Internet sales tax coming soon to all states

[DenverGP]

http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2018/06/21/supreme-court-rules-states-can-collect-sales-tax-for-online-purchases-nationwide.html



Online shoppers could find costs going up after the Supreme Court did away Thursday with a decades-old precedent limiting the ability of states to collect sales tax on certain out-of-state Internet purchases.


The 5-4 ruling called the current rules “unsound and incorrect.”

[porterdavid98]

5 to 4 vote? How reassuring the Supreme Court gets things right. Juries require a more definitive opinion. I think for most laws if indeed they are fair and reasonable the vote should be unanimous. This simple majority by scholarly law experts shows 4 such experts did not agree that law is valid.

Apply that logic to all Supreme Court actions. Crap!


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[Zundfolge]

The dirty little secret is compliance is going to end up being more expensive than the actual sales tax.

[RblDiver]

Apparently 5 people didn't read the Constitution that it's the US Congress, not the States, that get to regulate commerce between states. As such, currently, they're exempt. Period.

I think I'll start a Gofundme, "Teach Judges How To Read."

[Skip]

The dirty little secret is compliance is going to end up being more expensive than the actual sales tax.

Many already were. After Amazon's behavior, this decision is pretty much meaningless. The fear of being sued by a state and forced data disclosure was enough. Definition of nexus was kind of meaningless, as are most laws now.

So merely being a citizen of a state entitles the state to a cut of all transactions. If there are billing/shipping addresses in different states the can now fight over that.

Good news is that, just like Trump's tax reform, this creates visibility into state/local taxes and hits a lot of Libs where it hurts. Trump admin also supported this decision.

[spqrzilla]

Say good bye to our economic growth.

[Ridge]

Many already were. After Amazon's behavior, this decision is pretty much meaningless. The fear of being sued by a state and forced data disclosure was enough. Definition of nexus was kind of meaningless, as are most laws now.

So merely being a citizen of a state entitles the state to a cut of all transactions. If there are billing/shipping addresses in different states the can now fight over that.

Good news is that, just like Trump's tax reform, this creates visibility into state/local taxes and hits a lot of Libs where it hurts. Trump admin also supported this decision.

Exactly, this has been the case for sites like Amazon for a while already. All this does is codify the pre-existing behavior.

[Irving]

I think the only other website I've ordered anything from in the last few years has been RockAuto.com.

ETA: Amazon might have more control over me than my cell phone.

[Zundfolge]

Interesting possible unintended (or intended) consequence:

http://www.thetruthaboutguns.com/2018/06/daniel-zimmerman/supreme-court-sales-tax-ruling-could-mean-trouble-for-gun-owners/
(http://www.thetruthaboutguns.com/2018/06/daniel-zimmerman/supreme-court-sales-tax-ruling-could-mean-trouble-for-gun-owners/)

tl;dr: anti gun states could use the sales tax auditing process to root out citizens not complying with registration schemes.

[Skip]

Interesting possible unintended (or intended) consequence:

http://www.thetruthaboutguns.com/2018/06/daniel-zimmerman/supreme-court-sales-tax-ruling-could-mean-trouble-for-gun-owners/
(http://www.thetruthaboutguns.com/2018/06/daniel-zimmerman/supreme-court-sales-tax-ruling-could-mean-trouble-for-gun-owners/)

tl;dr: anti gun states could use the sales tax auditing process to root out citizens not complying with registration schemes.

Yup, but... The Lib states could get this info just by filing a claim against a company.

There are four(?) websites a state could sue to get information about 99%+ of the gun owners who actively shoot right down to the caliber in their state. Their suit could be BS and they would still get the data.

[Eric P]

Or just not store and destroy customer specific data after shipping beyond what is needed to comply with federal corporate tax requirements. Brick and mortar stores dont store data when items are purchased via cash in person. So treat treat inet sales the same. When a state calls, say you dont track, not are you required to comply with their laws.

[68Charger]

And now ebay is asking me (of all people) to sign a petition so congress will address this issue.

[Skip]

I think if I were one of those companies (e.g. like Midway) I'd make it very, very public, involve the NRA/public and ask for legal donations, and announce that you will refuse all out-of-state court orders for production in all circumstances, openly announce that California and it's judges can go %$#$ itself, if they want to enforce it, they better bring a lot of guns across state lines, and take it all the way.

6 months of a contempt sentence - which cannot be extradited anyway - would be worth the risk, and your loyalty would be rewarded handsomely down the road.

I would hope this is how it would be handled, but I doubt it. I imagine there is some legal wrangling where a Lib state could reach into a company's life and ruin it.

And the Conservative state would allow it because our principles demand dutiful suicide.



And now ebay is asking me (of all people) to sign a petition so congress will address this issue.

I'm not sure how that would work. State taxation is one of the few 10th Amendment powers left. USSC just said this is a state tax issue.

Ebay can bend over and take it with a smile. Their politics begged for more government. They are getting more government!

[brutal]

The dirty little secret is compliance is going to end up being more expensive than the actual sales tax.

If you mean more than the tax collected. Agree. They'll use TAXPAYER dollars to chase after more tax revenue to fund their ponzi scheme.

[Irving]

I think if I were one of those companies (e.g. like Midway) I'd make it very, very public, involve the NRA/public and ask for legal donations, and announce that you will refuse all out-of-state court orders for production in all circumstances, openly announce that California and it's judges can go %$#$ itself, if they want to enforce it, they better bring a lot of guns across state lines, and take it all the way.

6 months of a contempt sentence - which cannot be extradited anyway - would be worth the risk, and your loyalty would be rewarded handsomely down the road.

Maybe that would have flown in the 80's. The isn't a company worth a crap now that isn't so interested in your consumer profile that anyone would believe for one second that they'd throw away your purchase records.

[Eric P]

Wrong quote! But agreed.

Surprisingly, what can often work in a legal context is "we had catastrophic server loss and all records archived prior to one month ago have been lost". However, "We didn't keep them" is no bueno.

But, legally speaking, are they required to keep or track customer purchases for any reason? Treat all transactions as cash transactions.

It would be a good marketing plow to attract customers wanting to avoid interstate taxation.

Who actually reports usage tax on their income taxes for purchases made in person?

Not paying or minimizing paid taxes is the most american of traditions.

[NFATrustGuy]

Wrong quote! But agreed.

Surprisingly, what can often work in a legal context is "we had catastrophic server loss and all records archived prior to one month ago have been lost". However, "We didn't keep them" is no bueno.

The Corporate version of a tragic boating accident!

[Irving]

I feel like they could always recover the customer info from the frequent massive security breaches if they were so inclined.