3 ms·
South Dakota v. Wayfair [1] last year overturned the requirement of a physical presence for a state to levy taxes. Most states with sales tax have since passed
by anamexis 7y ago
South Dakota v. Wayfair [1] last year overturned the requirement of a physical presence for a state to levy taxes.
Most states with sales tax have since passed legislation to tax online purchases.
[1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/South_Dakota_v._Wayfair,_Inc https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/South_Dakota_v._Wayfair,_Inc.
edit: It seems as though HN's linkification drops trailing periods, so that link doesn't work when clicked.
- dontbenebby 7y agoInteresting. Is there a limit on what level of entity can do this? (Ex: in PA it feels like every two feet you're in a new township, then there's the county and state) I'm not necessarily anti-tax, but I don't envy a developer who needs to track down to the township level who taxes what in what way while providing goods across the entire USA.
- ghaff 7y agoIANAL but, as I understand it, the Supreme Court decision in South Dakota vs. Wayfairwas based on state laws that do not "unduly burden" interstate commerce. Kennedy's opinion cited adoption of "the Streamlined Sales and Use Tax Agreement. This system standardizes taxes to reduce administrative and compliance costs: It requires a single, state-level tax administration, uniform definitions of products and services, simplified tax rate structures, and other uniform rules." There is also a minimum sales threshold. Tickets for local events are one thing. It's not clear to me that a city tax on a streaming service meets the tests that the Supreme Court said should be met.
- DuskStar 7y agoEnclosing a link like that in parentheses will make it work. (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/South_Dakota_v._Wayfair,_Inc. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/South_Dakota_v._Wayfair,_Inc.)