U.S. Ecommerce To Be Broadly Taxed? 639
fl!ptop writes "ZDnet has a story about U.S. Senators proposing sweeping changes to how Americans are taxed for online purchases. As proposed, businesses would be required to collect sales taxes and send them to the state the purchase was shipped to. As a small business owner that primarily sells via ecommerce, I am shuddering at the prospect of having to deal with government sales tax forms and coupon books for 30 or more states. Will I have to register with each state's tax department? As an ecommerce Web developer, I'm also wondering what implications this will have on maintaining code that calculates sales taxes, expecially in states like Ohio where they differ by county and municipality."
Free startup idea (Score:5, Funny)
Throw in some mumble about Ajax and Web 2.0 and watch the VCs line up to throw money at you and beg you to have sex with their women-folk.
Re:Free startup idea (Score:4, Insightful)
Re:Free startup idea (Score:2)
Sales Tax is generally though of as a Comsumption Tax.
That means where the item is consumed. It the middle guy does nto use/consume the item then it is passed on to where it is consumed.
If I remember correctly, buying Cigarette (more thazn a pack or two) is another state and you bring them in to New York, you are bootlegging.
Re:Free startup idea (Score:3, Insightful)
Correction: Sales taxes on essential commodities, such as food, energy, and clothing, are regressive. Poor people spend a greater portion of their income on survival than do the rich.
If you are middle-class or below, sales taxes on non-essential items might sting you pretty hard, but only according to how much non-essential crap you consume. Live the non-materialist life which floaty-headed liberal rags like to advocate, and you'l
Re:Free startup idea (Score:3, Insightful)
Could you please provide examples of new regressive taxes imposed by Republicans?
Last I checked, "King George" has only lowered taxes. Of course, taxes were lowered
Re:Free startup idea (Score:2)
Too late (Score:3, Informative)
Re:Free startup idea (Score:3, Funny)
Re:Free startup idea (Score:5, Funny)
Re:Free startup idea (Score:5, Interesting)
In the telecom world, one does not usually find small business CLECs because we have to comply with several database requirements, including: Vertex (or similar tax databases), E911 and SS7.
Last time I had to deal with it (late 90s), a Vertex subscription for our Oracle-based billing system was about $220K annually. You are, of course, free to write your own and obtain tax information from every locale independently.
Of course, you can imagine that these great laws were proudly supported by the incumbant telcos who are pleased to have complicated taxes to merrily pass along to the customer. The more complicated it is, the less likely any up-start competitor can ever handle the up-front cost. Each barrier to entry pushes the benefit to the largest scale of business.
You can bet Congresspersons are getting heavily lobbied by larger institutions that favor taxes. And since 2/3 of our population doesn't understand that corporations don't pay taxes, customers do, we'll never have enough opposition to these ploys. Worse yet, not only will we end up ultimately picking up the cost of the taxes, but the drop in competition will push up the price of goods for us too. And you wonder why your paycheck goes less far each year!
A solution is the fair tax, but it's boring to one half of the population and misunderstood by the other half, so expect to continue to get screwed by the partnership between big government and big business.
*scoove*
p.s. Did you collect and file taxes on your last Ebay sale?
Re:Free startup idea (Score:3, Insightful)
If they do start taxing internet sales and lots of small companies start having to worry about this, I wouldn't be surprised to see an open-source tax info project come into existence. Getting the individual pieces of information is presumably simple since it is public information and not voluminous or sensitive - the problem is just one of scale. If people were contribute the information for their area, it seems like it would be pretty easy to construct a national database.
Re:Free startup idea (Score:3, Interesting)
The information is very complex...
1) Where is the address:
inside USA
inside a State (watch out for federal lands)
inside a county (watch out for State and Federal area)
inside a city (watch out for above plus unincorporated)
inside a special tax
Sheesh... (Score:5, Interesting)
Re:Sheesh... (Score:2)
Re:Sheesh... (Score:3, Insightful)
The fair tax will just change the way people work to minimize taxes - the goal will be to reduce prices in order to lower taxes. So in the end you wind up with as convoluted a system, just with different ways to reach the end goal.
And before someone points out that prices can't go below a certain poiny (i.e. cost); let me point out that price and profit on a sale are not necessarily related.
Fiartax is possibly the worst idea ever (Score:3, Insightful)
People hear no income tax and think "ooh.. how nice, I'd only have to pay that little bitty sales tax instead of my huge painful income tax". This is incorrect. Un
Re:Sheesh... (Score:5, Insightful)
Re:Sheesh... (Score:2)
Re:Sheesh... (Score:5, Insightful)
Second, this will have the effect of dramatically increasing individual Americans' reliance on the federal government on a day-to-day basis. Suddenly, everyone's on the dole. It's not bad enough that you have a good number of people stretching the budget and counting on their tax return checks once a year, now everyone's watching the mailbox hoping the fed will be good to them in the form of a rebate check EVERY MONTH. The effect of this dependence on the benevolence of the government is not good. A dependent populace is much more maleable, much more complacent. The damage it would do to the ability of citizens to develop as autonomous individuals capable of self-sufficiency would be devestating.
One of the most devestating effects of this tax system would be the massive black market that would erupt in the wake of it's implementation. Suddenly there's a black market for tax-free EVERYTHING. Such a black market would be enormous, possibly eclipsing the sales volumes of the "legitimate" government taxed market. This would create a new breed of criminal, the sales tax dodger. These people would be stigmatized, scapegoated for the nation's economic problems (of which many, many loom ahead, fair tax or no), and sentenced to inordinate prison terms, similar to what is done with non-violent drug offenders now.
The privacy implications are disturbing. If the fair tax was implemented, the only way to combat the resulting black market trafficing would be to track purchases for each and every citizen. The fair taxers talk about the stresses of April 15th, but the only way to validate that everyone has been paying their "fair share" (as the socialists like to say) of the tax, the government would have to track purchases, which means you've gone from reporting to the IRS regarding your income and tax totals from various sources to reporting EACH AND EVERY PURCHASE. For all intensive purposes, you've gone from filing a tax return to being audited every year. The only way to ensure accuracy and honesty on such an audit would be for the government to become even more apallingly intrusive than it is now ("the financial equivalent of a full rectal exam"). The government would undoubtedly use it as a means to justify further intrustions such as additional monitoring of our communications to ensure no one was buying tax-free online or by mail. Also, the manpower required to implement such an auditing system would be enormous. The fair tax FAQ talks of tax preparers and lobbyists being forced to find more productive pursuits, but in reality, most of them would end up absorbed into the new tax administration bureaucracy.
As to putting an end to lobbyists, I don't believe that for a second. Just as there is now, there will be rich and powerful lobby groups trying to convince the government to make the tax just a little more fair. Why should Bibles be taxed the same as porno? Textbooks the same as comic books? Why not tax cigarettes at a higher rate, since smoking is so un-P.C. now anyway? Lobbyists will not be going anywhere, they'll simply change their approach ever so slightly.
In short, the fair tax is a horrible idea. It has many more problems than I've attempted to delve in
Re:Sheesh... (Score:2)
Re:Sheesh... (Score:2)
Re:Sheesh... (Score:2)
You answered your own question.
Nightmare (Score:5, Insightful)
Re:Nightmare (Score:4, Insightful)
The legislation would apply only to businesses with more than $5 million in "gross remote taxable sales" each year.
You now it's just a matter of time before this number gets lower and lower though.
Re:Nightmare (Score:3, Insightful)
Re:Nightmare (Score:3, Interesting)
Not all that many - that's over $13,500 per day in sales. That is a big number! For retail trade, $6,000,000 in revenue is the upper end for the Fed's definition of most small businesses.
I've been involved with several successful small businesses in retail and service and none approached that limit.
-h-
Re:Nightmare (Score:2)
Find me a small business with lobbying cash.
Re:Nightmare (Score:2)
Re:Nightmare (Score:4, Interesting)
If this does come to pass, I would hope that the law would also provide for a publicly accessible database funded by the government. The subscription fees charged by some of these commercial database companies would break a small business, and possibly even one at the $5million level proposed depending on the nature and margin of the business.
Re:Nightmare (Score:2)
You are kidding right? If anything such a law would likely have a significant fine for not making sure you are collecting the right taxes.
If it does, buy stock in these companies (Score:3, Interesting)
The other big e-commerce tax product is Vertex [vertexinc.com] which has a bigger Fortune 500 footprint, but they are not publicly traded nor are they owned by a publicly traded company. Good acquisition target.
Re:If it does, buy stock in these companies (Score:2)
I forget the exact term, but some cities set up business advantage zones where the sales taxes is reduced. I believe they clear this with the state, and it is an effort to revitilize run down areas.
Re:If it does, buy stock in these companies (Score:2)
You would think that the counties in question would come to an agreement on how to handle taxes, but you never know.
Re:If it does, buy stock in these companies (Score:2)
Should be reversed (Score:5, Insightful)
It makes no sense for a company in California to try to figure out the sales tax for an order from New Hampshire.
Re:Should be reversed (Score:5, Informative)
Re:Should be reversed (Score:2)
But I understand what you meant to mean.
Now SEE!?!? (Score:3, Funny)
How's somebody in California supposed to keep track of all that!
Re:Should be reversed (Score:2, Interesting)
If your idea took hold, Oregon, NH, and other no-tax states would get lots of new fedex depots.....
Re:Should be reversed (Score:3)
Re:Should be reversed (Score:3)
Also, the sales
Re:Should be reversed (Score:3, Interesting)
If your eCommerce business is run in, say California, then it should charge California sales taxes.
Yeah but that would never fly because it would discourage businesses from setting up in regions that have sales tax.
Exactly as it should be. Ladies and gentlemen, this is the free market in action! As an added benefit it relieves overcrowding because, in general, the more crowded the region the higher the taxes needed to support the infrastructure.
30 states? (Score:4, Funny)
Re:30 states? (Score:2)
Re:30 states? (Score:2)
Ummm... Washington has a sales tax. Perhaps they are confusing us with Oregon? Although our friends to the south have a state income tax while we do not.
Also, 50-7 is still quite a few more than 30 - unless I woke up on Bizarro World this morning. In case which, above statements all wrong by me!
Re:30 states? (Score:2)
Faux pas on my previous post; the Yahoo article has it wrong, but the Saes Tax Clearinghouse has it as Oregon and not Washington.
Re:30 states? (Score:2)
Ecommerce sites that collect taxes ask which county you are in and charge the appropriate tax. (For example, movies by mail, that fine Ohio based perveyor of adult erotic products)
Re:30 states? (Score:2)
Re:30 states? (Score:5, Funny)
States like Alaska, Hawaii, and Europe don't count. Go learn some geography.
Mail order? (Score:4, Interesting)
So far, ecommerce had the same rule (or similar).
If this gets implemented, then will it apply to mail order as well, or will it be for ecommerce only?
What about if an American buys from a Canadian business via the internet? Will the Canadian business be required to collect US state taxes too?
This "feels" unconstitutional somehow (Score:3, Insightful)
And how about taxes for the local state? Do you get taxed twice or does one take precedent? I speak of situations where you buy from a company online and they have presense in your state as well as others. At present, if the company has presense in my state then I also have to pay local state tax. But what if the transaction is with a company in, say, N.Carolina (just pulled that from a hat) but they also have a presence in Texas where I am at now. Current practices say I have to pay tax to Texas. But with this, am I paying double tax?
Re:This "feels" unconstitutional somehow (Score:2)
BTW- come to Ohio where each of our 88 counties has its own sales tax!!!
Re:This "feels" unconstitutional somehow (Score:2)
Article I, section 9
Complexity Costs (Score:2)
Since all levels of government is greedy for taxes, would it not be more cost effective to say tax all purchases a flat rate of 3% and not force a million web sites to code in the complexity? And let the state, county, city fight over the 3%.
And if expensive tax states don't like it... touch $h1t.
Mail order (Score:3, Interesting)
Personally though, I don't think either of them should be taxed, but if they do pass this, the better make all the regular mail order companies comply with it too.
Re:Mail order (Score:2)
Interestingly, this situation actually divides the mail order industry (and ecommerce, for that matter). Before ecommerce became big, there was a schism between companies like LL B
Nothing creates business opps like (Score:3, Funny)
btw- Counties in Ohio have different tax rates. It has nothing to do with municipalities, so you only need to know the tax rates for each of our 88 counties... (Mine is Summit county, 6 3/4 percent)
Re:Nothing creates business opps like (Score:2)
However, It may soon rise to 6 3/4 percent.
http://www.ohio.com/mld/ohio/news/13440622.htm [ohio.com] (annoying registration required)
Cut taxes for the rich raise taxes everywhere else (Score:3, Insightful)
From the above article: "They cut vital programs and services that benefit hard-working lower- and middle-income Americans, and with the money saved, are giving more tax cuts to the wealthiest of the wealthy."
From the ZDNet article:
"...Sen. Mike Enzi, a Wyoming Republican. "This is costing states and localities billions in lost revenue."
So the Senators think they shouldn't tax the rich, but its okay when it is everyone else.
Anyone think that this is unfair? Or is this okay with you?
Re:Cut taxes for the rich raise taxes everywhere e (Score:2)
This was taken from another site, but it's good data:
Check this out [ustreas.gov].
It shows that the top one percent of taxpayers paid 34.3 percent of all federal income taxes in 2003, although they earned just 16.8 percent of the adjusted gross income. The top five percent of taxpayers paid more than half of all federal income taxes, the
Poster didnt read the article either. (Score:4, Insightful)
Article: The legislation would apply only to businesses with more than $5 million in "gross remote taxable sales" each year.
Of course, maybe my definition of small business is different than the posters.
Re:Poster didnt read the article either. (Score:2)
Y2K all over again... (Score:5, Interesting)
Something like this is really going offer employment opportunities for programmers. It will be a bigger boon than Y2K! Because if the states are getting their tax money, the counties will want theirs too. Of course it will crush commerce for the small guy and most everyone. Just think of the cost of tracking and sending these funds out on a regular basis. So it will be like a bigger bubble and a bigger crush. The nineties all over again.
Yow, Where's my aereon chair and foosball table?
Times are a-changin' (Score:2)
I hate taxes as much as the next guy, and I've certainly enjoyed nearly tax-free internet shopping for the past decade, but as more and more purchases are made online they begin to seriously cut into state and local government's revenues. Internet shopping has yet to eliminate my usage of roads, and someone has to fund them...
I
Controversial Thought... (Score:3, Insightful)
I don't know much about the so called "FAIR Tax" although I have heard people say that it is similar to this idea. I dislike the flat tax because it unfairly impacts larger families (although I am sure the population nazis would love that).
But in general, why on earth do we maintain this system? It's not efficent, not effective, and benefits no one except politicans wanting to play social engineering!
Re: (Score:2)
We're dealing with... (Score:2)
A Simpler Method (Score:3, Interesting)
All of us, including me, love to evade sales tax, but we all want the roads, schools and police services that it pays for.
The Big Chill (Score:2)
The government should act as an intermediary here (Score:2)
I mean, if they're going to take more of your cash, they can at least make it easy for you...
This will be near impossible (Score:2)
First you need is good address validation software, so the county can be determined. Then you need tax software on top of that, that understands the where the tax lines are drawn.
Example: There are "sp
simplicity, please (Score:3, Interesting)
This isn't a big deal, so long as states simply have one rate per state, and there is an easy way to find the rates and be notified of changes. Collecting differently based on county, municipality, etc, is gruesomely inconvenient. Of course, it that were required, I'm sure a couple companies providing a tax-rate web service would spring up, assuming that you didn't already receive such a service from someone like your payment gateway service.
Inducing a heart attack for Jerry Pournelle (Score:2)
The union of independent states was important for the original thirteen colonies, each of which was its own little fiefdom/nation, and damned jealous of their power.
Why not put 50 units of government out of business? What good is the division doing us? From what I see, I see business playing the states against each other, reducing wages and getting ta
Unconstitutional (Score:4, Informative)
Civil Disobedience... (Score:5, Interesting)
Screw'em. If they want me to pay taxes out-of-state, they can give me a representative to vote on my behald in their state.
How long until one state makes itself a no online tax state. And a company sets up "receiving/shipping" and you just have it sent to a PO Box and then it's routed elsewhere. You bought it in "x" tax free state.
Taxation Without Representation? (Score:3, Insightful)
1) If somebody comes to my online business hosted in CT from New York, why would I have to pay NY taxes? I have no representatives in New York, I am not a citizen of New York, and my business is not incorporated in New York. We have no New York offices or interests, save being taxed. How then, would I have recourse to adjust my taxation from New York? Move there? Payoff a politician from there? Seriously, how is it that a state in which I have no connection with able to impose it's legislative will on me? And if it is allowed to do so, where does it stop? Can they apply extra taxes to out-of-state purchases to allow for more in-state businesses? Tax certain businesses but not others? States are notorious for adjusting their tax systems to have some sort of social impact. Should CA be changing economic conditions in TX?
2) Somebody is going to start doing the math on this one. If I buy big ticket items, it would probably be best to tranship them to a tax free entity (Canada? NH?), deliver them there, then continue shipping to the original destination. For anything with a tax over 30 bucks or so (and a small item) it would be cheaper. (And for those of you who say it would be illegal, please see #1. Illegal where?)
Town Attacked By Giant Snowman (on my blog) [news2lose.com]
eww (Score:3, Interesting)
Frankly it's all a bit of a mess. Some place, like Louisana with its Parrishes, are just crazy. These tax companies are hoping to get in on the Streamlined Sales Tax Initiative, where they would act as Service Providers, giving retailers an easy way to cover their bases, but not every state wants to play along, because a lot of the states have different definitions for how to handle locations and what not.
In the 90s, I used to be against online tax just because I wanted to see companies like Amazon etc suceed. Now that online shopping is a pretty well established part of life, I can kind of see the desire to level the playing field a bit more.
Read their lips (Score:3, Insightful)
Do parties even mean anything anymore?
Re:Once again (Score:3, Informative)
Re:Once again (Score:3, Interesting)
Maybe I am calling for reform here but tax for services rendered is the system I would like to see.
Re:Once again (Score:2, Informative)
Have you ever heard of a government making a profit? Even if they ran a surplus, it would take several hundred years to wipe out the deficit they've already incurred!
Re:Once again (Score:3, Insightful)
Re:Once again (Score:3, Interesting)
Re:Once again (Score:3, Insightful)
So usually increasing the revenue is the way t
Re:Once again (Score:3, Informative)
Re:Once again (Score:2, Informative)
Re:Once again (Score:3, Interesting)
Re:Once again (Score:5, Interesting)
Back in the day, most people bought almost everything they bought from local merchants, meaning that there was very little way to avoid sales tax. Catalog mail order and later, telephone orders, made up such a small percentage of commerce that the items remained untaxed. The smaller northeastern states, and even some municipalities (like in the Oklahoma City area) sometimes lower their tax rates to encourage people to come shop in their malls. Delaware makes a big stink about not having a sales tax, and there's a lot of outlet malls that advertise as such. Still, it wasn't much money.
Now, thanks to advances in shipping technology and Internet ordering, people are spending more and more money online, especially in the holiday season. This money isn't being taxed.
Some states have provisions to attempt to curb this. Virginia, for example, has a "use tax" where if you purchase any item and do not pay sales tax, you have you pay a "use tax" on it. Problem is, it's hard to track and almost no one reports anything, much less what they really spent.
The tax system is so convoluted and fucked up it should be changed, I agree, but this is totally legal. The sticky point comes in where states are trying to force e-merchants to collect their own sales taxes. Depending on how this is accomplished (i.e., not a federal law) if you've got a state that isn't part of this agreement you're going to see e-merchants move to those states to avoid having the additional burden of collecting those taxes.
Re:Once again (Score:5, Insightful)
This law isn't really an "e-commerce" law like the article title would have you believe. It would apply to old-fashioned mail-order also. It is just that mail-order has really become MUCH bigger with e-commerce, so it is a bigger problem that it was before.
The justification behind the law makes sense. There is no reason that customers of say, Amazon.com, should be mostly exempted from paying sales tax while customers of bestbuy.com or compusa.com have to do so for the exact same items.
I expect if this law gets passed, there will be:
1) Be cheap software available to help retailers work this out. The software already exists, since web sites like target.com already have to deal with it.
2) A single form you file with your own state taxing authority that you would then list how much tax was supposed to go to each state. I don't think they would require you to register with each state individually.
SirWired
Re:Once again (Score:3, Informative)
Actually, there is a big reason. Best Buy and CompUSA have a physical presence in almost every single state and therefor must collect taxes for the states they exist in. Amazon only has a physical presence in 4 states (and they DO collect taxes from those 4 states). Best Bu
Re:Once again (Score:3, Interesting)
Please define "cheap" when you are talking about small business? Small business drives the economy more so than the businesses that can afford such things.
Making retailers jump through hoops to collect the taxes is the ultimate cowardice of polticians who want the money but are unwilling to go after their own citizens except through middlemen, because i
Re:Once again (Score:3, Informative)
Don't think this can happen? That's EXACTLY the way reporting for payroll taxes to the federal government. If you have less than $2500 in taxes due in a quarter, you may pay quarterly. Otherwise, you must pay monthly. Here's the catch: if, at the end
Re:Once again (Score:2)
Right now online shopping is tax free basically because of a juridiction issue, not because it's the right thing to do. Sales taxes are levied by the states, and a state doesn't have any author
Re:Once again (Score:2, Informative)
Re:Once again (Score:3, Informative)
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dns_root_servers
Constitution!? That old thing still around? (Score:2)
Re:Death sentence for many online retailers? (Score:2)
Re:Barter (Score:2)
Then, come end of tax year, there's a huge beer and wings night in Washington!
Re:tax (Score:2)
Re:The no tax conservatives (Score:3, Insightful)
I'd take that bet. Almost every time an Internet tax is brought up, it's by some Democrat jackass like Senator Mark Dayton, and done in the name of "protecting" local merchants. (Never mind that most of the smartest mom & pop stores are already doing a lot of e-commerce on the side themselves.)
When these proposals get shouted down, they are typically shouted down by conservatives and libertarians, who see that the Internet is t