I wasn't talking about what's legal, I was talking about what's ethical and/or economically efficient. States didn't tax online sales because there was no legal

I wasn't talking about what's legal, I was talking about what's ethical and/or economically efficient. States didn't tax online sales because there was no legal framework for doing so, so online retailers were able to gain an edge over local businesses by locating outside the states, avoiding the taxes. That is inefficient because it means firms are taxed differently based on an arbitrary aspect of how their business is run. You're claiming that' it's somehow treating them differently, but I call bullshit. Building an online retail site and marketing nationally is comparable to Best Buy building stores in all states, and of course one expense of doing that is having to pay sales taxes in all the states. > even if they have customers from all 50 states come by and make a purchase That is an edge case that is rare in practice and is difficult to exploit. If it was a huge problem then yeah I'd agree they should make a special tax setup for it (and this DOES exist: if you live in Washington and buy a car in Oregon, they will come for the sales tax: http://askville.amazon.com/Washington-State-resident-buy-car-Oregon-skip-sales-taxes/AnswerViewer.do?requestId=96403 http://askville.amazon.com/Washington-State-resident-buy-car...). I would certainly agree that if they are delivering products to all the states then yes, they should have to pay sales taxes to all the states that they delivered to, and if this law doesn't handle that case then yeah, I think it should.