Internet sales tax may be headed to America

The days of tax free internet shopping may be coming to an end. According to CNET, democratic Senator, Dick Durbin is aiming to introduce a legislation called "the main street fairness act" that puts tax on online shopping. According to multilingual-search.com, 94% of Americans use online retailing, which counts for most of their population. Durbin's plan, that will take place after Easter break, consists of applying new sales tax to any online purchase, bought out of state. Popular online stores such as Amazon.com and overstock.com will no doubt be negatively affected by these changes.

"Why should out-of-state companies that sell their products online have an unfair advantage over Main Street bricks-and-mortar businesses? Out-of-state companies that aren't paying their fair share of taxes are sticking Illinois residents and businesses with the tab," explained Durbin.

Because not all out-of-state internet purchases are taxed like they are are in shopping centers, Dick Durbin explains that this gives an "unfair advantage" to online retailers. Although, with the many thousands of different tax bands that exist in the USA, online retailers are finding it hard to keep up with the many rules that apply within these bands. For example, in New Jersey, bottled water and cookies do not have any sales tax, but bottled soda and candy do include sales tax.

Report a problem with article
Previous Story

New Zealand government sneaks in anti-piracy law [Update]

Next Story

Apple demonstrates Final Cut Pro X, cuts price

94 Comments

Commenting is disabled on this article.

Dick's policies are what drove this economy to the ditch. Why does anyone pay attention to him anymore? Why are my neighbors to the east so dumb as to elect fools like him?

Phantom Phreak said,
Dick's policies are what drove this economy to the ditch. Why does anyone pay attention to him anymore? Why are my neighbors to the east so dumb as to elect fools like him?

Whoa, calm down. Someone's an angry Western Conservative.
I get it: Dick Durbin's a moron. I 100% agree with you on that. However, that doesn't mean people to the East are dumb. (Or does it?)

It's a bill from Dick Durbin, thus it should be ignored.
When a liberal says "fairness," that means "taking corporate money, forcing them to lay off workers."

Good...Well done, smart Senator... Implement more tax to Online Shopping in USA and Asia will benefit great deal from that... If the cost/price to shop online from US gets too costly, the consumers will just shift elsewhere where it's attractive to shop online, and that will means Asia.

Online Shopping market is growing fast and huge in Asia, especially in countries like China, Taiwan, Japan.

We have a similar thing in Canada. If you're in BC, and buy something online from Alberta, you have to pay the BC tax. Started last July I think it was. We still see people in Canada buying from us. Just have to really want your item...

Problem was there was no way to enforce collection rules or collect state sales tax. That it increased sales, giving on-line sellers a chance to succeed in the 1st place was a side benefit. Far as state sales taxes go, rates vary, with some states having no sales tax at all -- depends on how much of your money the state gov insists on spending. Right now on-line sellers collect state sales tax if they have a physical place of biz in your state, e.g. buy from Walmart on-line & you'll pay state sales tax if your state has a sales tax, because Walmart stores are everywhere. On-line sellers are fighting it tooth & nail of course because collecting & paying out the taxes is added cost & hassle, plus it makes their prices closer to the brick & mortar alternatives. The status quo, asking citizens to voluntarily send the state any taxes due from on-line purchases for some strange reason isn't working all that well.

And or course our Government is throwing money left and right at a worthless war in another country, that will probably go on for months and months, and billions of dollars.

Oh thats right it comes out of our pockets. Yet they make a big deal out of something like this? Its pocket change compared to what the Government does.

This is typical Government twisting the facts around. You could also say local stores have an advantage because they don't have to charge shipping fees. So I guess that is also unfair. Might as well slap a shipping fee tax on all local store sales to make it fair.

Then Government turns right around and uses that money for a worthless spending spree of their own. We even have businesses who are closely associated with Government (the President for example) who didn't pay a single penny in tax last year, yet they made billions in profit.

Our entire Government IS corrupt. Both Democrats and Republicans.

When states themselves impose tax on products that come from different states, that is interfering with interstate commerce which the constitution clearly gives the power to the federal government to do. Of course, the federal government meddles with lots of stuff that is way beyond its' constitutional purview, this is clearly a power that the federal government does have and it supersedes the states power. I am surprised that someone hasn't taken a state to the supreme court for overstepping their power and trying to impede interstate commerce.

If we see taxes as a necessary evil and local municipalities and states tax "Brick and Mortar" stores in their area to be able to provide the infrastructure for that business to even exist. Water, Power, Roads, Sidewalks, Signs, Tourism advertizing, etc... all the stuff that make a local business successful that the city and state help pay for. That being said, why would the city of Chicago, or the state of Illinois or New Mexico have any right to claim sales tax on products that a resident purchased in Hong Kong, or Dubuque, IA?
Chicago, IL, or New Mexico have provided no water, sewer, sidewalks, roads, etc for that business!

Now, if tax is just an arbitrary fee imposed without any reason to simply raise money where they can, then that is a different story.

kirkdickinson said,
When states themselves impose tax on products that come from different states, that is interfering with interstate commerce which the constitution clearly gives the power to the federal government to do.

As far as I understand it they've invented the legal language [which Amazon is really fighting] that says by selling to me they're in effect doing biz in my state & thus subject to its rules/regs. Whether it'll hold up in court or not is another matter. For every failing brick & mortar-only chain, & for every bankrupt state gov, there are Congressional Reps & Senators that at the very least need to fill bank accounts for their election campaigns -- the Googles & Amazons have more than enough $ to help make that happen. Even if Congress is bypassed with new regs coming through presidential order, Congress can put a stop to it.

My state of New Mexico requires sales tax for all Internet purchases now. The major online retailer respec this as well as common payment methods (such as PayPal). But there are still some places that don't tack on the NM sales tax, and I generally gravitate towards using them. Sales tax makes for a LOT and it is definitely felt on large items.

Why don't they worry about more important issues? like the deficit? Or the fact that every congressman/representative makes, what 3x or 4x times the national average of income?

Btw Spike, you beat me by 18 min's. Way to read my mind.

Huffdady said,
Why don't they worry about more important issues? like the deficit? Or the fact that every congressman/representative makes, what 3x or 4x times the national average of income?

Btw Spike, you beat me by 18 min's. Way to read my mind.

Because the FED (the bankers to whom you pay taxes) invents money and services for some of that, and if you place $5,000 in a bank "a" bank or bank(s) (not necessarily that one) is in debt to you for $5,000. Yes they count that, believe it or not. See services/digital economy above, it's all the same thing. So lawmakers see that debt as a pay whenever at a much lower rate.

Edited by justmike, Apr 13 2011, 3:28pm :

most sites I shop at now charge state sales tax as they have a warehouse or something in my state....

but yeah it is kind of unfair to local stores if you can buy something without sales tax online

Don't you just love all the change,tax and spend,2.5 trillion in,3.5 trillion out,and they make 175,000.00 plus free heath insurance.

Dusco25 said,
This can not be true.. Democrats are for the poor.... wait..... Nevermind.

Most Democrats do not know money so we pay for it, most Republicans do but are thieves so we pay for it. Vote for the majority 3rd party, not for the person, but to pull a single lobbyist away from our polar government.

Dusco25 said,
This can not be true.. Democrats are for the poor.... wait..... Nevermind.

When I attend my local City Council meeting each week they're always talking about the importance of education - especially education in high-wage jobs. Then they go on to explan that such jobs are necessary for a fat tax base so they can buy stuff we don't need.

Last night I heard an interview with Paul Krugman, a very political Nobel Prize in Economics winner where he said that the GOP wants to "take about $3 trillion from the neediest Americans and give it to wealthy Americans and corporations." The solution he proposes is to take about $3 trillion from wealthy Americans and corporations and give it to "the neediest Americans" (who always seem to be affiliated with labor unions amazingly).

My approach is to not take money from anyone, and then not give it to anyone either at the government level. Isn't it horiffic to think that people might make their own choices with their money? I'd be willing to bet that most people won't be spending half of what they used to pay in Federal taxes on bombing the daylights out of 3rd World countries, so seems like a decent start.

From above.. I just read this from CNN, so 2% of the country make over $250,000 per year with no upper limit. What percent of the country (families of 2.5) make under say $30,000 or have nothing taxable?

NEW YORK (CNNMoney) -- For years, President Obama has been clear about his preferred tax policy: Tax the rich more and protect households that make less than $250,000 from higher taxes. It's not clear what he'll say about taxes on Wednesday when he lays out his ideas for how to tackle the country's long-term debt. If history holds, he'll stick to his guns. Certainly, continuing to promise low taxes for 98% of the country will help his newly launched 2012 re-election campaign.

This is a good idea. I hate paying more for anything, but this enforces additional fair market competition between stores. Everyone knows that more buying power "can" bring cost down, and the large online companies like Amazon end up taking local jobs/businesses away just like WalMart does for B&M stores. Because we have turned into a mostly services/digital economy. Economy is generally speaking (the flow of money). Because of our heavy service/digital economy we must collect more tax. Why is this? Because even when a company goes under, actual assets (physical items) hold value (future tax), services generally do not, they usually just vanish into someones large bank account, and a bank is the opposite of a functioning economy. The banks make money off of the banks, and what do you thing that does to the economy? The bank(s), mostly the FED, did this folks. So what do we have? Banks being built where stores once were. The way the tax law is written now must change, because the top 2% incomes/businesses are paying over 90% of the entire populations taxes because of their higher tax bracket, and what happens when they go under/sell out/evaporate being a service? We all pay it, with what jobs? The next big money crunch is Social Security, because it must change or die soon (that's why both sides don't want to talk about it, baby boomers), the FED was/is in a pinch because investors knew what would happen at this point, so they wanted to unload long term investments (housing). We could talk about how and why higher gas prices hurt taxes and the economy overall, but I'll save that for another time. Have a nice day.

justmike said,
this enforces additional fair market competition between stores.

If I agree to a transaction with you, and a man with a mask comes by and steals 6%, the fair solution is to put a stop to the man with a mask stealing from our transaction - not to ensure that all transactions are burdened by thieves in the same way.

...oh wait, you said "fair" market competition - not "free" market competition. Missed your Orwellian newspeak there. Nevermind.

Neb Okla said,

If I agree to a transaction with you, and a man with a mask comes by and steals 6%, the fair solution is to put a stop to the man with a mask stealing from our transaction - not to ensure that all transactions are burdened by thieves in the same way.

...oh wait, you said "fair" market competition - not "free" market competition. Missed your Orwellian newspeak there. Nevermind.

That could work, but what's the odds, and who then would pay for the necessary tax programs? I cannot believe that there are people who think a "Flat tax" can work. lol That only works when "most" incomes are in some range of each other. If the top 2% of the population is making over $250,000, and carrying over 90% of the tax burden, then a gallon of milk would not be $7, it would be over $120. lol

justmike said,
This is a good idea. I hate paying more for anything, but this enforces additional fair market competition between stores.

In theory, maybe... Unfortunately the reality of adding on-line sales taxes is 1) it reduces total sales numbers which help drag down the economy. 2) it hurts lower wage earners who are forced by economic circumstance to buy the cheapest goods from the cheapest sources, encouraging some to give up working entirely & live off the gov. 3) since many retailers depend on both on-line & brick & mortar sales, added on-line costs hurt their bottom line, & thus the total number of employees they can afford. In the end states wind up needing more $ to pay for the additional people needing assistance, while reducing their sources of income -- companies with reduced income pay less taxes.

Bottom line -- most (all?) state govs spend too much & are paid too much. While state gov does help the needy & poor to some extent, they also favor spending on things that only the upper income folks really care about -- & they'll refuse to cut *That* spending because the wealthy are their greatest source of private cash. Most people think any additional tax income would be throwing good money after bad -- what about all the gov said would be done with the cash from the lotteries -- so are against it across the board.

So many Americans whining about a little tax. You already have products cheaper than most people. Try having VAT ruin every purchase you buy

AFineFrenzy said,
So many Americans whining about a little tax. You already have products cheaper than most people. Try having VAT ruin every purchase you buy

Try having freedom and not living as a serf for a change, then maybe you'll whine a little too.

AFineFrenzy said,
So many Americans whining about a little tax. You already have products cheaper than most people. Try having VAT ruin every purchase you buy

That's exactly what this would amount to if it passed.

This tax had better go to the state of the buyer or the seller (or split?) and not the feds...

Not that I like the idea.

thornz0 said,
This tax had better go to the state of the buyer or the seller (or split?) and not the feds...

Why should the tax go anywhere? Why on earth do the states deserve a cut at all? Answer: they don't.

If they're going to try to re-write the sales tax laws to get around the substantial nexus (physical presence) clause of the interstate commerce act, then they'll have to make a pretty strong case. There is language in the act at the federal level that prohibits states from using taxation to promote unfair advantage to local businesses over those out of state, and there are cases that set precedence. If they do pull it off, they'll need to simplify the interstate tax rate(s) so that small business can collect the appropriate amounts without needed a tax accountant on staff.

Glen said,
If they do pull it off, they'll need to simplify the interstate tax rate(s) so that small business can collect the appropriate amounts without needed a tax accountant on staff.

Good thing our government excels at small business simplification and efficiency!

Good ol' democrats... His logic is so flawed. "Main Street bricks-and-mortar businesses" are still going to have their loyal customers who will support if they keep on stocking the right products. How lame.

este said,
Good ol' democrats... His logic is so flawed. "Main Street bricks-and-mortar businesses" are still going to have their loyal customers who will support if they keep on stocking the right products. How lame.

My problem with "main street brick-and-mortar" stores is that whenver I find a parking spot it's got a time limit that says "we don't want you here". It's as if the parking ticket revenue is more important to City leaders than a thriving local economy. Talk about lame.

This better count as the sales tax of your own state, because deleware will be sending a big **** you letter to this ****ty government that we have if they decide to make it universal.

Why is our government so stupid? They're so bad at making money that they have to charge us just for every little thing that we do. If our country is really that broke they should just consider making drugs legal and selling them at shops and taxing them for christ sake. They could raise the taxes on those through the roof and druggies would still buy them!

mDaWg said,
If our country is really that broke they should just consider making drugs legal and selling them at shops and taxing them for christ sake. They could raise the taxes on those through the roof and druggies would still buy them!

They already do that with alcohol and tobacco. The result? More crime centered around skirting the alcohol and tobacco taxes (just look at what's happened in NYC!).

I couldn't help but notice that nobody here is suggesting the solution of opening up their *own* wallet to pay for these oh-so-valuable government services.

The solution to the problem of "running out of other people's money to spend" is to stop buying stuff you can't afford - not simply stealing more!

I wonder if this will also affect international companies?

For example, pretend that I own an online shop in Australia, would I also have to pay a sales tax? I am guessing the answer is no.

Jelly2003 said,
I wonder if this will also affect international companies?

For example, pretend that I own an online shop in Australia, would I also have to pay a sales tax? I am guessing the answer is no.


Just to clarify my poor wording here...

What I mean is:
Would I pay US sales tax if I were to sell to a customer from the USA from a store that I have here in Australia. I am guessing this is national only... In fact its a stupid question... Dunno why I asked it

Jelly2003 said,

Would I pay US sales tax if I were to sell to a customer from the USA from a store that I have here in Australia.

The question is, who's goons are going to fly from the US to Australia with guns to knock on your door demanding the money. Oz wouldn't let that happen.

It's similar on a state level except many states have come to "an understanding" where if I buy something from an Illinois resident, my state demands the tax money (based on?). Since Illinois doesn't want to fight my state for the money, they let it slide and instead demand money from their residents who bought products from my state.

Nobody seems to be interested in demanding a fair system that makes sense. Of course, fair to me is no taxes whatsoever because taxation is immoral and economically destructive.

The reason I shop for alot of things is towards places so I can avoid the sales tax and I save alot of money doing it.

I will still buy from an online store because even with taxes they are still cheaper than local stores. If local stores would lower their prices, then I would buy from them. The government once again doesn't know what they're talking about. This person doesn't care about locals getting the revenue, he cares about getting his tax money.

Sales tax.. yeah.. wasn't that one of the biggest reasons America broke away? There's enough of that crap here and it shouldn't be implemented for online purchases. I believe 94% of the population in America shops online not because of tax free sales, but because its convenient.. I purchase everything online as it saves gas for one. I mean with gas being over $4.00 a gallon I would rather not the 40 miles to TigerDirects warehouse instead I'll pay what little S&H fees there are.

Initially as I understand it, there is no tax to encourage more widespread internet use and invention. That may no longer be needed and I agree...

...however, if this happens, all online stores will be at a disadvantage over local retail, simply because they will have to charge to pay taxes AND shipping. This doesn't solve anything.

There are other advantages of online stores, cheaper rent, more stock per dollar of rent you pay, possibly less staff you need to pay, not restricted to business hours. The law is not just going to automatically flip over the tide, it may go too far or it may not go far enough.

Internet Taxation is Already here in the states. Some states have passed laws requiring tax be taken for online orders. It has also forced many tech companies to jump to states where such laws are not yet on the books.

American tax law sounds really messy with various state and federal taxes. GST may not be great, but at least it's one standard for the whole country

petroid said,
American tax law sounds really messy with various state and federal taxes. GST may not be great, but at least it's one standard for the whole country

Must be nice to live in a land with a one-size-fits-all yoke on it's citizenry. If I don't like the taxes, I can move until I find a system that is more palatable.

the government collects enough taxes. ask yourself not what you've done for your government by holding down a steady job and paying your taxes, but what has the government done for you lately besides increased the gas prices, cost of food and living and healthcare?

netsendjoe said,
the government collects enough taxes. ask yourself not what you've done for your government by holding down a steady job and paying your taxes, but what has the government done for you lately besides increased the gas prices, cost of food and living and healthcare?

And these things are ENTIRELY under government control, right? What level of government? I'm sure your local board of councillors (or something similar) have influence on gas prices. I'm SURE they can do a lot about shortage of good.

Healthcare? Sure, but half of your precious country hated Obama for his healthcare. Like it or not, it is your capitalist ideals that actually is ruining the dream of cheaper healthcare. There are literally battalions of politician who fought and failed in doing so. So no, simply blaming the government isn't the way to go. If they are inadequate in doing their job, then that is another matter. In that case, why don't you show them how to do their job?

netsendjoe said,
what has the government done for you lately besides increased the gas prices, cost of food and living and healthcare?

Luckily I live in a nation where the markets control prices instead of governments, but yeah, it's impossible to know what prices would really be without a universe of taxes, tarriffs, fees, and other regulations aimed at tweaking prices.

Just looking at gas alone you see taxes piled on as well as regulations demanding various mixtures for any number of reasons. The effect of all of it is more expense piled onto an already expensive commodity.

The funny thing is, if gas prices get so high that people start having to modify their behavior due to the economics of the situation, then the very same idiots who meddled with the price to raise it start complaining that poor people can't afford it anymore and start screaming about "gouging" at the pump.

I just want to get them to stop meddling with the prices so they can make themselves useful for a change.

Eddo89 said,

Healthcare? Sure, but half of your precious country hated Obama for his healthcare. Like it or not, it is your capitalist ideals that actually is ruining the dream of cheaper healthcare.

Obamacare isn't cheaper. It's going to cost 1.2 Trillion to implement and that's front loaded by 4 years. How is it cheaper?

I think this is fair you have to look at the bigger picture, all these online stores that flaunt taxes like in the UK many big online retailers set up on an island near the UK called Jersey doesnt have VAT (taxes) so they can sell stuff under a certain price and not have to pay taxes on them so they can massively undercut the high street stores.

Online retailers that get around paying taxes are killing the high street which is why a lot of companies are going out of business, sure the prices in the high street look expensive but you have to factor in all the cost and taxes of not living in a tax haven.

Would i like having to pay more, of course i wouldnt, but if it meant that all the high street stores didnt go bust and everyone who worked in them out of a job i would gladly pay that extra.

All you people who are whining about "the government" need to look at the bigger picture.

Jenson said,
I think this is fair you have to look at the bigger picture, all these online stores that flaunt taxes like in the UK many big online retailers set up on an island near the UK called Jersey doesnt have VAT (taxes) so they can sell stuff under a certain price and not have to pay taxes on them so they can massively undercut the high street stores.

Online retailers that get around paying taxes are killing the high street which is why a lot of companies are going out of business, sure the prices in the high street look expensive but you have to factor in all the cost and taxes of not living in a tax haven.

Would i like having to pay more, of course i wouldnt, but if it meant that all the high street stores didnt go bust and everyone who worked in them out of a job i would gladly pay that extra.

All you people who are whining about "the government" need to look at the bigger picture.

Yuo can't just go inventing taxes to stop old business models dying. Capitalism works because people/companies find the loop holes to exploit, which creates competition so the other companies then need to adapt or die as well

If there's a sustainable demand for brick and mortar stores I'm sure someone will find a business model that works

DomZ said,

Yuo can't just go inventing taxes to stop old business models dying. Capitalism works because people/companies find the loop holes to exploit, which creates competition so the other companies then need to adapt or die as well

If there's a sustainable demand for brick and mortar stores I'm sure someone will find a business model that works


They cant find a business model that works if online retailers exploit loopholes to be able to completely undercut the high street stores, there is no way they can compete.

Jenson said,

They cant find a business model that works if online retailers exploit loopholes to be able to completely undercut the high street stores, there is no way they can compete.

That's BS. There's more to shopping than just price. If you offer a nice sales experience, knowledgeable and friendly staff, easy returns, etc, etc, you'll have a competitive advantage over online sales. But let's face it, most stores don't give a crap about their customers -- they want your money and that's it. Those are the businesses that are failing, and those are the businesses that deserve to fail.

Why do I keep shopping at Amazon? Partially because of their prices, but mostly because of their customer service. Whenever there's a mistake, whether it's their fault, the delivery company's fault, or some other random event, they make it right. If local businesses did that, I'd shop there in a second, but they don't.

Jenson said,

They cant find a business model that works if online retailers exploit loopholes to be able to completely undercut the high street stores, there is no way they can compete.

Simple fix, don't levy taxes on brick and mortar store sales either.

Undoubtedly you'll myopically think that this is impossible, so I'll explain that the US states of Alaska, Delaware, Montana, New Hampshire, and Oregon have no sales taxes.

Who cares if the island of Jersey has no sales tax. If you don't like the reality that people tend to seek the best value, why not offer a better value instead of trying to force your competition to raise their prices too. Forcing businesses to offer crappier pricing because of your own local love affair with stealing money to buy neat stuff for your community is psychotic.

Neb Okla said,

Simple fix, don't levy taxes on brick and mortar store sales either.

Undoubtedly you'll myopically think that this is impossible, so I'll explain that the US states of Alaska, Delaware, Montana, New Hampshire, and Oregon have no sales taxes.

Who cares if the island of Jersey has no sales tax. If you don't like the reality that people tend to seek the best value, why not offer a better value instead of trying to force your competition to raise their prices too. Forcing businesses to offer crappier pricing because of your own local love affair with stealing money to buy neat stuff for your community is psychotic.

Yes yes yes yes, we will lower our prices too? So what if I can't repay the bank, wages, or even myself. I can be competitive price wise, that is ALL that matters.

His point is, there is uneven ground in the competition. Brick and mortar starts 20m behind in a 100m race. Somehow you have to bring it back to even. Either through removal of tax or the addition of tax. Now, where do some of the stuff like police, healthcare, roads, wages of public servant (politicians too), defence come from again? Oh yes, something called tax. How naive are we all, tax cuts and we all be free and dandy. Here I thought politicians are the only deluded and greedy ones.

screw the gov. all they do is screw the people, as usual.

putting tax online will hamper the benefits of using it because then you will have to pay shipping ALONG WITH some BS taxes.

the gov is just running low on money and are trying to find new ways to screw the average joe.

p.s. they might as well just print some more money up and leave us alone.

ThaCrip said,
p.s. they might as well just print some more money up and leave us alone.
Because that won't damage rather than heal the economy at all... </sarcasm>

ThaCrip said,

p.s. they might as well just print some more money up and leave us alone.

Hey, it's working for North Korea! ...oh wait.

"The price of rice has inflated about 100 times compared to one year ago," says Tae-keung Ha. He blames economic mismanagement for hyperinflation, following botched currency reforms in 2009. "The main reason is [that] the value of North Korean currency is plummeting down because [the] North Korean government is just printing more and more North Korean currency."
SOURCE: http://www.npr.org/2011/04/12/...for-food-aid-draw-suspicion

Intrinsica said,
Because that won't damage rather than heal the economy at all... </sarcasm>

Would it though? If we operated our gov'ts on a bare minimum of services (i.e., sans entitlements and handouts, no wars, no world policing), what would be the total cost per year? How does that amount compare with existing gov't money printing? What is that number in relation to GDP?

If gov't was efficient and cheap, could you pay for it via inflation?

Vlad said,
Would it though? If we operated our gov'ts on a bare minimum of services (i.e., sans entitlements and handouts, no wars, no world policing), what would be the total cost per year? How does that amount compare with existing gov't money printing? What is that number in relation to GDP?

If gov't was efficient and cheap, could you pay for it via inflation?

http://www.fintrend.com/inflat...les/HighOrLow_inflation.asp

Seems like the best way is just no inflation, minimal spending, and low taxes.

Continually printing money sounds a bit too good to be true, anyway.

This is silly. So Illinois companies sales are affected because companies in other states can sell to people in Illinois and not charge tax, but Illinois businesses don't benefit from not charging tax to customers in the other 49 states? Are the piliticians seriously stupid enough to not see it works both ways??

Not to mention collecting sales tax for 50 different states would be a nightmare.

So stupid...

Hence the reason Amazon.com is pulling their sellers from the state of IL and suggesting they go to Missouri, Indiana or some other state.

Missouri has a usage tax, but it's a $2000 deductible. Sounds fair to me!

I am so sick of they calling internet buyers thieves. They set the rules up a long time ago why should people who shop online be put ou a guilt trip.

Also we do end up paying the same price per say when you factor in shipping.

Randall_Lind said,
I am so sick of they calling internet buyers thieves. They set the rules up a long time ago why should people who shop online be put ou a guilt trip.

Also we do end up paying the same price per say when you factor in shipping.

I think in most states (with sales tax) the rules you speak of say that you must report internet purchases and pay use tax.

Randall_Lind said,
I am so sick of they calling internet buyers thieves.

Agreed. The real thieves are the ones demanding a tribute for a transaction they have no part in. Durbin admits, the sole purpose of his proposed legislation is to meddle in transactions as an attempt at price fixing - to make transactions with people who have more freedom less appealing to his serfs.

Durbin said "Out-of-state companies that aren't paying their fair share of taxes (in Illinois)". What a nutcase. My fair share of Illinois taxes is ZERO because I don't live there.

I was researching my local tax code a while back and as a consultant they expect me to pay a different tax rate every day depending on where I work relative to the imaginary lines they made up defining various communities. So if I physically leave town to work in a suburb with lower taxes, my town demands a tribute in the amount of the difference. This is to discourage me from lookng for work that isn't near my house!

I doubt most of you have ever even read a tiny fraction of the laws that bind you. When you do you'll hopefully see how arbitrary, absurd, illogical, and senseless they are.

Stetson said,

I think in most states (with sales tax) the rules you speak of say that you must report internet purchases and pay use tax.

Exactly. They are thieves because they fail to remit their taxes as they are legally required to do.

Neb Okla said,

Durbin said "Out-of-state companies that aren't paying their fair share of taxes (in Illinois)". What a nutcase. My fair share of Illinois taxes is ZERO because I don't live there.

If you don't live in Illinois then how would this affect you? It means that if you live in Illinois and you bought something online, the seller would have to add sales tax onto the price and then send it to the state. They aren't charging the businesses taxes, the businesses are collecting the taxes that the consumers of Illinois owe.

I still think that it's pretty impractical to try to achieve though. Lots of smaller businesses who couldn't afford to have a system to keep track of the sales tax in every state and pay it to every state would probably just not sell to states that enforced this.

Stetson said,

If you don't live in Illinois then how would this affect you? It means that if you live in Illinois and you bought something online, the seller would have to add sales tax onto the price and then send it to the state. They aren't charging the businesses taxes, the businesses are collecting the taxes that the consumers of Illinois owe.

I still think that it's pretty impractical to try to achieve though. Lots of smaller businesses who couldn't afford to have a system to keep track of the sales tax in every state and pay it to every state would probably just not sell to states that enforced this.

The proposed legislation applies to all internet purchases which means everyone in every state. It's just the jack ass Durbin who is proposing it. I live in Illinois and therefore with Durbin and his nonsense and I'll definitely be contacting his office. Personally I think this is b.s. The state of Illinois (along with many other states) is in dire financial shape and this is his way of fixing the problem.

bj55555 said,
How about just forcing the freeloading corporations to pay some income taxes for a change?

Oh yes, because companies don't pay taxes. Clearly you're clueless...

Well the US government is broke, so why not tax the people some more!

Can't hurt can it? It's not like "greed is good" was the cause of the problems in the first place it it?

cmc482 said,

Being criticized for not paying taxes in 2010 is different than officially NOT paying taxes.

"Immelt also pointed out that over the past five years GE has paid $14 billion in taxes. "

Looks to me as if they're paying taxes and in the year that they're being told they didn't.

It would be pretty stupid to publicly say your not paying them and then so easily be proven otherwise in front of everyone; its not good PR for your company or your position as a CEO. I wonder if you understand how many company can move money around different continents to avoid legally PAYING taxes. Its a very legal and many companys do it today. If I remember right there was an article about this type of tax maneuver displayed on Neowin months ago. Would be nice to have that link if anyone remembers that article as well.

bj55555 said,
How about just forcing the freeloading corporations to pay some income taxes for a change?

Freeloading? What entitles you to any fruits of someone else's private enterprise? You sound pretty arrogant to think you're entitled to the fruits of someone else's labor.

bj55555 said,
How about just forcing the freeloading corporations to pay some income taxes for a change?

How do you think corporations make money? They make it from you. YOU pay those income taxes!

bj55555 said,
How about just forcing the freeloading corporations to pay some income taxes for a change?

Yes brilliant! Lets tax the crap out of corporations so they can just forward that cost on to us. Think people think. It is very simple logic.

dvb2000 said,
Well the US government is broke, so why not tax the people some more!

Can't hurt can it? It's not like "greed is good" was the cause of the problems in the first place it it?

I hope you are joking (I suspect you are) but I hope that it is understood that cutting government spending is the real way to begin to climb out of the hole we are in

werdwerdus said,

I hope you are joking (I suspect you are) but I hope that it is understood that cutting government spending is the real way to begin to climb out of the hole we are in

+1. The Republicans seem to be on the right track. I'm just not sure if sudden, huge cuts will make the government and country more unstable. But we definitely need to eliminate a lot of spending.

ermax said,

Yes brilliant! Lets tax the crap out of corporations so they can just forward that cost on to us. Think people think. It is very simple logic.

I am certain that this would never come to being from the current state of things, but umm..the government can add regulation to the picture to not allow corporations to tax people unfairly for products and services. And cut the bull **** about socialism. American public is too ****ing dumb to even understand what is happening to the country to be even complaining about high level subjects like "socialism". The country is broke! The main problem being that these idiot voters are voting to bring the corporate lobbyists into power.

ermax said,

Yes brilliant! Lets tax the crap out of corporations so they can just forward that cost on to us. Think people think. It is very simple logic.

These corps are raising prices on us no matter what. As an example, look at all of the tax cuts and benefits the oil companies get. Then they raise gas prices for no good reason claiming it's due to "unrest in the middle east" then turn around and rake in record profits in the billions of dollars per quarter. Yeah, let's give them a tax break.