The United States Supreme Court ruled Thursday that states have the authority to force online shoppers to pay sales tax; a move that could generate billions of dollars and significantly raise prices of commonly bought goods.
Yeah, let’s just keep on SCREWING the CONSUMER!
Well, it is an idea that has caught up with the times.
This was an inevitability
Sorry, but I must disagree with our host.
This was the correct decision.
Link to the Opinion of the Court is in my Supreme Court thread for today.
The court got this one wrong. This is (State) Taxation without representation. Force the consumers to pay their own state taxes and I dont have a problem with it. Forcing me in Virginia to collect taxes on behalf of California is not right. I never engaged in contractual obligations with California, and under no circumstances should I have to serve unwillingly as their collection agent.
You all need to read the decision before spouting off. First of all, the issue was not whether consumers have to pay sales tax on internet purchases. It was undisputed that states can tax internet purchases of their citizens. The issue was whether the merchants can be required to collect and remit the taxes.
The issue is whether or not a state can require a merchant who does not reside in their state (or have a base of operations) to collect “their” taxes. I say no unless these states who wish this, pay for the cost. You see, if you are collecting taxes in the state you work in, that is a “privilege” you get when you apply for your license to operate in said state. Since there is a “benefit” to the business owner… What benefit does the out of state merchant get? Besides the extra costs of trying to deal with up to 40 states with sales taxes and then all the variations since these are almost to a T, different based on each and every zip code in that state. It has always been up to the consumer to be responsible to pay those taxes on out of state purchases. As it should have been left. This now allows states to reach into other states to enforce their tax regulations, seems to me that in the end there will be less state rights as all these money grubbers will look at this as a cash cow. States without a sales tax could install one just for online purchases etc, when will it end? This is a overreach.
This is my take on it as well. I am very surprised by their ruling. Next there will be lawsuits on the level of sales and income on what constitutes “Sellers” that have to send states their taxes. Today, S Dakota says over 200 sales transactions in a year, or over 100000 in sales. You can bet those numbers will be adjusted downward before too long.
Omaha Nebraska is roughly 100 miles from the state line of S Dakota. If a car dealer in Omaha Nebraska sells five cars in a year to people that live in S Dakota, that would more than likely reach the 100k value. Realistically when looking at trucks, 2 or 3 sales in a year would reach that 100k level. Should that car dealer be required to send sales tax to S Dakota? What does S Dakota do for him and his business? Why should S Dakota be able to force him with the threat of govt to act as their revenue agent?
This issue has not been resolved by a long shot. The courts should have left this the way it was. They should have told S Dakota to take their grievance to the Congress and have their representatives enact a new law.
At least in Washington when you register your vehicle that you brought into the state, they charge the tax then. Unless, you can prove you owned it in another state for (not sure how long) a couple of years I guess.
It’s funny how the courts change the rules to the game. It’s time to remind them they don’t write the law, they don’t re-write the law. It’s not their responsibility and they don’t have constitutional power to do so legally. Supposedly, it’s congress that does that… LOL.
The first interpretation was the correct one.
