imports or Exports, shall be for the Use of the Treasury of the United States; and all such Laws shall be subject to the Revision and Control of the Congress.

It appears that the few of us who own small businesses in this thread mostly support the collection of sales tax.

I don’t want to speak for the others, but I appreciate the concern from those who are worried that this will adversly impact my business. I can assure you it will only impact me in a positive fashion.

Don’t be mad at those who agree with it. We had nothing to do with it. If the states weren’t loosing so much revenue via tax evasion they would be perfectly happy. But instead those who fail to pay their use tax are costing millions and millions of dollars in loses. Instead of raising the taxes I’m forced to pay, I’m happy that they are keeping the burden on those who actually owe them.

quote:

Originally posted by a1abdj:
Don’t be mad at those who agree with it. We had nothing to do with it.

I am surprised that anyone here would advocate people being audited for something like this. Very surprised.

quote:

Originally posted by a1abdj:
... I’m happy that they are keeping the burden on those who actually owe them.

Actually, they are not. They are shifting the burden from the taxpayers (that do owe the tax) of their state to the businesses in other states.

quote:

Originally posted by a1abdj:

If the states weren’t [losing] so much revenue via tax evasion they would be perfectly happy.

Oh I'm sure they'd be just as happy as a clam at high water. Not a chance they'd ever again try to come up with new ways to tax us.

quote:

Originally posted by Balzé Halzé:

quote:

Originally posted by a1abdj:

If the states weren’t [losing] so much revenue via tax evasion they would be perfectly happy.

Oh I'm sure they'd be just as happy as a clam at a high water. Not a chance they'd ever again try to come up with new ways to tax us.

Absolutely. Surely they will be satisfied with what they were owed. All of the unpaid taxes will go to police, fire, and helping little old ladies across the street.

quote:

. If the states weren’t loosing so much revenue via tax evasion they would be perfectly happy. But instead those who fail to pay their use tax are costing millions and millions of dollars in loses.

is this sarcasm, irony, dark humor, or some other kind of political commentary that escapes casual interpretation?

Well... I needed to stop buying so much crap anyway. Put that in your pipe and smoke it Mr. Taxman.

Booming economy my ass...