4 ms·

There has been efforts for more than a decade to introduce a streamlined tax system (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Streamlined_Sales_Tax_Project https://en.wiki

There has been efforts for more than a decade to introduce a streamlined tax system (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Streamlined_Sales_Tax_Project https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Streamlined_Sales_Tax_Project), a framework that all states could adopt for their tax purposes. The intent was to make it easy for states to tax as desired, while using a simple framework that would make it easier for companies choosing to do inter-state business, and easier for online companies to implement. A number of the larger companies had expressed a willingness over the years of implementing a sales tax, provided the states could clean up their tax codes to make it straightforward. A number of the states have tax codes that are so insanely complex for companies operating outside of the state that it becomes a near nightmare to correctly turn in to a computer program, for example Hawaii which doesn't have a sales tax but has a General Excise Tax. Getting states to be willing to completely overhaul their tax system is an extremely hard battle. edit: added link to the SST Project wiki page.

tzs 8y ago
In the decision allowing states to make out of state sellers collect tax, the Supreme Court said that a state could only do so if it wasn't unduly burdensome on interstate commerce. They did not give precise rules for what qualified, but did mention that South Dakota (the state involved in the case) was part of the SST project as being an important factor in South Dakota's law not being burdensome. The general opinion I've seen has been that if a state joins SST, sets thresholds similar to South Dakota's, and does not make their law retroactive, it will almost certainly pass muster. My guess is that this will bring most of the states into SST. That gets them safe tax collection right away. If they go it alone, they risk merchants making the state prove in court first that their particular law is not burdensome.

tzs 8y ago

In the decision allowing states to make out of state sellers collect tax, the Supreme Court said that a state could only do so if it wasn't unduly burdensome on interstate commerce. They did not give precise rules for what qualified, but did mention that South Dakota (the state involved in the case) was part of the SST project as being an important factor in South Dakota's law not being burdensome. The general opinion I've seen has been that if a state joins SST, sets thresholds similar to South Dakota's, and does not make their law retroactive, it will almost certainly pass muster. My guess is that this will bring most of the states into SST. That gets them safe tax collection right away. If they go it alone, they risk merchants making the state prove in court first that their particular law is not burdensome.