What about states like Oregon that has no sales tax?
No Tax or Duty shall be laid on Articles exported from any State.U.S. Constitution, Article I, Section 9, Clause 5.
This may have been a disappointing decision, but it was no surprise. The government will always do what is best for the government. The states have an insatiable need for money so anything that increases their revenues was bound to be approved.
Our government is of the bureaucrats, by the bureaucrats, and for the bureaucrats.
Just internet small business.
And I’m under the impression, the way it’s worded, that it means that a retailer in Washington State, must charge Washington State sales tax on a sale to someone in Oregon because they bought from the Washington state business.
If this is true, a LOT of small businesses who do a lot of internet business could just move to Oregon.
If they are saying the sales taxes at the place where the person lives is to be charged, well, that’s a logistics nightmare.
But the former suggests that the ONLY tax due regards where the business is, not where the purchaser is. With Amazon it’s easy. I’m in Kentucky, their fulfilment center is here. All my purchases get charged a KY state income tax.
A state’s tax on another state’s exports is unconstitutional (Art. I, Sec. 9, Cl. 5).
Huh? This helps all brick and morter businesses by allowing them to be on equal footing with national online retailers.
amazon is gonna take it in the shorts...
It is in line with Trump’s fair trade view. So it should be no surprise.
And a mad dash is made for all online businesses to relocate to states with no sales tax.
Montana would be my pick for online businesses to relocate to.
Ignore my previous post. From the article:
A coalition of small business owners, many offering their online goods from home offices, say their profits would evaporate if forced to comply with complex tax rules in all 50 states.
It better be simplified, or this could be a nightmare.
I suspect that it will be interpreted simply and not take into account local taxes.
But they did throw precedent out the window to come up with this decision. I’m still trying to figure out what is unconstitutional about the previous status quo, though.
This is a crappy ruling. Very surprised and disappointed that Thomas, Alito & Gorsuch went along with it. It’s crazy to demand that small businesses figure out and comply with the sales tax laws of >3,000 different counties in the U.S. As Roberts points out in the dissent, there are places where Snickers is subject to sales tax but Twix isn’t (because the former is classified as a candy and the latter is considered a cookie).
Only if the small business is selling their product out of state without charging taxes. A lot of the reason Amazon exploded was because of the no tax advantage. Who would buy a product for close to the same price if one had added taxes and the other one didn’t?
A big built-in advantage to online retailers over local small businesses. All small business were charging taxes in their state. And actually, any business that bought a product out of state were legally bound to pay sales taxes on that item whether they were charged or not. Individuals are responsible too, they just never reported the purchase on their taxes.
The biggest disadvantage to small business is figuring out what to charge with all the taxing authorities scattered throughout the nation. Someone will come up with a web solution or business solution to solve this problem, now that there is a need. Might be a good business to start.
provide money to the Interstate Commerce Commission to create a publicly-accessible database of tax liability by ZIP code. States would provide the input.
The database would provide tax rates for categories of goods: food, drugs, and "other". Additional broad categories of tax entries can be provided for by Congress.
Yes, I know that some taxing districts provide for different tax rates for staples, prepared foot, cigarettes/tobacco, and so forth. For the purposes of interstate commerce taxation, the state will have to decide how they want to handle the disparity.
Because the look-ups can be built into the payment systems, the cost should not be that high.
It’s how mail order has worked for over a century. I don’t understand why the internet got treated any differently.
For example...
Could say, California charge you with violating a state gun law banning internet gun sales because you happened to mention you have a gun for sale on Facebook, however you live in Texas where there is no such law, so your post was perfectly legal under Texas law. However because your Facebook account can be viewed in California just as easily, they determine you have an "electronic presence" in the state and issue a warrant for your arrest....
Personally I agree with this. The online economy is killing local and national businesses. This cause reduced sales tax income (the only fair tax) and eliminates jobs. Just like A.I. (automated ignorance) machines should help people do their jobs not take them away. I am so glad I’m old.
"More than 40 states had asked the high court to overrule two, decades-old Supreme Court decisions that they said cost them billions of dollars in lost revenue annually."
...
"The cases the court overturned said that if a business was shipping a customer’s purchase to a state where the business didn’t have a physical presence such as a warehouse or office, the business didn’t have to collect the state’s sales tax. Customers were generally responsible for paying the sales tax to the state themselves if they weren’t charged it, but most didn’t realize they owed it and few paid."
https://apnews.com/332abb7455cb4b60b2effc0852ff3c89/High-Court:-Online-shoppers-can-be-forced-to-pay-sales-tax
Sales Tax on the Internet
"Despite what you sometimes hear, however, some Internet sales are subject to sales tax, and even when a site doesn't collect sales tax, consumers are technically responsible for remitting any unpaid sales tax on online purchases directly to their state.
...
Under the RTPA, however, any seller who sells through an electronic marketplace like Amazon would not qualify for the small seller exception."
Consumers May Be Required to Report and Pay Sales or Use Taxes
"For consumers that order tax-free items online, but live in states that charge a sales tax, they are technically required to report that purchase to their state tax agency and pay the sales tax directly to the agency. When consumers are required to do so, it is often called a "use" tax."
It may be a cash grab but why should LL Bean have to charge me NYS sales tax because they have a retail store 52 miles away and Amazon doesnt, because they have no store even though the C Crane Radio I bought actually came from a retail audio store in Yonkers NY. That give Bezos an enormous advantage.
I live in California so I better use my Amazon gift card fast. I’m sure Jerry Brown is chomping at the bit to impliment this pay for his choo-choo and lawyers for illeals.