5 ms·

I'm sorry, but the whole tax system is broken anyway. Online retailers (excluding the shell games that some companies play) do not benefit from a state's servi

I'm sorry, but the whole tax system is broken anyway. Online retailers (excluding the shell games that some companies play) do not benefit from a state's services, so why should they bear the burden of collecting taxes for that state? Most states have a use tax that is the responsibility of the taxpayer to pay to make up for this; I should know, I just filed my taxes and paid it.

enjo 15y ago
They benefit because the people paying them money have the infrastructure to get to work to make the money to pay them. Everything is always connected.
- waterlesscloud 15y ago
  The taxes are owed by the citizen/purchaser regardless. If the citizens are choosing to not pay it, how is that the retailer's issue?
  - jacobolus 15y ago
    Because in practice those taxes can’t be collected from consumers. Which means that Amazon gets a big unfair advantage vs. local stores. It’s stupid to have a reverse-tariff only charged to local businesses, because purchases from out of state send profits away, harming the state economy. Ultimately, states should probably scrap sales taxes and raise capital gains, inheritance, property, and income taxes to compensate. Those are all tough politically/legislatively though.
    - anigbrowl 15y ago
      Which means that Amazon gets a big unfair advantage vs. local stores. What's unfair about it? They're not consuming any resources within the state, like Brick & Mortar merchants, who have an advantage of their own - physical stores to bring people in and sell them stuff on the spot.
      - dkrich 15y ago
        Which resources are consumed by brick and mortars that are not consumed by online retailers? I'm genuinely curious.
        skeeterbug 15y ago
        Roads, utilities, buildings have to be inspected by fire dept, etc.
        rprasad 15y ago
        I wasn't aware that Amazon has developed teleportation technology that avoids using roads to deliver purchased goods. No wonder they've been doing so well.
        anigbrowl 15y ago
        UPS, Fedex, etc. already pay property and gasoline and vehicle taxes. Those externalities are accounted for. For those downvoting comments above, doing so isn't going to alter that fact.
        pbreit 15y ago
        The fact is they _are_ consuming resources in the various states their customers reside.
        dkrich 15y ago
        Once again, every brick and mortar pays a for-profit for nearly every service that enables it to do business, so that argument does not hold water.
        enjo 15y ago
        Wouldn't that mean that brick and mortar folks are being doubly taxed? After all they are paying taxes to maintain that infrastructure in addition to what Fedex and the like are paying.
  - dkrich 15y ago
    Why should that apply only to internet retailers? By that logic it should be any store's discretion whether or not to charge for sales tax.
dkrich 15y ago
>Online retailers (excluding the shell games that some companies play) do not benefit from a state's services, so why should they bear the burden of collecting taxes for that state? Really? That's interesting, I always thought these roads I drive on were paid for by the state. I don't really see many state-enabled services that brick-and-mortar's consume that internet retailers don't.
- bdonlan 15y ago
  The online retailer pays shipping companies, and those shipping companies do indeed have a nexus in the state and pay various taxes as appropriate. One could argue that asking the retailer to pay as well is a form of double-dipping.
  - dkrich 15y ago
    That argument could be extended to any business operating anywhere. If we only paid taxes based upon what we directly consume from the government, I don't think many businesses would be collecting sales taxes. Your lease is paid to a landlord. Your inventory is purchased from a distributor. Your insurance premium is paid to an insurance company.
    - cagey 15y ago
      So, I, in California, buy something from Amazon, which pays Fedex to ship it from out of state to me. Fedex pays "gas taxes" in CA, and other CA taxes too[1]. If Fedex ships my pkg by air, there are at least additionally airport fees/taxes. Since Fedex is not going bankrupt, it seems Amazon is at least paying Fedex enough to offset these expenses, so Amazon is in effect, through Fedex, paying these CA taxes (the same ones that in-state B&M stores would be paying for shipping a purchase to me, or that I would be paying if I bought an item at a local B&M store and transported it in my own motor vehicle). Now, in my understanding, the purpose of these taxes is to pay for the "services" CA is providing to the taxpayer (in this case, Fedex, and, indirectly, Amazon). For a shipper, "services" would include construction and maintenance of (and bureaucratic overhead associated with) the roads, bridges, airports, etc. But in your opinion Amazon is skating on their responsibility and should in addition charge sales tax to the customer (apparently for additional "services provided by the state" not covered by the above)? What are these additional services Amazon is receiving (in this transaction) from CA that are not being paid for via [[the above-mentioned]] taxes? [1] http://www.dmv.ca.gov/vehindustry/mcp/mcpfaq.htm#what http://www.dmv.ca.gov/vehindustry/mcp/mcpfaq.htm#what [[edit]]

enjo 15y ago

They benefit because the people paying them money have the infrastructure to get to work to make the money to pay them. Everything is always connected.

waterlesscloud 15y ago
The taxes are owed by the citizen/purchaser regardless. If the citizens are choosing to not pay it, how is that the retailer's issue?
- jacobolus 15y ago
  Because in practice those taxes can’t be collected from consumers. Which means that Amazon gets a big unfair advantage vs. local stores. It’s stupid to have a reverse-tariff only charged to local businesses, because purchases from out of state send profits away, harming the state economy. Ultimately, states should probably scrap sales taxes and raise capital gains, inheritance, property, and income taxes to compensate. Those are all tough politically/legislatively though.
  - anigbrowl 15y ago
    Which means that Amazon gets a big unfair advantage vs. local stores. What's unfair about it? They're not consuming any resources within the state, like Brick & Mortar merchants, who have an advantage of their own - physical stores to bring people in and sell them stuff on the spot.
    - dkrich 15y ago
      Which resources are consumed by brick and mortars that are not consumed by online retailers? I'm genuinely curious.
      - skeeterbug 15y ago
        Roads, utilities, buildings have to be inspected by fire dept, etc.
        rprasad 15y ago
        I wasn't aware that Amazon has developed teleportation technology that avoids using roads to deliver purchased goods. No wonder they've been doing so well.
        anigbrowl 15y ago
        UPS, Fedex, etc. already pay property and gasoline and vehicle taxes. Those externalities are accounted for. For those downvoting comments above, doing so isn't going to alter that fact.
        pbreit 15y ago
        The fact is they _are_ consuming resources in the various states their customers reside.
        dkrich 15y ago
        Once again, every brick and mortar pays a for-profit for nearly every service that enables it to do business, so that argument does not hold water.
        enjo 15y ago
        Wouldn't that mean that brick and mortar folks are being doubly taxed? After all they are paying taxes to maintain that infrastructure in addition to what Fedex and the like are paying.
- dkrich 15y ago
  Why should that apply only to internet retailers? By that logic it should be any store's discretion whether or not to charge for sales tax.

dkrich 15y ago

>Online retailers (excluding the shell games that some companies play) do not benefit from a state's services, so why should they bear the burden of collecting taxes for that state? Really? That's interesting, I always thought these roads I drive on were paid for by the state. I don't really see many state-enabled services that brick-and-mortar's consume that internet retailers don't.

bdonlan 15y ago
The online retailer pays shipping companies, and those shipping companies do indeed have a nexus in the state and pay various taxes as appropriate. One could argue that asking the retailer to pay as well is a form of double-dipping.
- dkrich 15y ago
  That argument could be extended to any business operating anywhere. If we only paid taxes based upon what we directly consume from the government, I don't think many businesses would be collecting sales taxes. Your lease is paid to a landlord. Your inventory is purchased from a distributor. Your insurance premium is paid to an insurance company.
  - cagey 15y ago
    So, I, in California, buy something from Amazon, which pays Fedex to ship it from out of state to me. Fedex pays "gas taxes" in CA, and other CA taxes too[1]. If Fedex ships my pkg by air, there are at least additionally airport fees/taxes. Since Fedex is not going bankrupt, it seems Amazon is at least paying Fedex enough to offset these expenses, so Amazon is in effect, through Fedex, paying these CA taxes (the same ones that in-state B&M stores would be paying for shipping a purchase to me, or that I would be paying if I bought an item at a local B&M store and transported it in my own motor vehicle). Now, in my understanding, the purpose of these taxes is to pay for the "services" CA is providing to the taxpayer (in this case, Fedex, and, indirectly, Amazon). For a shipper, "services" would include construction and maintenance of (and bureaucratic overhead associated with) the roads, bridges, airports, etc. But in your opinion Amazon is skating on their responsibility and should in addition charge sales tax to the customer (apparently for additional "services provided by the state" not covered by the above)? What are these additional services Amazon is receiving (in this transaction) from CA that are not being paid for via [[the above-mentioned]] taxes? [1] http://www.dmv.ca.gov/vehindustry/mcp/mcpfaq.htm#what http://www.dmv.ca.gov/vehindustry/mcp/mcpfaq.htm#what [[edit]]