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

Skip to comments.

Online sales tax to be added to defense authorization bill [Goodbye Internet Sales]
The Daily Caller ^ | 12-06-2012 | Betsi Fores

Posted on 12/06/2012 11:10:02 AM PST by Red Badger

click here to read article


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-5051-91 last
To: Database
http://www.prnewswire.com/news-releases/strong-consumer-support-for-congressional-action-on-e-fairness-179976081.html

International Council of Shopping Centers wouldn't be too skewed now would it?

51 posted on 12/06/2012 2:19:43 PM PST by Focault's Pendulum
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 26 | View Replies]

To: Database
This survey was conducted on behalf of ICSC by Opinion Research Corporation (ORC) using a computer assisted telephone interviewing (CATI) system randomly selected from a national probability sample of 1,005 adults comprising 500 men and 505 women 18 years of age and older, living in private households in the continental United States.
52 posted on 12/06/2012 2:23:18 PM PST by Focault's Pendulum
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 26 | View Replies]

To: Lichgod

In your specific example, the tax would be collected based on California’s sales tax for where the product is delivered.

I would expect that they would use product shipping address to determine the locality for purpose of calculating the sales tax.

Your example is interesting because you are buying something for someone else. In a brick-and-mortar store, there is little ability to collect sales tax based on where you will use the item. So, if I buy something in DC and bring it home to Virginia, I’ve paid DC sales tax.

Virginia law requires that if I buy something in a state that has a lower sales tax than our sales tax, I am supposed to pay the tax on the difference — IF I am buying something to bring into the state. I think pretty much everywhere I’ve bought things has had higher sales tax than Virginia, so I’ve pretty much ignored that.

But obviously 0% is less than 5%, so I do pay the Virginia sales tax on all my online purchases if they weren’t already collected, unless the purchase was a gift for someone in another state.

I wish Amazon would make this easier; I have to pull up each invoice to see whether they collected sales tax or not. They could give me a page view that showed every invoice with the dollar amount and shipping and sales tax, all in one table. But I could also just fill out my spreadsheet during the year.

When this law is passed, I will no longer have to do all that work, nor will I have to fill out an extra tax form every year. So for me, this change is a good thing. But that is only because I already obey the law and pay the taxes due.

For those who do not, and who don’t buy from companies that already do business in their state, this will be a change. But on the upside, they will no longer be committing fraud each year when they sign their tax forms swearing under penalty of perjury that they have reported all taxes due (at least in Virginia, since the use tax is on the income tax form).


53 posted on 12/06/2012 2:30:47 PM PST by CharlesWayneCT
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 27 | View Replies]

To: CharlesWayneCT

Slowly but surely we are being strangled.


54 posted on 12/06/2012 2:32:12 PM PST by sport
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 53 | View Replies]

To: Red Badger

Maybe just tax porno sites. Those are the sites most frequented by congress and staff.


55 posted on 12/06/2012 2:39:21 PM PST by central_va ( I won't be reconstructed and I do not give a damn.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Red Badger
No candidate is ever conservative enough for some folks.

Come on guys you know Boehner will never let this get through.


56 posted on 12/06/2012 2:40:27 PM PST by itsahoot (Any enemy, that is allowed to have a King's X line, is undefeatable. (USS Taluga AO-62))
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Red Badger

But this is for national defense....................


57 posted on 12/06/2012 2:42:40 PM PST by PeterPrinciple ( (Lord, save me from some conservatives, they don't understand history any better than liberals.))
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: ThunderSleeps

Nobody is for an “online sales tax”.

On the other hand, ask people if they support making all people in their state pay the same sales tax they do, it gets a lot of support.

And if you ask people if they support legislation that will help crack down on tax cheaters skipping out of the state sales tax they owe, even more people support it.

And since this legislation will not be a “new tax”, but rather a new collection capability for an existing tax, the 2nd way of describing it is more accurate.

Of course, it is possible the democrats could make it into a tax, and then have some bizarre remittance scheme to states, and then they would easily be able to implement a federal sales tax using an amendment to the law.

That couldn’t happen if conservatives worked hard to support a bill that did nothing more than provide a better way to ensure compliance with existing state sales tax laws. But since conservatives are mostly working hard to make it easy to cheat on their taxes, I fear that the democrats will screw this up.


58 posted on 12/06/2012 2:43:42 PM PST by CharlesWayneCT
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 36 | View Replies]

To: CharlesWayneCT

You’ve already gotten your wish - Amazon agreed to collecting and remitting VA sales tax next year.


59 posted on 12/06/2012 2:46:12 PM PST by Gabz (Democrats for Voldemort.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 53 | View Replies]

To: CharlesWayneCT
It would be a lot easier just to charge a connect fee, oh wait Al Gore already did that.

This forum is beginning to look like DU every day.

60 posted on 12/06/2012 2:53:13 PM PST by itsahoot (Any enemy, that is allowed to have a King's X line, is undefeatable. (USS Taluga AO-62))
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 48 | View Replies]

To: Red Badger

“They also feel that a tax for online purchases would encourage people to buy local and keep tax dollars in their community.”

One of the main reasons I shop online is because the $%&*@$ “local” stores don’t have what I want. Morons.

Even if I have to pay state sales tax I’ll still shop online for the convenience and the local brick-and-mortar shops can FOAD.


61 posted on 12/06/2012 2:56:08 PM PST by PLMerite (Shut the Beyotch Down! Burn, baby, burn!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Red Badger

more NEW TAXES on the MIDDLE CLASS...


62 posted on 12/06/2012 3:40:52 PM PST by Brown Deer (Pray for 0bama. Psalm 109:8)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Red Badger
Both Sens. Durbin and Enzi have offered the bill as an amendment to the National Defense Authorization Act.

Note to self: when helping write the constitution for Freeplandia, be sure it contains a "no riders" provision under the section covering prohibited legislative powers.

63 posted on 12/06/2012 3:54:44 PM PST by ApplegateRanch (Love me, love my guns!©)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: AdmSmith; AnonymousConservative; Berosus; bigheadfred; Bockscar; ColdOne; Convert from ECUSA; ...

Thanks Red Badger.


64 posted on 12/06/2012 4:43:40 PM PST by SunkenCiv (https://secure.freerepublic.com/donate/)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies]

To: Red Badger

Loophole — just call them on the phone!


65 posted on 12/06/2012 5:12:57 PM PST by Salvation ("With God all things are possible." Matthew 19:26)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: memyselfandi59

Very simple, if you are intelligent enough to write an order, then you should be smart enough to compute your sales tax. If for some reason this does not work out a paper trail of the transaction is available to the state and they will collect from you, one way or another. As for the poor little business man being punished by having to collect another states sales tax, if it’s so much trouble, just quit doing business in that state.


66 posted on 12/06/2012 5:17:39 PM PST by Gertie
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 32 | View Replies]

To: plain talk

The “real world” is in trouble because this tax has not seen the light of day. If you can’t compete on a level playing field and collect sales tax like a local store than don’t do business in that state, have you never heard of aiding and abetting dishonesty?


67 posted on 12/06/2012 5:26:21 PM PST by Gertie
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 25 | View Replies]

To: ExCTCitizen
Good-Bye, I don't see the rationality, the customer pays the sales tax, whatever the states rate is, you don't pay it, you collect it and remit it to that state, that's part of doing business, and if you move anywhere including offshore the rules still apply.
68 posted on 12/06/2012 5:37:22 PM PST by Gertie
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 37 | View Replies]

To: CharlesWayneCT
Good, noble and honest. As a retail store manager, I attended a meeting on “theft”. The speaker started out by saying 95% of you customers are dis-honest if given the opportunity — most everybody in the room looked at each other in dis-belief and then the speaker added “ think IRS”.
69 posted on 12/06/2012 5:45:38 PM PST by Gertie
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 34 | View Replies]

To: Gabz

My understanding is that Amazon is backing this. Of course they would, just like all large business support more regulation. They can afford a thousand accountants, the small business cannot. This keeps their competition from the small guy low.

This is how large business keep small business from succeeding, through regulation that only they can afford.


70 posted on 12/06/2012 5:47:38 PM PST by esoxmagnum (The rats have been trained to pull the D voting lever to get their little food pellet)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 59 | View Replies]

To: esoxmagnum
There are only 50 states, 5 of them do not have a sales tax, that leaves 45 and several of them have the same percentage. I really doubt that this is a ploy to hurt small business. I guess now we got “The Boogy Man Card”.
71 posted on 12/06/2012 5:56:32 PM PST by Gertie
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 70 | View Replies]

To: Gabz

I know that whatever the bill is they pass, it will exempt businesses below a certain sales level, so the question is moot.

But I love answering moot questions, because the exercise is a useful one. It is fun to try to apply competing conservative principles in a practical way.

In my town, we have Walmart. We also have some tiny “city” stores. Those tiny stores have to understand the sales tax for our state (we don’t have local add-ons, except if they are a prepared food provider, many cities add a food tax). They have to collect the tax on their low-volume sales, just like Walmart, and send the checks in, just like Walmart.

So the sales tax requires this tiny business to incur a huge fixed cost, which to Walmart is a small small part of sales. Is that “fair” (I hate the word “fair”, but it describes the concept)?

But this small business has many areas of high fixed costs. Worse, the best thing they DO have, that small-store personal touch, well so does that internet store in Delaware. Only that store doesn’t have a building overhead, and it doesn’t have to collect 5% sales tax.

That means they save money on overhead, they save money on tax collection, AND they can charge 5% less since they don’t actually make the person PAY the 5% tax. Is that “fair”? Well, they did have to pay shipping, or they could add it to the purchase which negates some of the savings. If the order is big enough, it works out better for the consumer.

From the state’s point of view, they have decided to collect a portion of the money they use to provide legitimate government services like police protection by charging residents of the state a fixed amount of whatever money they spend. It would be great if everybody voluntarily paid their tax (I hate that word “voluntary”, because some people deliberately mis-interpret it as meaning you don’t have to pay the tax, rather than what it REALLY means which is that the government didn’t physically take the money from you, you have to send it to them).

Now, we live in an internet age, where I can in 10 minutes pen an entire opinion column on sales tax and “post” it and you can see it 10 seconds later. I can go online and find my workmate’s speeding citation, show her how much it will cost, find how many points she has, figure out how many points you get for the infraction.

Then I can come into this conversation, and no matter what state you live in, I can tell you in 10 minutes what your state sales and use tax laws are, provide you the form you need to fill out, and tell you the state and local tax rates. All while sitting around in my family room.

It simply is not that hard anymore for a company who already does business on the internet to also collect sales tax. It is a hardship, but every company doing internet sales would get the same hardship, and the costs would be passed along equally to every purchaser.

And of course, this would help local businesses to some degree, since now they wouldn’t be the only ones having to collect a sales tax. And it would help Barnes and Noble, who sell the same books at the same price as Amazon, but then have to collect sales tax based on your state and locality, because they made the mistake of building a real store and hiring people from your state.

But I don’t support extending this collection to small business. There is a band I like in California. This is a small band. They sell their own CDs and shirts and stuff, out of their living room, one of their girlfriends gets the orders off the internet, packages the stuff, writes nice little quips, and sends them off. It would be ridiculous to also make them try to collect taxes. It wouldn’t be cost effective. (Of course, most of their sales are to people in California, since that is where they are based, and they have to do taxes for those sales, and remit them).

If I were designing the law, I’d provide for compensation to companies outside a state who collect taxes in this way. And I’d require states to set up an easy internet application to provide billing and collection information. And I’d allow the tax to be paid on a yearly basis.

I’d probably require each state to set a single collection point for the money as well, and make the state then push the money to localities.

The hard part is determining how to exempt “small business”. The best way from a business side would be, at the end of the year, you only have to remit to a state if the sales for that state exceeded some dollar amount. Unfortunately, by the time you knew that, you’d have already collected the sales tax.

So instead, you’d have to base the decision on last year’s earnings, except for small business earnings vary wildly.

BTW, I think states would be happy to accept a large TOTAL SALES VOLUME cutoff, rather than worry about state-by-state numbers. If they could collect taxes from the top 25 internet companies, they’d be 80% of the way to getting all the money they are due. The small mom-and-pop stores would just be too little to matter.

And the reason they don’t collect much now is that it also is hard to justify the expense of going after individuals. I consider myself an average internet shopper, and I have to remit about $150 at most in taxes at the end of the year. If the state spent an hour of lawyers trying to get me to pay, they’d spend more than I’m worth.


72 posted on 12/06/2012 7:05:45 PM PST by CharlesWayneCT
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 43 | View Replies]

To: itsahoot

But a connect fee would be a new tax. This is a collection of an existing tax, where it is hard to catch those who aren’t following the law.

You know, like how the feds have an FBI, which will come in and help a state catch criminals that committed crimes in their state, if that criminal then runs off to another state where your state doesn’t have jurisdiction?


73 posted on 12/06/2012 7:10:01 PM PST by CharlesWayneCT
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 60 | View Replies]

To: esoxmagnum

If it takes a thousand accountants, someone has done something horribly wrong.

The store down the street from me doesn’t even HAVE an accountant, and they manage to collect sales tax for one state.

If the law is written correctly, and puts the correct burdens on the states who want to participate, it should be no harder to determine the remittance for all 50 states than for the single state.

I would expect that the feds would set up a clearing house, where all the states would register if they wanted to be part. Any business doing an internet sale that had enough sales to be required to participate would send the address through an internet app, and it would come back with the tax required, and the state online payment location to transfer the funds.

Amazon doesn’t have accountants doing this — their program is already written, and it already knows how to charge taxes for everybody, so if they get a purchase through one of their partner stores they can collect.


74 posted on 12/06/2012 7:17:42 PM PST by CharlesWayneCT
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 70 | View Replies]

To: memyselfandi59

What makes you think that the states will see much in the way of tax revenue from this? The Fed will keep most, if not all of it, and say well we are paying for the welfare and what ever other program for your state, so tough.


75 posted on 12/06/2012 7:26:01 PM PST by DarkWaters ("Deception is a state of mind --- and the mind of the state" --- James Jesus Angleton)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 32 | View Replies]

To: CharlesWayneCT

A brick and mortar business receives return on investment for calculating, collecting and paying the local sales taxes. They receive a value for their time in the form of police, fire departments, schools producing customers & workers (in theory), maintained roads, etc...

How does the business in Podunk, Idaho benefit from doing Virginia’s job of collecting sales taxes? They get no benefit except for the sale, so why should they be forced to be a tax agent for Virginia?

You don’t have a problem with the taxes; even worse, you think that sellers in states miles away should be forced to do the job of the state Treasurer for no benefit.


76 posted on 12/06/2012 7:50:14 PM PST by ExTxMarine (PRAYER: It's the only HOPE for real CHANGE in America!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 74 | View Replies]

To: ExTxMarine

In general, they would all get the benefit, since businesses in other states would be remitting the taxes to their state, while they were remitting taxes to the other states.

Of course, net export states would come out ahead.

But the law could provide remittance to the out-of-state companies for collecting the taxes. Of course, if that was too high, it would be another thing that would bias the free market toward the out-of-state internet company.

This issue isn’t about the taxes. It is about collecting the taxes. The taxes are a state issue. If i don’t like my state sales tax, I can ask my representatives to change it or repeal it.

We are talking about aiding the state in tax enforcement.

It isn’t that different than federal and state collection of income tax withholding.


77 posted on 12/06/2012 8:27:32 PM PST by CharlesWayneCT
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 76 | View Replies]

To: CharlesWayneCT
We are talking about aiding the state in tax enforcement.

In "THEORY" they would all get the benefit, but that isn't reality. With brick and mortar stores they get repaid for performing this service for THEIR state. There is no way that a state is going to remit back to out-of-state sellers for their services; it would not pass!

I simply don't think that a company formed in Idaho, subject to the laws thereof, should also be forced to be subject to the laws of all the other states - that is why they are in Idaho! If they wanted to be subject to the laws of Texas, they would pack-up and move to Texas.

Do you believe that a Sears store in North Carlina should demand to see your license so that they can collect Virginia taxes based on YOUR HOME ADDRESS? That would be an asinine suggestion, and so is this.

If anything, I could see where online sellers could collect sales taxes based on where the SELLER is located, since that is what brick & mortar stores are required to do. Anything else is extortion by out of state legislatures whom the seller cannot vote out or anything else - except refuse to sell people of that state - which will only benefit the big online stores and brick & mortars - which is what this is designed to do!
78 posted on 12/06/2012 9:19:46 PM PST by ExTxMarine (PRAYER: It's the only HOPE for real CHANGE in America!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 77 | View Replies]

To: ExCTCitizen

move it to mexico..


79 posted on 12/06/2012 10:47:36 PM PST by max americana (Make the world a better place by punching a liberal in the face)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 37 | View Replies]

To: Obama_Is_Sabotaging_America

I am told by my parents, who live in Cook county, that if you go outside the county to purchase some big ticket items, like a car, they TAX you for doing so. So they are now making people pay a special “punishment” tax simply because they did not make their purchase where they live. I’ve told them to get the hell out but they have been there for 24 years and are retired.


80 posted on 12/06/2012 11:30:15 PM PST by kelly4c (http://www.freerepublic.com/perl/post?id=2900389%2C41#help)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 16 | View Replies]

To: Buckeye McFrog

“...and borough to borough.”

I made this point on a thread a few days ago. In my suburban town it is even worse - my half pays a Rapid Transit Tax as it has lots of bus stops and a large central bus “station” type area. The other half (more rural) had only a few bus stops, and doesn’t pay the tax. (Same zip code).


81 posted on 12/06/2012 11:47:15 PM PST by 21twelve (So I [God] gave them over to their stubborn hearts to follow their own devices. Psalm 81:12)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 6 | View Replies]

To: GeronL

“The GOP should vote it down.”

What!!?? You want the GOP to deprive our brave men and women protecting our nation from having the necessary equipment to do their jobs properly and safely!!?? /s


82 posted on 12/06/2012 11:50:50 PM PST by 21twelve (So I [God] gave them over to their stubborn hearts to follow their own devices. Psalm 81:12)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 29 | View Replies]

To: Red Badger

Honestly, it would.

The internet tax loophole was going to be closed one of these days.


83 posted on 12/07/2012 4:00:37 AM PST by redgolum ("God is dead" -- Nietzsche. "Nietzsche is dead" -- God.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 42 | View Replies]

To: Gertie; CharlesWayneCT

The real pain will be in those places with a local option sales tax (cities and such). I live in a small town in Iowa, and the larger town near by wants us to start collecting sales tax on things sold in our town, and send it to them. Because so many people are buying gas here.

A state flat sales tax would be better.


84 posted on 12/07/2012 4:06:40 AM PST by redgolum ("God is dead" -- Nietzsche. "Nietzsche is dead" -- God.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 71 | View Replies]

To: CharlesWayneCT

Let each state enforce its own sales and use laws within its own borders. We don’t need another layer or government. Sales tax is a state and local issue. That states refuse to enforce the law against their own citizens tells you all you need to know.

Milton Friedman’s biggest regret was automatic witholding. The state doesn’t need more revenue, but less state. Keep in mind the major sponsor of this bill is Dick Durbin.

Think - where will this lead? Our goal is federalism and state’s rights. This is just nationalization of tax policy and will lead to Internet control by the IRS, shut downs of internet businesses, audits, and eventually a VAT on everything at the national level on top of a state sales tax.


85 posted on 12/07/2012 4:28:05 AM PST by 1010RD (First, Do No Harm)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 34 | View Replies]

To: ThunderSleeps

You mean an organization that thrives off of local retailers might create a poll to manipulate the public?

Never!

We’d better be calling our Reps and Senators now. Boehner’s already itching to raise taxes.


86 posted on 12/07/2012 4:30:38 AM PST by 1010RD (First, Do No Harm)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 36 | View Replies]

To: redgolum

It’s just the ‘first step’ towards the Mark of the Beast........


87 posted on 12/07/2012 6:19:42 AM PST by Red Badger (Lincoln freed the slaves. Obama just got them ALL back......................)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 83 | View Replies]

To: ExTxMarine

Just a few points.

I don’t think it is unreasonable for a state to allow out-of-state stores to keep a percentage of collection as the cost of doing business. But that would be written into the federal law. If the state didn’t like it, the state should be able to NOT PARTICIPATE in the federal law. The state can continue to try to collect use tax directly.

I happen to think states would pay, because it would be like hiring a collection agency, they’d at least get some money where now they get no money.

I don’t think if this type of law as “forcing” a store in one state to abide by the laws of another state — although this actually happens now, as a store in one state that wants to sell certain products into another state have to abide by the laws of that state for sales. But I don’t think that is what we are talking about here.

There would be a federal law, not state law. The federal law would proscribe what any store in any state was required to do when shipping a product across state lines. I have no doubt the feds can write this law badly. But if they wrote the law correctly, there would be a single location where any store could get the correct sales tax info, much like federal instant background check for gun sales.

Each state which wants to participate would have to set up online methods for supporting the tax, which would feed through the single service. So when processing an online sale, the store would take the shipping address, send it through this service, and would get back the tax rate and state collection address, which should include electronic means of collection.

As to the more general question of whether they should be subject to laws, if the didn’t want to be subject to the sales tax of texas, why couldnt’ they simply refuse to ship items to texas? They still have the control — just like they could choose not to set up a shop in a state, they could refuse to ship to a state.

Or, they can choose to ship to the state, and collect the tax due in the state.

There is an alternative, which lessens the burden on the stores, but which I imagine people wouldn’t like as much.

Instead of requiring companies to collect sales tax, require them to provide the purchase information to the state government where the product was shipped to. This would be like the tax forms companies currently have to submit.

Then, it would fall on the state to decide what to do with the information. The state could use it to cross-check their residents tax submittals, to make sure they are properly reporting their purchases, as required by state law.

But that is a horrible intrusion into your privacy, having your state know of each purchase (btw, there was some federal law that required all purchases of something over $600 to be reported, I don’t remember if it was Obamacare or something else). I guess you could just have the value reported, but then how would the state know if the item was taxable or not?

Anyway, I am not an advocate for the bill. But I have no problem with the idea of the bill should it pass, and I can and do argue that it is a good thing.

I do agree with the various problems that people point out. It isn’t often that you can find a way to get government involved where there aren’t significant downsides.

In the end, it could be that sales tax is just not a good way to collect money for government. However, from a conservative perspective, it’s one of the few taxes that is not skewed toward rich people (in principle — in fact, state governments often find ways to minimize tax on things poor people by more of, and vice versa).

It is hard for the state to raise sales taxes, because EVERY VOTER feels the pain.


88 posted on 12/07/2012 8:52:07 AM PST by CharlesWayneCT
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 78 | View Replies]

To: cizinec
Asking a small seller to keep up with the tax laws of thousands of jurisdictions is ridiculous. All it will do is kill small business and create a new bureaucracy.

Yes it will create a crisis and they love those, the only way to solve it will be for all the companies to pay one flat rate to the federal government who will then redistribute some of it back to the states.

Game, set. match.

89 posted on 12/08/2012 8:52:44 AM PST by usurper (Liberals GET OFF MY LAWN)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 9 | View Replies]

To: Focault's Pendulum

About the Survey

This survey was conducted on behalf of ICSC by Opinion Research Corporation (ORC) using a computer assisted telephone interviewing (CATI) system randomly selected from a national probability sample of 1,005 adults comprising 500 men and 505 women 18 years of age and older, living in private households in the continental United States. Interviewing for this survey was completed during the period October 25-28, 2012.

SOURCE International Council of Shopping Centers

PR Newswire (http://s.tt/1u4T1)

Howmany were in a mall stealing while pretending to be shopping during normal working hours.


90 posted on 12/08/2012 10:47:58 AM PST by Grampa Dave (Tagline space for rent to pay for some of my extra taxes the next 4 years!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 15 | View Replies]

To: DaveyB

Can’t possibly be true, Obozo said campaigning for his first term that our taxes wouldn’t go up one dime..of course he didn’t say anything about a bunch of dimes. I loathe him and all democrats and RINO’s too.

I look forward though, to those I know that voted for their hero, to the howls when the taxes come hailing down on all the fools who believed all the bull from Obama. They deserve whatever comes their way, unfortunately we all will be collateral damage too.


91 posted on 12/08/2012 8:38:53 PM PST by tina07 (In loving memory of my father,WWII Vet. CBI 10/16/42-12/17/45, d. 11/1/85)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 33 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-5051-91 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