View Full Version : Internet taxation : It is upon us...
BaphometaS
10-04-2005, 09:43 PM
When they start taxing sales generated through the internet at a state
level, will your online purchasing habits change? Personally I buy a lot of
things online specifically to avoid some if not all of the taxes. Does this
make me a bad person? Is that considered "cheating" the system in your
mind? What are your thoughts...:devil:
When they start taxing sales generated through the internet at a state
level, will your online purchasing habits change? Personally I buy a lot of
things online specifically to avoid some if not all of the taxes. Does this
make me a bad person? Is that considered "cheating" the system in your
mind? What are your thoughts...:devil:
Hell, no.
It makes you an upstanding American.
I think some sort of taxation, or a hellacious effort at implementing same, will arise in the next few years, but unless it is enforceable at the state level (doubtful, ironically so because only the Feds have anything at all close to the technical ability to pull it off, and because a "states" effort would render something on the order of gasoline formulations-absolutely unworkable), it will be a huge farce.
I wouldn't worry overmuch; not for the time being, anyway.
Any successful plan would require first and foremost an agreement uniformly applicable on an interstate basis, and, as this would require Republicans and Democrats to agree on something...nah. :)
GepperRankins
10-05-2005, 12:00 AM
if the people in power stand to lose money if it doesn't get the go ahead, i imagine it's only a matter of time
JPaul
10-05-2005, 05:03 AM
Which state would collect the tax, the state the buyer was in, or the state the vendor was in.
What if they are foreign, living in a foreign country.
What if there is no similar tax in their state / country.
It's a minefield I tells ya.
Which state would collect the tax, the state the buyer was in, or the state the vendor was in.
What if they are foreign, living in a foreign country.
What if there is no similar tax in their state / country.
It's a minefield I tells ya.
Preeeeeee-cisely! ;)
Busyman
10-05-2005, 11:34 PM
Which state would collect the tax, the state the buyer was in, or the state the vendor was in.
What if they are foreign, living in a foreign country.
What if there is no similar tax in their state / country.
It's a minefield I tells ya.
The simplest way would be for ze state the vendor is in to collect ze tax.
That would solve the whole conundrum.
Which state would collect the tax, the state the buyer was in, or the state the vendor was in.
What if they are foreign, living in a foreign country.
What if there is no similar tax in their state / country.
It's a minefield I tells ya.
The simplest way would be for ze state the vendor is in to collect ze tax.
That would solve the whole conundrum.
Nope.
For such a plan to be successful, every state would have to agree to it, and that would never happen.
The Fed would have nothing to do with enforcement if they weren't due a cut, and a National sales tax will never fly.
The states would never agree to uniform collection, and if some did, affected vendors would re-locate to non-taxed states for competitive advantage.
I don't think there are any "creative" solutions to the dilemma.
Face it; if it were viable, it would be in place already.
Busyman
10-05-2005, 11:57 PM
The simplest way would be for ze state the vendor is in to collect ze tax.
That would solve the whole conundrum.
Nope.
For such a plan to be successful, every state would have to agree to it, and that would never happen.
The Fed would have nothing to do with enforcement if they weren't due a cut, and a National sales tax will never fly.
The states would never agree to uniform collection, and if some did, affected vendors would re-locate to non-taxed states for competitive advantage.
I don't think there are any "creative" solutions to the dilemma.
Face it; if it were viable, it would be in place already.
You just said nope to something else.
We could go for forever with the if's. I answered JP's post nothing more. I could say that it would have to pass state legislation and it be a.....no shit sherlock.
Let me rephrase...If all the damn states agree to tax the vendor located in that state then it would most definitely work.
Mmk?
Nope.
For such a plan to be successful, every state would have to agree to it, and that would never happen.
The Fed would have nothing to do with enforcement if they weren't due a cut, and a National sales tax will never fly.
The states would never agree to uniform collection, and if some did, affected vendors would re-locate to non-taxed states for competitive advantage.
I don't think there are any "creative" solutions to the dilemma.
Face it; if it were viable, it would be in place already.
You just said nope to something else.
We could go for forever with the if's. I answered JP's post nothing more. I could say that it would have to pass state legislation and it be a.....no shit sherlock.
Let me rephrase...If all the damn states agree to tax the vendor located in that state then it would most definitely work.
Mmk?
And it would have the effect of causing business migration to states that wouldn't tax.
There would be quite a few of them, especially those considered to be more business-friendly than tax-hungry.
I'll leave the phrasing as is.
Mmk?
Busyman
10-06-2005, 01:06 AM
You just said nope to something else.
We could go for forever with the if's. I answered JP's post nothing more. I could say that it would have to pass state legislation and it be a.....no shit sherlock.
Let me rephrase...If all the damn states agree to tax the vendor located in that state then it would most definitely work.
Mmk?
And it would have the effect of causing business migration to states that wouldn't tax.
There would be quite a few of them, especially those considered to be more business-friendly than tax-hungry.
I'll leave the phrasing as is.
Mmk?
...and you still don't get it. I'm not talking about the states that won't tax. I'm talking about the states in general. :1eye:
Answering.....
If all the damn states agree to tax the vendor located in that state then it would most definitely work.
With....
And it would have the effect of causing business migration to states that wouldn't tax.
...is pure idiocy. :dry:
twisterX
10-06-2005, 01:39 AM
I dont think its just possible. They cant tax you from another state becuase the money will go to that state. They would have to make it so that the money goes to your state
And it would have the effect of causing business migration to states that wouldn't tax.
There would be quite a few of them, especially those considered to be more business-friendly than tax-hungry.
I'll leave the phrasing as is.
Mmk?
...and you still don't get it. I'm not talking about the states that won't tax. I'm talking about the states in general. :1eye:
Answering.....
If all the damn states agree to tax the vendor located in that state then it would most definitely work.
With....
And it would have the effect of causing business migration to states that wouldn't tax.
...is pure idiocy. :dry:
Why?
Internet business is extraordinarily easy to do, and there would be significant competitive advantages to relocating to avoid the tax issue.
You contend this would not be worthwhile?
If this is true, we'll never hear another complaint about taxes and we can disband the IRS.
If this is true, would you (after all, you're closer) please let the IRS know they can all go home...for good?
JPaul
10-06-2005, 02:23 AM
Which state would collect the tax, the state the buyer was in, or the state the vendor was in.
What if they are foreign, living in a foreign country.
What if there is no similar tax in their state / country.
It's a minefield I tells ya.
The simplest way would be for ze state the vendor is in to collect ze tax.
That would solve the whole conundrum.
But where is the vendor.
His principal place of business, his interweb server location, the state his warehouse is in (quite messy), the location of his accounts department, or one of many other possibilities.
Your answer may indeed be the simplest way (well actually it isn't) however it is not necessarily the best way, or even a workable solution.
Busyman
10-06-2005, 01:24 PM
The simplest way would be for ze state the vendor is in to collect ze tax.
That would solve the whole conundrum.
But where is the vendor.
His principal place of business, his interweb server location, the state his warehouse is in (quite messy), the location of his accounts department, or one of many other possibilities.
Your answer may indeed be the simplest way (well actually it isn't) however it is not necessarily the best way, or even a workable solution.
If the vendor is in the US it is. Many B&M businesses already charge tax for online purchases.
Outside the U.S. would be the problem. j2's post would have had more teeth if it was "well they'd just move outside the US." Better yet, they'd move to a state that charges less tax.
Busyman
10-06-2005, 01:28 PM
I dont think its just possible. They cant tax you from another state becuase the money will go to that state. They would have to make it so that the money goes to your state
Why?
If you drove to a B&M business in another state to purchase good or services, you'd pay tax there. The state you live in doesn't deserve a cut.
JPaul
10-06-2005, 01:29 PM
But where is the vendor.
His principal place of business, his interweb server location, the state his warehouse is in (quite messy), the location of his accounts department, or one of many other possibilities.
Your answer may indeed be the simplest way (well actually it isn't) however it is not necessarily the best way, or even a workable solution.
If the vendor is in the US it is. Many B&M businesses already charge tax for online purchases.
Outside the U.S. would be the problem. j2's post would have had more teeth if it was "well they'd just move outside the US."
Aren't State taxes different, by State.
If that is the case then my point stands, if it is not the case then please to be ignoring my last. Other than the obvious international rammifications.
Oh wait .... gotcha.
I can give you an example (of the international element) using VAT and the different treatment depending on whether the "source" is in the EU, or outwith it. However it really would be rather boring, so I won't bother.
Busyman
10-06-2005, 01:31 PM
If the vendor is in the US it is. Many B&M businesses already charge tax for online purchases.
Outside the U.S. would be the problem. j2's post would have had more teeth if it was "well they'd just move outside the US."
Aren't State taxes different, by State.
If that is the case then my point stands, if it is not the case then please to be ignoring my last. Other than the obvious international rammifications.
Oh wait .... gotcha.
I can give you an example (of the international element) using VAT and the different treatment depending on whether the "source" is in the EU, or outwith it. However it really would be rather boring, so I won't bother.
See my edit.
But where is the vendor.
His principal place of business, his interweb server location, the state his warehouse is in (quite messy), the location of his accounts department, or one of many other possibilities.
Your answer may indeed be the simplest way (well actually it isn't) however it is not necessarily the best way, or even a workable solution.
If the vendor is in the US it is. Many B&M businesses already charge tax for online purchases.
Outside the U.S. would be the problem. j2's post would have had more teeth if it was "well they'd just move outside the US." Better yet, they'd move to a state that charges less tax.
:lol: I give up.... :lol:
JPaul
10-06-2005, 07:37 PM
If the vendor is in the US it is. Many B&M businesses already charge tax for online purchases.
Outside the U.S. would be the problem. j2's post would have had more teeth if it was "well they'd just move outside the US." Better yet, they'd move to a state that charges less tax.
:lol: I give up.... :lol:
As a direct result of the "see my edit", which didn't actually change anything. I second that giving up.
twisterX
10-06-2005, 09:16 PM
No taxation without represantation!!!
Busyman
10-06-2005, 10:20 PM
If the vendor is in the US it is. Many B&M businesses already charge tax for online purchases.
Outside the U.S. would be the problem. j2's post would have had more teeth if it was "well they'd just move outside the US." Better yet, they'd move to a state that charges less tax.
:lol: I give up.... :lol:
Less tax ain't the same as no tax j2. :dry:
One may be 6% the another 8% which vastly different than 0%.
You do know that some internet vendors charge tax already right?
Busyman
10-06-2005, 10:23 PM
:lol: I give up.... :lol:
As a direct result of the "see my edit", which didn't actually change anything.
How so?
This....
Better yet, they'd move to a state that charges less tax.
was added before this.....
Aren't State taxes different, by State.
that's the only reason I said "see my edit".
JPaul
10-06-2005, 11:17 PM
But where is the vendor.
His principal place of business, his interweb server location, the state his warehouse is in (quite messy), the location of his accounts department, or one of many other possibilities.
Busyman
10-06-2005, 11:25 PM
But where is the vendor.
His principal place of business, his interweb server location, the state his warehouse is in (quite messy), the location of his accounts department, or one of many other possibilities.
Can't be his server location unless he owns that space. You pretty much can do it like it's already done with B&M businesses. It could be where accounts department. It could be his warehouse location (provided the warehouse is in owned by the company.
I think that would be the easy part. The hard part would be competition with overseas companies.
JPaul
10-07-2005, 12:39 AM
So what's the answer.
Which State is the vendor in.
Busyman
10-07-2005, 01:04 AM
So what's the answer.
Which State is the vendor in.
Wherever the vendor owns or rents a space, even their home. Kinda like it is now. :dry:
JPaul
10-07-2005, 02:01 PM
Sorry if I am being dense here, but my point is - What if they have locations in various different states.
They order the goods online, the Server is in State A.
They are issued an invoice, from Accounts Dept, in State B.
The goods are despatched from the Warehouse, in State M.
Who decides which State's tax is appropriate.
Busyman
10-07-2005, 02:20 PM
Sorry if I am being dense here, but my point is - What if they have locations in various different states.
They order the goods online, the Server is in State A.
They are issued an invoice, from Accounts Dept, in State B.
The goods are despatched from the Warehouse, in State M.
Who decides which State's tax is appropriate.
Beats the hell outta me. Probably the vendor. My point is do it the way that it's already done.
My company is in multiple states and sells products over teh web too yet they charge tax. Treat internet vendors like current ones.
Rat Faced
10-07-2005, 11:22 PM
No taxation without represantation!!!
You mean like Puerto Rico, Guam, U.S. Virgin Islands, American Samoa, Northern Mariana Islands... or do you include all the territories? :huh:
Powered by vBulletin® Version 4.2.3 Copyright © 2024 vBulletin Solutions, Inc. All rights reserved.