>Of course I suppose some wet blanket has to come in at this >juncture to point out that in states with a sales tax one is >technically supposed to declare it if it isn't collected at >the time of sale. Plenty of people don't do that, of course, >but if you do, the collection is really just a convenience. > >I've always been torn on this, because although I do see the >point of view of the states here, especially in the age of >internet commerce, I also think that the naming of this as a >"sales and use tax" by states is a deliberate and >transparent lie to allow them to avoid what might well be seen >as a violation of the constitution which forbids interstate >tariffs. Calling a sales tax a use tax does not make it one, >especially since use is not actually required and lack of use >does not exempt you, and since the tax is assessed only on >purchase and only on the price of purchase. I think that a >constitutional challenge if done right might well overthrow >interstate sales taxes. Even though I actually can understand >the need for it, and might even sympathize wit the states, I >resent the transparently duplicitous language of the law. > >But in the meantime if you're not going to make a federal case >of it, at least in the case of B&H, few places have sales >taxes higher than those in New York City, so at least most of >us internet shoppers do better than we would if we went to the >store.
There are no interstate sales taxes, only state, and other taxing jurisdictions within a state.
The Supreme Court's ruling was rather narrow in scope. It just applied to a South Dakota case. However, states with eager attorneys general saw the opportunity to apply the ruling to their particular states.
The merchants saw the writing, and realized that they had limited resources compared to states (B&H is chump change compared to major vendors like Amazon et al.).
From a collection perspective, it's relatively easy to write the necessary software to collect the use tax due. Zip codes and tax rates make it easy to collect from someone who lives in jurisdictions which collect tax at multiple levels. I imagine that B&H and others are paying a pretty hefty chunk of change for the software, so those costs get sunk into your product cost.
This is one of those instances where the states have lost sovereignty in a number of areas, but retain a lot when it comes to taxes.
>juncture to point out that in states with a sales tax one is
>technically supposed to declare it if it isn't collected at
>the time of sale. Plenty of people don't do that, of course,
>but if you do, the collection is really just a convenience.
>
>I've always been torn on this, because although I do see the
>point of view of the states here, especially in the age of
>internet commerce, I also think that the naming of this as a
>"sales and use tax" by states is a deliberate and
>transparent lie to allow them to avoid what might well be seen
>as a violation of the constitution which forbids interstate
>tariffs. Calling a sales tax a use tax does not make it one,
>especially since use is not actually required and lack of use
>does not exempt you, and since the tax is assessed only on
>purchase and only on the price of purchase. I think that a
>constitutional challenge if done right might well overthrow
>interstate sales taxes. Even though I actually can understand
>the need for it, and might even sympathize wit the states, I
>resent the transparently duplicitous language of the law.
>
>But in the meantime if you're not going to make a federal case
>of it, at least in the case of B&H, few places have sales
>taxes higher than those in New York City, so at least most of
>us internet shoppers do better than we would if we went to the
>store.
There are no interstate sales taxes, only state, and other taxing jurisdictions within a state.
The Supreme Court's ruling was rather narrow in scope. It just applied to a South Dakota case. However, states with eager attorneys general saw the opportunity to apply the ruling to their particular states.
The merchants saw the writing, and realized that they had limited resources compared to states (B&H is chump change compared to major vendors like Amazon et al.).
From a collection perspective, it's relatively easy to write the necessary software to collect the use tax due. Zip codes and tax rates make it easy to collect from someone who lives in jurisdictions which collect tax at multiple levels. I imagine that B&H and others are paying a pretty hefty chunk of change for the software, so those costs get sunk into your product cost.
This is one of those instances where the states have lost sovereignty in a number of areas, but retain a lot when it comes to taxes.