Comments on: Tax-free Internet shopping days could be numbered
Pro-tax states and the National Conference of State Legislatures are hoping to persuade Congress to let states impose new fees on Internet and mail-order sales.
Most Popular
The yogurt makers of tech: Gadgets to avoid
Don't buy these one-trick ponies--unless you like gizmos that gather dust.
Google wants to unclog Net's DNS plumbing
The Net giant, ever eager for a faster Internet, debuts its Google Public DNS service. With it, Google could become even more central to the Net.
About News Blog
Recent posts on technology, trends, and more.
Add this feed to your online news reader
However, the Federal government CAN and probably SHOULD tax Internet sales. On any day of the week ending in a "y" they can order that retailers must pay a, say, 5% sales tax on goods delivered to another state. Congress could tnen turn around and divide the revenue equally between the two states involved in the transaction. They don't want to do this because then they'd take the hit for taxing the Internet. Any of the schemes proposed by the states for collecting interstate taxes on Internet sales, would almost certainly run afoul of the Interstate Commerce Clause.
Sales taxes levied at the point of transaction destroys commerce, a fact of cause and effect, end of story. Just because the heat gets turned up slowly does not mean it won't cook you! Just because your state has not yet boiled over (it sounds like its about to).
As it is, some places already charge you sales tax if either your billing or shipping address is in the same state as the site owner's business.
/P
If you did make taxable income then you benefited from the existence of the state and its services, and its a fair tax affecting equally everyone based upon how much they benefited, in the form of taxable income.
The poorest, lowest income should not have to pay as much as the rich, because they obviously did not benefit as much. But when you go and buy that DVD (online or otherwise) the low income person is paying the same amount of taxes on that as the as the highest income, how is that fair?
Oregon has no Sales Tax.
Oregon has a balanced budget.
Oregon has lots of IT and Tech Companies.
Oregon has lots of IT infrastructure.
Oregon has great Universities with top notch programs.
Oregon has lots of skilled IT workers looking for work too, if you are honestly hiring for a decent wage (don't believe the shortage crap they spew to get the H1-B's, and L1's, I know lots of really smart techs, still looking for work).
I would love to see lots more IT and tech job opportunities here in Oregon, provided you won't mess up our beautiful state with pollution.
/P
--mark d.
The only people being cheated are the tax pays.
I don't mind paying "use taxes," or even a flat national sales tax on non-crucial items we buy, but ONLY in the absence of the countless other taxes we pay on everything.
What do we do at the polling place? That's a tough one. The Dems want to tax the crap out of us, but the Repubs want us to stay in Iraq and remain policing the world, which we'll be paying for for generations. The only hope I saw for real change was Ron Paul, but he's out of it, so we're screwed.
Know Democrat Politicians = Know New Taxes!
Republicans would have you believe they are against taxes and big government, thats because they want it all privatized, so the can make profits off of social services, basically profits off the poor, and then you have no say in what they do with that money once they get it.
At least with taxes and government services and programs, you can have your say in how it is handled, at the voting booth, through demonstrations, writing politicians (not that they'll listen) etc. You can read the policies and accounting up front, its public record, not so with a corperate entity, or private business.
When the republicans privatize everything, you have to be able to afford a lawyer first, fight for a day in court, against a rich business or corperation to get heard, to get justice, that sound good to you?
Democrats see government programs as non-profit, which is better for the people, than private for profit equivalent businesses, when dealing with social services, and basic needs and infrastructure that everyone benefits from. It does not compete with free enterprise, because much of work can be contracted to private business, through the bid process that keeps costs down, but still ensures fair wages, and healthy businesses.
It's just incredible to me that we would be called cheaters for not wanting to pay sales tax on a few internet purchases, which is in line with our nations laws anyway. It is ILLEGAL for the govt to charge sales tax for interstate commerce! WE are the cheaters, yet our tax dollars are lost and stolen everyday by our govt.
I don't know about the rest of you guys, but I'm ready for a REAL tax revolt or revolution.
https://forms.house.gov/wyr/welcome.shtml
We all know this is a ridiculous tax, and the government simply wants more of your money to fund programs that are not working. Why should Amazon be taxed by the state of California when the state of California is providing nothing for Amazon? Taxation without representation, anyone?
I wish I could choose which state my tax money went to. I wish I could also choose to send my federal tax to whatever state I wanted instead of the federal government. They'd all have to compete with each other because everyone would send it to the lowest charging states or federal if they were the cheaper.
Without some sort of competition or something to lower taxes this country might break. I say this because I'm hearing of new taxes almost everyday now. It used to be only every now and then. Now even though the economy is struggling to stay prosperous the politicians seem set on killing it. I never heard so much talk about taxes before. That's all they ever talk about anymore.
Low income people aren't going to continue to go to work if they don't make enough to pay the rent anyway. When their credit line runs out who's going to buy the products if taxes go too high?
I think we may have already started to see it, but I don't know. High taxes aren't good. They can't keep raising them forever, and now is the wrong time to have new taxes even if they wanted to.
We need simpler tax plans. I shouldn't have to pay a separate tax on everything. My income has already been taxed when I cash my check. Then every time I spend some I get taxed again. Then depending on what I buy I have to pay yet again even a separate tax.
The government doesn't need to raise tax. How much of the money I spend does the government get? If sales tax is 5%, and I spend five dollars then do they get a quarter?
No, in the end they'll get almost all of it anyway. Because the next time someone spends the remaining 4.75 it'll get taxed again, and again, and again on the same five dollars. Raising tax doesn't bring in more revenue it only speeds the process up. Bringing more money into the economy, and making the dollar worth more are the only real way to bring in more revenue.
An Internet tax is just another way to speed up their incompetence. They were going to get that money anyway through income tax, or some other means. The real reason they want to tax Internet sales is because some people lock their money in the banks where nobody ever sees it again. So, the government never makes any money off it after the initial taxes. Like Bill Gate's billions of dollars that just sat there for how long? As long as it sat there it didn't do anything to help anyone. Even though that's a generalization I suppose.
The attitude they can just raise taxes whenever they want because they can't find other solutions to problems has got to stop before it goes too far.
Taxes are to provide services collectively for groups where no one person from that group could accomplish the task alone. That's not what they're being used for. They're being used to cover the politicians mistakes on policies that aren't working. If they couldn't raise taxes then everyone would see their incompetence, and then they would get voted out of office.
We need a set a tax cap that can never be raised. I would even suggest putting it in the constitution. If you end up paying more than the cap the government should have to send the difference back. It would be a percentage. If the state wasn't bringing in enough, instead of raising it, their only option would be to provide services or pass laws that would allow people and business to bring in more money. If they brought in more income the government would bring in more revenue.
The people and the government would then be working together instead of against each other. It would be a more sane system then what we have now. This would mean business might come back to the US because the government is helping the business make extra money so the government can bring in extra revenue. With more business that means more jobs. Which means workers might get paid more because with more business means more demand for labor. This means more people work, and people make more money. It means shareholders make more too. That means even more revenue for the government and the cycle starts again.
That's why they built roads and highways. It was a service that created ways for everyone to make more money. That increased the revenue. Somewhere the government has lost that logic, and what they spend the money on doesn't work.
Just like they keep ramming dollar after dollar into school systems that are supposedly failing. The point is to produce smart kids that can improve the economy when they grow up, but that's not what is happening. The few smart kids they produce set up shop in China or somewheres else. The school systems has become a bad investment.
Are they really failing, or do they just create tests to make it look like that so they can justify raising taxes? I don't know anymore. They've gotten so far off track.
There just is NO WAY to stop waste and misuse of tax dollars without causing harm to our government and the people of our country.
Well ... for years, citizens have been arguing that the rise of taxes is causing the rise of e-commerce. Could it be that citizens are trying to deliver a message to state and Federal legislators - and that the politicians aren't getting that message?
It is against private AND business interests to have a sales tax, it artificially inflates the cost of products, and the state should have no say how I spend my money once I earn it, nor should it rely on me spending my money, to cover its costs. What if I want to save it?
When the economy goes south (as it is right now), rich people who can afford extra stuff don't spend their money, they save it, preparing for harder times, which then reduces the tax revenue, making those times even harder. Its a self-perpetuating downward spiral.
Example:
I make $50K a year, and Joe Blow makes $100K a year. I spend nearly all I get just providing a basic home and living for my family, say $40K. Joe Blow, seeing harsh times ahead in the economy, keeps his spending down too and spends about the same $40K for him and his family, and saves the other $60K. We buy the same items, and pay the same amount in sales tax.
Now is it fair that I paid the same amount of taxes as Joe Blow, but he made twice as much as me? Joe Blow benefited from the existence of the state twice as much as I did, by evidence of his income, is that fair?
Joe Blow also has $60K, not working in the economy, I only have $10K (not a very big cushon these days). I am not saying people should not save but when you look at the obscenely rich, and how much they have sucked out of the economy, and don't give back, and don't spend it, they drag the economy down.
Think about Bill Gates, how much has he benefited from the state, compared to how much he spends personally (Bill Gates, not Microsoft), its not even close, as obscenely rich as he is, he has not spent enough to pay his fair share of taxes (if only sales taxes).
Last I counted he could spend a $1000 dollars a day and not run out of money until he was 180 years old!
Oh, and to those people who say "The banks lend out money so it gets into the community sooner or later!"..... WRONG! It NEVER gets into the community, it just goes into the hands of big business.
I noticed you said that a person "benefited from the state by evidence of his income" How the heck does that work? So somehow "Joe Blow" is not benefiting from his collage education, his ingenuity, or his motivation. Somehow the 80hours/week that Joe Blow puts in at the office to increase production and revenue was the "states" idea.
Your right, I see the light, we should stick our filthy thieving hands into his pocket and rip his money and time away from him cause he doesn't deserve disposable income no matter how hard and smart he works.
What is it with people and the idea of forced communism?
I make less than 30k per year and I could certainly benefit from your 50k income. I think we should charge you 50% of your income so I can have some of it.
BTW, I'm always in hard times, it's called life.
- Then check cars at the state border and charge tax on out-of-state purchase
- by sgornick April 19, 2008 9:43 AM PDT
- Sales taxes are self-imposed by each state. I like the fact that my state feels threatened that I can go somewhere else to get a cheaper sales tax rate. That is called competition, and that is what helps keep my state (California) from charging even more than they already do.
- Like this Reply to this comment
-
Showing 2 of 3 pages (87 Comments)