4 ms·

I am a anti-tax libertarian type and also a affiliate marketer but even i think its an unfair advantage eCommerce companies have. Creating a nationwide eCommerc

by gopi 15y ago

I am a anti-tax libertarian type and also a affiliate marketer but even i think its an unfair advantage eCommerce companies have. Creating a nationwide eCommerce sales tax system is the best way to solve this

SamReidHughes 15y ago
But they require no government services from states they're shipping to so it's unfair to tax them the same.
- jbooth 15y ago
  That's not how taxation works. Also, presumably the goods they're shipping are traveling on government-maintained roads, right?
  - yummyfajitas 15y ago
    Also, presumably the goods they're shipping are traveling on government-maintained roads, right? Presumably Fedex/etc pay state taxes in rough proportion to their use of the roads. But I suppose that if you don't believe taxes are payments for public goods provided, but are instead fidelity owed by vassals to their lord, that doesn't really matter.
    - streptomycin 15y ago
      The point isn't that taxes are good or bad. It's that people who shop at Internet companies are effectively getting a tax break relative to people who shop at physical stores. And that doesn't really make sense.
    - jbooth 15y ago
      The point is that you pay taxes regardless of your personal service consumption. I don't consume medicaid and I live in a city so I don't see the work of the Fish and Wildlife dept that much. Tough shit. That's how taxes work because it'd cost way more than it saved to break out fine granularity at the billing level. Fedex pays for their use of the roads? No, they pay for their corporate income. They have no billing related to their miles driven on federal, state or local roads (aside from toll roads, which are a minority case). Spare me the rhetoric about vassals.
      - cagey 15y ago
        > Fedex [has] no billing related to their miles driven on federal, state or local roads (aside from toll roads, which are a minority case). So you're saying FedEx, being an evil corporation, is exempt from Federal, State, and local fuel taxes?
        deleted 15y ago
        [deleted]
      - yummyfajitas 15y ago
        That's how taxes work because it'd cost way more than it saved to break out fine granularity at the billing level. Yes - in principle taxes pay for public goods which are provided to everyone in a geographic region. But if you paid attention to the discussion, you'd realize we are discussing entities who don't exist in that geographic region. It's actually quite easy to figure out that I don't owe NY anything and you don't owe Maharashtra anything. Fedex pays for their use of the roads? No, they pay for their corporate income. The taxes they pay to the states in which they do business cover their use of the roads, no?
        jbooth 15y ago
        >The taxes they pay to the states in which they do business cover their use of the roads, no? Yeah, and they cover grade school education, which FedEx doesn't directly use at all. That was my point about how taxes work. Regarding your point about regions, A) The tax is on the consumers, not on amazon.com (or equivalent, proper noun provided to eliminate pronoun confusion). B) Whether or not amazon.com 'exists' in that region, they're certainly doing business in it, no? Otherwise there'd be no taxes to collect. Brave new world, used to be it was impossible to do business somewhere you didn't have a shop, mail order was nothing close to the web. That's why tax codes and enforcement methods need to be updated for the 21st century. It's less competitive and less capitalist to have different tax codes for the same goods (or even different goods, IMO, with rare exceptions).
- TomOfTTB 15y ago
  Yes but the companies that don't require state services aren't getting taxed. They are being told to tax their customers who are (theoretically) getting state services.
- hullo 15y ago
  This is not about taxing the companies, it's about simplifying collection of already-owed taxes from residents of the various states, all of whom are indeed using those services (to whatever varying degree).
- hugh3 15y ago
  So we should get rid of state sales taxes (which were always a stupid idea -- why would a state want to punish businesses for doing business in that state, especially in border areas?) and make sales taxes federal. Then, to compensate, we lower Federal income taxes and let states collect some more income tax.
- pbreit 15y ago
  In fact, by locating distribution centers much further from population centers, they require even more government services.
deleted 15y ago
[deleted]

by gopi 15y ago

SamReidHughes 15y ago

But they require no government services from states they're shipping to so it's unfair to tax them the same.

jbooth 15y ago
That's not how taxation works. Also, presumably the goods they're shipping are traveling on government-maintained roads, right?
- yummyfajitas 15y ago
  Also, presumably the goods they're shipping are traveling on government-maintained roads, right? Presumably Fedex/etc pay state taxes in rough proportion to their use of the roads. But I suppose that if you don't believe taxes are payments for public goods provided, but are instead fidelity owed by vassals to their lord, that doesn't really matter.
  - streptomycin 15y ago
    The point isn't that taxes are good or bad. It's that people who shop at Internet companies are effectively getting a tax break relative to people who shop at physical stores. And that doesn't really make sense.
  - jbooth 15y ago
    The point is that you pay taxes regardless of your personal service consumption. I don't consume medicaid and I live in a city so I don't see the work of the Fish and Wildlife dept that much. Tough shit. That's how taxes work because it'd cost way more than it saved to break out fine granularity at the billing level. Fedex pays for their use of the roads? No, they pay for their corporate income. They have no billing related to their miles driven on federal, state or local roads (aside from toll roads, which are a minority case). Spare me the rhetoric about vassals.
    - cagey 15y ago
      > Fedex [has] no billing related to their miles driven on federal, state or local roads (aside from toll roads, which are a minority case). So you're saying FedEx, being an evil corporation, is exempt from Federal, State, and local fuel taxes?
      - deleted 15y ago
        [deleted]
    - yummyfajitas 15y ago
      That's how taxes work because it'd cost way more than it saved to break out fine granularity at the billing level. Yes - in principle taxes pay for public goods which are provided to everyone in a geographic region. But if you paid attention to the discussion, you'd realize we are discussing entities who don't exist in that geographic region. It's actually quite easy to figure out that I don't owe NY anything and you don't owe Maharashtra anything. Fedex pays for their use of the roads? No, they pay for their corporate income. The taxes they pay to the states in which they do business cover their use of the roads, no?
      - jbooth 15y ago
        >The taxes they pay to the states in which they do business cover their use of the roads, no? Yeah, and they cover grade school education, which FedEx doesn't directly use at all. That was my point about how taxes work. Regarding your point about regions, A) The tax is on the consumers, not on amazon.com (or equivalent, proper noun provided to eliminate pronoun confusion). B) Whether or not amazon.com 'exists' in that region, they're certainly doing business in it, no? Otherwise there'd be no taxes to collect. Brave new world, used to be it was impossible to do business somewhere you didn't have a shop, mail order was nothing close to the web. That's why tax codes and enforcement methods need to be updated for the 21st century. It's less competitive and less capitalist to have different tax codes for the same goods (or even different goods, IMO, with rare exceptions).
TomOfTTB 15y ago
Yes but the companies that don't require state services aren't getting taxed. They are being told to tax their customers who are (theoretically) getting state services.
hullo 15y ago
This is not about taxing the companies, it's about simplifying collection of already-owed taxes from residents of the various states, all of whom are indeed using those services (to whatever varying degree).
hugh3 15y ago
So we should get rid of state sales taxes (which were always a stupid idea -- why would a state want to punish businesses for doing business in that state, especially in border areas?) and make sales taxes federal. Then, to compensate, we lower Federal income taxes and let states collect some more income tax.
pbreit 15y ago
In fact, by locating distribution centers much further from population centers, they require even more government services.

deleted 15y ago

[deleted]