Nothing at all wrong with my reasoning.
Question:
Did the article we are talking about come in to this state from another state?
If the answer is “yes” then “NO TAX OR DUTY SHALL BE LAID...”
Now you can twist words to make the meaning whatever you want. You could call it a tax on breathing while you are going to the post office to pick up your package.
But the law is supposed to look at the SUBSTANCE of things, not the form or description or title.
It isn’t a tax or duty laid on items coming into the state. It is a tax on the people who PURCHASE items, regardless of where they come.
When you are attempting to advance constitutioanl arguments, and I assume that you, like me, are not a lawyer, it is helpful to think about whether those who are actually trained in the law advance your argument.
There is no argument put forward against interstate sales tax related to the constitutional issue you raise, because it simply does not apply.
I imagine there are few things you purchase that didn’t come into your state from another state — if your argument had any merit, it would apply to the sale tax you are paying on those goods that are shipped into your state.
Meanwhile, you will notice that nobody is questioning the constitutionality of Barnes and Noble collecting sales tax from you for purchases you make from their online site, which are fulfilled by shipments from another state.
The argument Amazon is making does not invoke the Duty and Excise tax clause, because it simply does not apply to sales tax collected on items used by residents of a state.
If a state tried to tax items that were brought into the state from other states exclusively of a tax on all goods, you’d have an argument.