4 ms·
As someone who grew up in a house who's mailing address and zip code were for a different town and county from the actual physical location of the house (it was
by eric_h 8y ago
As someone who grew up in a house who's mailing address and zip code were for a different town and county from the actual physical location of the house (it was just past the border) - I can't even begin to imagine how to actually do this completely correctly.
- delinka 8y agoApple has asked me several times in the past for online purchases. I enter a ZIP code, they do some lookup and ask me to choose the county I live in from a list of three. I choose, and based on that they calculate tax.
- CodeWriter23 8y agoThat’s great until one has customers living in Los Angeles City vs. Los Angeles County. The city charges its own sales and use tax, I believe it’s an additional 0.25%. And then factor in “Enterprise Zones” where even different portions of cities have different tax rates.
- dumbfoundded 8y agoHonestly, the state doesn't expect anyone to get this completely right except the largest companies. If you make a good faith effort to comply with laws, in the vast majority of cases, you're fine.
- rbritton 8y agoI don't find that to be a valid excuse. If a law is worded in such a way that companies or individuals will frequently get it wrong, it's probably a bad law. Call me paranoid, but that seems like it just sets a person up with an easy reason to audit.
- dumbfoundded 8y agoIt's not an excuse. It's just that laws are enforced by people. Think of what happens if you get caught speeding. Does everyone always get a ticket every time they speed? Of course not. Even when you get pulled over you can behave politely and maybe get off with a warning. This is how every law and regulation works.
- munk-a 8y agoNo! Selective enforcement is terrible, if there's a revenue threshold bake it into the law, otherwise you'll see large companies crying foul on some up-and-coming competitor that then gets bogged down in legislation, along with all the other terrible thing inherit in selectively enforced laws.
- bmelton 8y ago> if there's a revenue threshold bake it into the law There's no real winning there either. If you bake the threshold into the law, some companies may game the system such that, if the cost of total compliance is x, and we're revenue range of x, give or take, to just take a little less money to stay under the threshold. Not that I'm suggesting that is something that we should care about, or even consider a majority worry, but hard and fast cliffs lead to gamesmanship, or worse, misaligned incentives (such that it's non-beneficial for those on welfare to work if it puts them over a given benefits threshold.) On the whole, I agree that selective enforcement is bad, if not wholly terrible, but its absence isn't a panacea either.
- ggcdn 8y agoI think there is a threshold of $100,000 or 200 separate transactions in the South Dakota law that was being challenged [1]. [1] https://www.supremecourt.gov/opinions/17pdf/17-494_j4el.pdf https://www.supremecourt.gov/opinions/17pdf/17-494_j4el.pdf