OT: Colorado buyers saved from Amazon tax

[HeyBub]

"A federal court has thrown out a 2010 Colorado law meant to spur online
retailers like Amazon to collect state sales tax. The law had already been
temporarily blocked in federal court last year, but U.S. District Judge
Robert Blackburn's ruling Friday permanently handcuffs it."

Federal court tosses Colorado's Amazon tax - The Denver Post
http://www.denverpost.com/breakingnews/ci_20316979/federal-court-tosses-colorados-amazon-tax#ixzz1r6rWI6Zz

[Robert Green]

"HeyBub" <hey...@NOSPAMgmail.com> wrote in message
news:bNSdnXHrnKt8IOHS...@earthlink.com...

Good article. I guess this means I'm Republican because I agree with the
judge's ruling. (-:

--
Bobby G.

[J Carter]

"Robert Green" <robert_g...@yah00.com> wrote in
news:jljffe$t6h$1...@dont-email.me:

The article said that on-line purchases still had to have the tax
paid. Does anyone know how it's done ?

[Ed Pawlowski]

On 6 Apr 2012 05:01:43 GMT, J Carter <m...@mymailsvr.org> wrote:

>>
>>
>>
>The article said that on-line purchases still had to have the tax
>paid. Does anyone know how it's done ?

Most states have a "use tax" for such purchases. In CT and MA, when
you do the state income tax return you are asked if any purchases are
made that were not taxed. You just fill in the amount and pay the
tax. There may also be a form you can get from the DOR, but I never
checked into it.

[Percival P. Cassidy]

On 04/06/12 05:43 am, Ed Pawlowski wrote:

>> The article said that on-line purchases still had to have the tax
>> paid. Does anyone know how it's done ?

> Most states have a "use tax" for such purchases. In CT and MA, when
> you do the state income tax return you are asked if any purchases are
> made that were not taxed. You just fill in the amount and pay the
> tax. There may also be a form you can get from the DOR, but I never
> checked into it.

In MI, it's similar, but we get credit for any lesser amount of tax
(i.e., less than Michigan's 6%) that was paid in another state. We can
enter the amount if we have records, or we can let them estimate an
amount based on our income; TurboTax figures it all out for us.

BTW, many retailers here are saying that the absence of sales tax on
Internet purchases is hurting them, but many items I buy online are
still far cheaper than local retail even after paying the "use tax." I
might even get them more quickly than waiting for a local retailer to
order them if they are not in stock. One local store I went to recently
to buy an item they showed on their Web page, but they said neither they
nor "head office" kept it on stock: I would have to order it online and
pay shipping costs and tax; Yeah, right!

Perce

[HeyBub]

J Carter wrote:
>>
> The article said that on-line purchases still had to have the tax
> paid. Does anyone know how it's done ?

Depends on your state. Some ask you to tabulate your out-of-state purchases
on your state income tax. For states without an income tax, there's a form
you can get from your state comptroller.

The state relies on voluntary compliance inasmuch as finding and collecting
the tax would be an expensive and logistical nightmare - even for a
government - for the state to take the initative.

FUN WITH TAXES, #37

What you could do is send the comptroller a note along the lines (write in
crayon so it will be noticed):

"Hello dear tax people. While on a recent trip to the Dry Tortugas, I bought
a pack of gum. I brought this pack of gum, unopened, back to my hometown of
Left Elbow, (fill in state). I am enclosing the three cents in state sales
and use tax below. Sorry for the oversight."

Tape three pennies to the letter and mail away. Wait two weeks. Send another
letter.

"Dear tax people: In my original remittance of two weeks ago, I
miscalculated. My tax obligation was really TWO cents instead of the three
originally specified. Please refund the overpayment at your earliest
convenience."

[Caesar Romano]

On Fri, 06 Apr 2012 07:29:57 -0400, "Percival P. Cassidy"
<Nob...@NotMyISP.net> wrote Re Re: Colorado buyers saved from Amazon
tax:

>BTW, many retailers here are saying that the absence of sales tax on
>Internet purchases is hurting them, but many items I buy online are
>still far cheaper than local retail even after paying the "use tax."

That old retailer's argument has not been true for a long time. As
you observe, Internet merchant prices are so competitive, that even
with sales tax, they are still cheaper delivered to your door than a
trip to the local store; which probably doesn't have what you want
anyway.
--
Work is the curse of the drinking class.

[Percival P. Cassidy]

On 04/06/12 07:29 am, I wrote:

>>> The article said that on-line purchases still had to have the tax
>>> paid. Does anyone know how it's done ?
>
>> Most states have a "use tax" for such purchases. In CT and MA, when
>> you do the state income tax return you are asked if any purchases are
>> made that were not taxed. You just fill in the amount and pay the
>> tax. There may also be a form you can get from the DOR, but I never
>> checked into it.
>
> In MI, it's similar, but we get credit for any lesser amount of tax
> (i.e., less than Michigan's 6%) that was paid in another state. We can
> enter the amount if we have records, or we can let them estimate an
> amount based on our income; TurboTax figures it all out for us.
>
> BTW, many retailers here are saying that the absence of sales tax on
> Internet purchases is hurting them, but many items I buy online are
> still far cheaper than local retail even after paying the "use tax." I
> might even get them more quickly than waiting for a local retailer to
> order them if they are not in stock. One local store I went to recently
> to buy an item they showed on their Web page, but they said neither they

> nor "head office" kept it in stock: I would have to order it online and

> pay shipping costs and tax; Yeah, right!

IOW, I would pay them full price, plus shipping and tax, and it would be
shipped to me directly from the manufacturer or distributor. The
"retailer" would collect a profit (an undeserved profit) on an item on
which they had never even set eyes.

Perce

[Robert Green]

"Percival P. Cassidy" <Nob...@NotMyISP.net> wrote in message
news:jlmk3k$2kb$1@dont-

<stuff snipped>

> BTW, many retailers here are saying that the absence of sales tax on
> Internet purchases is hurting them, but many items I buy online are
> still far cheaper than local retail even after paying the "use tax."

I agree. I don't know why states feel so entitled to revenue from companies
that hardly put any drain on local resources. Brick and mortar stores use
police, courts, fire departments, water. and many other government services
that Amazon or Ebay don't. About the only thing that gets consumed is the
roadway use of the delivery trucks and that's already factored in with road
use taxes. It's a scam. Given how far the Feds are willing to stretch the
commerce clause to cover guns near schools and mandatory health care, I find
it surprising they don't assert themselves and declare use taxes an illegal
impediment to interstate commerce.

> I might even get them more quickly than waiting for a local retailer to
> order them if they are not in stock. One local store I went to recently
> to buy an item they showed on their Web page, but they said neither they
> nor "head office" kept it on stock: I would have to order it online and
> pay shipping costs and tax; Yeah, right!

I find I order more and more stuff online just to get it done and over
unless I really need to inspect the quality of the goods beforehand. I was
really surprised to find Home Depot completely out of hot melt glue )-:
Disappointments like that tend to drive me even further to the web for
stuff. We get groceries delivered via the web. It costs more but we both
hate grocery shopping and this gets the basics to our door with very little
hassle. That leaves us free to shop for speciality stuff when we do go to
the grocery store. Peapod even scans your previous orders and will select
items it thinks you're going to buy. I'll be damned if they don't get a lot
of it right!

--
Bobby G.

[HeyBub]

Robert Green wrote:
> Given how far the Feds are willing to stretch the commerce clause to
> cover guns near schools and mandatory health care, I find it
> surprising they don't assert themselves and declare use taxes an
> illegal impediment to interstate commerce.

The guns near schools business was struck down by the Supreme Court.
Mandatory health care is in the pressure cooker. The heat is on.

[Ed Pawlowski]

On Fri, 06 Apr 2012 12:57:59 -0400, "Percival P. Cassidy"
<Nob...@NotMyISP.net> wrote:



>
>IOW, I would pay them full price, plus shipping and tax, and it would be
>shipped to me directly from the manufacturer or distributor. The
>"retailer" would collect a profit (an undeserved profit) on an item on
>which they had never even set eyes.
>
>Perce

Why is the profit undeserved? They placed the item for sale, hosted
the web site, paid for the database work, promoted it, handled the
paperwork, charged your credit cart, and passed it in bulk to the
manufacturer or his warehouse. Most middlemen perform a needed
service.

Next time you need a roll of toilet paper, call Proctor & Gamble and
see if you can buy direct.

[Ed Pawlowski]

On Fri, 6 Apr 2012 13:58:39 -0400, "Robert Green"
<robert_g...@yah00.com> wrote:

>"Percival P. Cassidy" <Nob...@NotMyISP.net> wrote in message
>news:jlmk3k$2kb$1@dont-
>
><stuff snipped>
>
>> BTW, many retailers here are saying that the absence of sales tax on
>> Internet purchases is hurting them, but many items I buy online are
>> still far cheaper than local retail even after paying the "use tax."
>
>I agree. I don't know why states feel so entitled to revenue from companies
>that hardly put any drain on local resources. Brick and mortar stores use
>police, courts, fire departments, water. and many other government services
>that Amazon or Ebay don't.

They don't want a penny from those stores. They are not asking Amazon
to give them a penny. They want YOUR money. They just want Amazon, et
al, to act as the collector for them.

In addition to collecting sales tax, the B & M stores do pay local
real estate taxes, inventory taxes, personal property taxes on
machines and fixture, etc. The Internet sellers are paying those
taxes in the states and towns where they have facilities. They may be
paying more taxes to another town three states away and covering their
local police costs.

>About the only thing that gets consumed is the
>roadway use of the delivery trucks and that's already factored in with road
>use taxes. It's a scam. Given how far the Feds are willing to stretch the
>commerce clause to cover guns near schools and mandatory health care, I find
>it surprising they don't assert themselves and declare use taxes an illegal
>impediment to interstate commerce.

If you avoid the use or sales tax, that revenue will be made up in
other ways. The state has a budget and will do whatever they have to
in order to bring in that money. You avoid $1 in sales tax, they
raise the restaurant tax. You buy a new TV on line, they tax
haircuts. If you avoid paying your share, your neighbor gets whacked
for more to make up for it.

No free lunch, The states get the money one way or another.

[Frank]

No sales tax here in Delaware but on some internet orders I see a line
item for tax, if any.

I always assumed that mail or phone orders were taxed. Why not internet?

I believe there is another problem with states like California that
wants to collect sales tax from places like Amazon if sales come from
California even though going to a state like Delaware with no tax.
Might be why Amazon located one of their first centers in Delaware to
avoid such BS.

[k...@att.bizzzzzzzzzzzz]

A long time is right! It even predates the Internet. I was buying from the
likes of 47th St. Photo forty years ago.

[Ed Pawlowski]

On Fri, 06 Apr 2012 18:31:44 -0400, Frank
<frankperi...@comcast.net> wrote:

>
>No sales tax here in Delaware but on some internet orders I see a line
>item for tax, if any.
>
>I always assumed that mail or phone orders were taxed. Why not internet?

Years ago, the sales tax situation was the same as now, most
mail-order companies did not collect it. Before the Internet, that
was a tiny portion of the overall sales so the states did little to
enforce the laws or force collection. Internet sales are becoming a
large portion of overall sales and for big ticket items.

If in 1975 you ordered a new album from Columbia House, the tax was
maybe 30¢ or $1 on that nice pen and pencil set, but today, the tax
on an Amazon appliance can be $50 or $100 or more times many more
orders. How about that tax on a Dell laptop?

>
>I believe there is another problem with states like California that
>wants to collect sales tax from places like Amazon if sales come from
>California even though going to a state like Delaware with no tax.
>Might be why Amazon located one of their first centers in Delaware to
>avoid such BS.

If you live in CA, you owe the tax. Same with other states with sales
taxes.

[Caesar Romano]

On Fri, 06 Apr 2012 17:22:07 -0400, Ed Pawlowski <e...@snet.net> wrote

Re Re: Colorado buyers saved from Amazon tax:

>If you avoid the use or sales tax, that revenue will be made up in
>other ways. The state has a budget and will do whatever they have to
>in order to bring in that money. You avoid $1 in sales tax, they
>raise the restaurant tax. You buy a new TV on line, they tax
>haircuts. If you avoid paying your share, your neighbor gets whacked
>for more to make up for it.
>
>No free lunch, The states get the money one way or another.

Only true where tax payers do not demand that government cut programs
until it can stay within budget. If a taxpayer demands that, but his
neighbor doesn't, then let the neighbor pay the taxes.

[Percival P. Cassidy]

On 04/06/12 05:12 pm, Ed Pawlowski wrote:

>> IOW, I would pay them full price, plus shipping and tax, and it would be
>> shipped to me directly from the manufacturer or distributor. The
>> "retailer" would collect a profit (an undeserved profit) on an item on
>> which they had never even set eyes.

> Why is the profit undeserved? They placed the item for sale, hosted
> the web site, paid for the database work, promoted it, handled the
> paperwork, charged your credit cart, and passed it in bulk to the
> manufacturer or his warehouse. Most middlemen perform a needed
> service.
>

> Next time you need a roll of toilet paper, call Proctor& Gamble and

> see if you can buy direct.

A retailer earns its profit by having the item in stock (taking up
space) and on display for examination and perhaps even demonstration.
Amazon and many other online "sellers," for far less than the retailer's
typical markup, collect my payment and forward my order to Ingram Micro
or some other distributor who ships it to me.

Perce

[Ed Pawlowski]

That is why Amazon can sell cheaper. They still offer you goods and
perform a service and are entitled to be paid for that service. They
have costs in making the transaction possible for you.

[Percival P. Cassidy]

On 04/07/12 10:41 am, Ed Pawlowski wrote:

>>>> IOW, I would pay them full price, plus shipping and tax, and it would be
>>>> shipped to me directly from the manufacturer or distributor. The
>>>> "retailer" would collect a profit (an undeserved profit) on an item on
>>>> which they had never even set eyes.
>>
>>> Why is the profit undeserved? They placed the item for sale, hosted
>>> the web site, paid for the database work, promoted it, handled the
>>> paperwork, charged your credit cart, and passed it in bulk to the
>>> manufacturer or his warehouse. Most middlemen perform a needed
>>> service.
>>>
>>> Next time you need a roll of toilet paper, call Proctor& Gamble and
>>> see if you can buy direct.
>>
>> A retailer earns its profit by having the item in stock (taking up
>> space) and on display for examination and perhaps even demonstration.
>> Amazon and many other online "sellers," for far less than the retailer's
>> typical markup, collect my payment and forward my order to Ingram Micro
>> or some other distributor who ships it to me.

> That is why Amazon can sell cheaper. They still offer you goods and
> perform a service and are entitled to be paid for that service. They
> have costs in making the transaction possible for you.

But the retailer in the case I mentioned was only going to do the same
thing: take my order and forward it to the distributor or manufacturer
but collect a far larger markup than Amazon does.

I do not begrudge Amazon its small markup, but I do begrudge a
"retailer" its large markup for doing the same thing.

BTW, as I mentioned here a while back, "trade" ("buy low, sell high")
was considered unethical until comparatively recently.

Perce

[Frank]

Not only live there but if visiting and you buy something there you also
pay tax. But if I buy mail order from California and Delaware has no
tax then no tax is paid. I heard that California wanted to collect tax
from anything sold there even if mailed out of state.

In our small state of Delaware, shopping center parking lots are full of
out of state cars. Matter of fact state has highway signs as you drive in:

http://somd.com/news/headlines/2011/14174.shtml

[HerHusband]

Caesar,

> Internet merchant prices are so competitive, that even with sales tax,
> they are still cheaper delivered to your door than a trip to the local
> store; which probably doesn't have what you want anyway.

There are a variety of reasons I shop online instead of local retailers.

1. Selection. Local retailers usually just stock a few popular brands,
and often just a limited selection from each brand. More often than not,
I've gone looking for a specific model and couldn't find one at any local
retailer. A couple examples:

I needed a new corded drill with low speed and high torque to use with
large self-feeding auger bits. Everything sold in local stores was the
typical high speed, low power drill. I ordered a Dewalt model from
Amazon.com and had it in three days.

I recently did some electrical work at my in-laws. The inspector said I
needed lockout devices on a few of the breakers. Despite being a national
code requirement since 2008, not a single home center or local electrical
supply stocked them. Ordered online and they showed up a couple days
later.

2. Knowledge. Anytime I go to a retail store, I almost always know more
about the merchandise than the employee does. Doesn't matter if it's
electronic devices, computers, or building materials. If I have a
question I'm usually on my own to figure it out. When I shop online I can
see the full specifications of the device, link to the manufacturers web
site for more information, and find reviews if I want to know how it
worked out for others.

3. Convenience. I can shop online at 5am in my pajamas on a Sunday
morning if I wish. I don't have to get dressed, wait till the store
opens, drive to town (10 miles each way using $4/gallon gas, pumping
exhaust into the air, putting wear and tear on my vehicle), and hope they
have what I need. Shopping online I can check out 4 or 5 different stores
in a few minutes, instead of wasting the afternoon driving from store to
store.

4. Price. In most cases, I can find items online cheaper than I can find
them locally.

The best exceptions are retail stores with the local inventory listed
online. For example, I can research the product I want online, then check
HomeDepot.com, Walmart.com, etc. to see if the local retail store has
that item in stock. If they do, I am more likely to drive down and pick
it up that day than wait for the item to be shipped, even if it costs a
little more.

Anthony

[Percival P. Cassidy]

On 04/07/12 12:28 pm, HerHusband wrote:

<snip>

> 4. Price. In most cases, I can find items online cheaper than I can find
> them locally.
>
> The best exceptions are retail stores with the local inventory listed
> online. For example, I can research the product I want online, then check
> HomeDepot.com, Walmart.com, etc. to see if the local retail store has
> that item in stock. If they do, I am more likely to drive down and pick
> it up that day than wait for the item to be shipped, even if it costs a
> little more.

Keep in mind that the online inventory display is not always up to date.
Some stores do updates only overnight. Sometimes an item that is shown
as in stock walked out of the door without saying "Goodbye."

Perce

[Robert Green]

"HeyBub" <hey...@NOSPAMgmail.com> wrote in message

news:28mdnbzuONun0-LS...@earthlink.com...

> Robert Green wrote:
> > Given how far the Feds are willing to stretch the commerce clause to
> > cover guns near schools and mandatory health care, I find it
> > surprising they don't assert themselves and declare use taxes an
> > illegal impediment to interstate commerce.
>
> The guns near schools business was struck down by the Supreme Court.

Not before quite a few people got swept up by it. The problem with SCOTUS
scuttling a law is that it's usually done a fair amount of damage by then.
I moved out of DC a long time ago, in part because of their draconian gun
laws. Heller was way too late to help me and thousands who were arrested
merely for owning a gun.

> Mandatory health care is in the pressure cooker. The heat is on.

Don't gloat. SYG could easily follow the ACA into troubled waters. SYG was
an abstraction to a lot of people until just recently. The pendulum swings
. . .

--
Bobby G.

[Ed Pawlowski]

On Sat, 07 Apr 2012 12:26:55 -0400, Frank
<frankperi...@comcast.net> wrote:

>
>Not only live there but if visiting and you buy something there you also
>pay tax. But if I buy mail order from California and Delaware has no
>tax then no tax is paid. I heard that California wanted to collect tax
>from anything sold there even if mailed out of state.
>
>In our small state of Delaware, shopping center parking lots are full of
>out of state cars. Matter of fact state has highway signs as you drive in:
>
>http://somd.com/news/headlines/2011/14174.shtml

Where does the money to run the state come from? NH has no sales tax,
but has very high property taxes. Delaware has some toll roads, but
those shoppers are not paying that much to make up for the loss of
sales taxes. Are they getting enough in corporate taxes? Delaware is
a big state for incorporations.

[Ed Pawlowski]

On Sat, 07 Apr 2012 10:50:15 -0400, "Percival P. Cassidy"
<Nob...@NotMyISP.net> wrote:



>
>> That is why Amazon can sell cheaper. They still offer you goods and
>> perform a service and are entitled to be paid for that service. They
>> have costs in making the transaction possible for you.
>
>But the retailer in the case I mentioned was only going to do the same
>thing: take my order and forward it to the distributor or manufacturer
>but collect a far larger markup than Amazon does.
>
>I do not begrudge Amazon its small markup, but I do begrudge a
>"retailer" its large markup for doing the same thing.
>

OK, gotcha. Yes, that is one reason local retail shops are going
away. They have higher overhead and generally charge higher prices
even if they don't have to. It is also possible that with his volume,
he is paying a higher price than the internet retailer too.

Major appliances have changed over the years. Local stores could not
compete with the big box retailers. Now, most belong to co-ops and
buy at lower prices and can be very competitive. If I'm buying a
$2000 refrigerator, I'd be happy to pay $50 more from the guy up the
street that I know will give me a good delivery experience and long
term service. I'm not willing to pay hundreds more though.

[k...@att.bizzzzzzzzzzzz]

Just had a $3,400 refrigerator delivered today. We bought it from a large
chain store that had the same price as everyone else (fair traded) but they
had it "in stock" locally. Even Lowes would have taken 3-4 weeks (they took
that long last time we bought one - same model). The delivery crew was
excellent. A "local" couldn't have done better.

[k...@att.bizzzzzzzzzzzz]

On Sat, 7 Apr 2012 14:21:39 -0400, "Robert Green" <robert_g...@yah00.com>
wrote:

At one time people were transfixed watching OJ and Tawana Brawley, too. Both
were about as legitimate, policy wise, as this mess.

[k...@att.bizzzzzzzzzzzz]

You mean, like California? <snicker>

[Frank]

Good question. I can't find the actual distribution of income, but
there is income tax which can run up to 7%, the corporate income as you
mention, casinos at race tracks. There is a small transfer tax that
sellers pay and it is something like a quarter of a percent. License
fees, car registration fees, a transfer tax on a new car maybe 3%.
Property taxes go to the counties and schools. All in all, taxes are
lower then neighboring states of PA, NJ and MD. In a housing development
on the PA border a house in PA will pay twice the property tax as
Delaware's.

[HeyBub]

Robert Green wrote:
>
>> Mandatory health care is in the pressure cooker. The heat is on.
>
> Don't gloat. SYG could easily follow the ACA into troubled waters.
> SYG was an abstraction to a lot of people until just recently. The
> pendulum swings . . .

I agree. Now, millions of people know they don't have to run away.

[HeyBub]

k...@att.bizzzzzzzzzzzz wrote:
>>
>> Only true where tax payers do not demand that government cut programs
>> until it can stay within budget. If a taxpayer demands that, but his
>> neighbor doesn't, then let the neighbor pay the taxes.
>
> You mean, like California? <snicker>

Stop it! You're killin' me.

[HeyBub]

Ed Pawlowski wrote:
>
> Where does the money to run the state come from? NH has no sales tax,
> but has very high property taxes. Delaware has some toll roads, but
> those shoppers are not paying that much to make up for the loss of
> sales taxes. Are they getting enough in corporate taxes? Delaware is
> a big state for incorporations.

Good point. In my view, states should rely on voluntary contributions.

They are, after all, a charity writ large.

[Frank]

Article in today's paper clarifies Delaware somewhat.

One third of state expenditures comes from corporate taxes.

Surprisingly 12% comes from escheat. (I had an inactive credit union
account a couple of years ago and got notice that since I had not done
anything for 5 years, if I didn't do something, the State would get it.
I withdrew the $100 or so in it and closed it out.)

Add the lottery, casinos, gas and cigarette taxes etc means that less
than half of Delaware's income is from income tax.

Last year, as a retiree over 65 on exempt SS and mostly exempt pension,
my share was only about 0.5% of my income but 4% went to local property
taxes. Franchise tax for my little S corp was $125.

Tax wise, it is cheaper to live down state. My son's father in law with
a house about the same as mine pays only half the tax. He says big
difference is that lower county is ruled by Republicans vs Democrats
where I live ;)

[Caesar Romano]

On Sat, 7 Apr 2012 16:28:21 +0000 (UTC), HerHusband
<unk...@unknown.com> wrote Re Re: Colorado buyers saved from Amazon
tax:

>> Internet merchant prices are so competitive, that even with sales tax,
>> they are still cheaper delivered to your door than a trip to the local
>> store; which probably doesn't have what you want anyway.
>
>There are a variety of reasons I shop online instead of local retailers.

Excellent description of why on-line retailing is beating the heck out
of B&M retailers. It has nothing to do with sales tax or even shipping
costs. It's all about selection, convenience and delivered (to the
door) cost. In all three of those criteria, on-line retailers have
mostly IMO taken the lead.

[George]

But it is still unreasonable that a local brick and mortar merchant MUST
be a tax collector and a online merchant doesn't.

[George]

On 4/6/2012 1:58 PM, Robert Green wrote:
> "Percival P. Cassidy"<Nob...@NotMyISP.net> wrote in message
> news:jlmk3k$2kb$1@dont-
>
> <stuff snipped>
>

>> BTW, many retailers here are saying that the absence of sales tax on
>> Internet purchases is hurting them, but many items I buy online are
>> still far cheaper than local retail even after paying the "use tax."
>

> I agree. I don't know why states feel so entitled to revenue from companies
> that hardly put any drain on local resources. Brick and mortar stores use
> police, courts, fire departments, water. and many other government services

> that Amazon or Ebay don't. About the only thing that gets consumed is the




But aren't *sales taxes* the only taxes under discussion? Sales taxes
are a tax that YOU pay on the purchase price and the merchant is simply
the tax collector. Most state laws mandate that they must collect those
taxes while online places are not mandated to be tax collectors.

> roadway use of the delivery trucks and that's already factored in with road

> use taxes. It's a scam. Given how far the Feds are willing to stretch the

> commerce clause to cover guns near schools and mandatory health care, I find
> it surprising they don't assert themselves and declare use taxes an illegal
> impediment to interstate commerce.
>

>> I might even get them more quickly than waiting for a local retailer to
>> order them if they are not in stock. One local store I went to recently
>> to buy an item they showed on their Web page, but they said neither they
>> nor "head office" kept it on stock: I would have to order it online and
>> pay shipping costs and tax; Yeah, right!
>
> I find I order more and more stuff online just to get it done and over
> unless I really need to inspect the quality of the goods beforehand. I was
> really surprised to find Home Depot completely out of hot melt glue )-:
> Disappointments like that tend to drive me even further to the web for
> stuff. We get groceries delivered via the web. It costs more but we both
> hate grocery shopping and this gets the basics to our door with very little
> hassle. That leaves us free to shop for speciality stuff when we do go to
> the grocery store. Peapod even scans your previous orders and will select
> items it thinks you're going to buy. I'll be damned if they don't get a lot
> of it right!
>
> --
> Bobby G.
>
>
>

[George]

On 4/6/2012 5:22 PM, Ed Pawlowski wrote:
> On Fri, 6 Apr 2012 13:58:39 -0400, "Robert Green"
> <robert_g...@yah00.com> wrote:
>
>> "Percival P. Cassidy"<Nob...@NotMyISP.net> wrote in message
>> news:jlmk3k$2kb$1@dont-
>>
>> <stuff snipped>
>>
>>> BTW, many retailers here are saying that the absence of sales tax on
>>> Internet purchases is hurting them, but many items I buy online are
>>> still far cheaper than local retail even after paying the "use tax."
>>
>> I agree. I don't know why states feel so entitled to revenue from companies
>> that hardly put any drain on local resources. Brick and mortar stores use
>> police, courts, fire departments, water. and many other government services
>> that Amazon or Ebay don't.
>
> They don't want a penny from those stores. They are not asking Amazon
> to give them a penny. They want YOUR money. They just want Amazon, et
> al, to act as the collector for them.
>

> In addition to collecting sales tax, the B& M stores do pay local

> real estate taxes, inventory taxes, personal property taxes on
> machines and fixture, etc. The Internet sellers are paying those
> taxes in the states and towns where they have facilities. They may be
> paying more taxes to another town three states away and covering their
> local police costs.
>
>
>
>> About the only thing that gets consumed is the
>> roadway use of the delivery trucks and that's already factored in with road
>> use taxes. It's a scam. Given how far the Feds are willing to stretch the
>> commerce clause to cover guns near schools and mandatory health care, I find
>> it surprising they don't assert themselves and declare use taxes an illegal
>> impediment to interstate commerce.
>
>
> If you avoid the use or sales tax, that revenue will be made up in
> other ways. The state has a budget and will do whatever they have to
> in order to bring in that money. You avoid $1 in sales tax, they
> raise the restaurant tax. You buy a new TV on line, they tax
> haircuts. If you avoid paying your share, your neighbor gets whacked
> for more to make up for it.
>
> No free lunch, The states get the money one way or another.

Exactly, and requiring a local merchant to be a tax collector and not
applying the same requirement to online merchants is totally unfair.

[k...@att.bizzzzzzzzzzzz]

On Sun, 08 Apr 2012 10:30:43 -0400, George <geo...@nospam.invalid> wrote:

>On 4/8/2012 10:25 AM, Caesar Romano wrote:
>> On Sat, 7 Apr 2012 16:28:21 +0000 (UTC), HerHusband
>> <unk...@unknown.com> wrote Re Re: Colorado buyers saved from Amazon
>> tax:
>>
>>>> Internet merchant prices are so competitive, that even with sales tax,
>>>> they are still cheaper delivered to your door than a trip to the local
>>>> store; which probably doesn't have what you want anyway.
>>>
>>> There are a variety of reasons I shop online instead of local retailers.
>>
>> Excellent description of why on-line retailing is beating the heck out
>> of B&M retailers. It has nothing to do with sales tax or even shipping
>> costs. It's all about selection, convenience and delivered (to the
>> door) cost. In all three of those criteria, on-line retailers have
>> mostly IMO taken the lead.

But the likes of Best Buy are a good place to take a peek at the merchandise
before buying. A number of smart phone apps even make this comparison easy.
BB has noticed, too.

>But it is still unreasonable that a local brick and mortar merchant MUST
>be a tax collector and a online merchant doesn't.

The online merchant does have to be a tax collector for all jurisdictions he
operates in. Why should he be a tax collector for jurisdictions he doesn't do
business in? The purchaser is required to pay the use tax. Is it the
merchant's fault the buyer is a tax cheat?

[HerHusband]

George,

> But aren't *sales taxes* the only taxes under discussion? Sales
> taxes are a tax that YOU pay on the purchase price and the merchant is
> simply the tax collector. Most state laws mandate that they must
> collect those taxes while online places are not mandated to be tax
> collectors.

In many states, online retailers have to collect sales tax for sales in
their own state, just like a B&M store. Unfortunately, here in Washington
state they adopted a real pain in the butt tax system based on the
recipients location. There will often be different tax rates within the
same zip code. This makes it rather difficult to calculate the proper tax
rate for each buyer.

Anthony

[k...@att.bizzzzzzzzzzzz]

Why should a retailer with no presence in a jurisdiction be required to do the
work of that jurisdiction? They have the laws and the means to collect but
don't want to bother doing the work.

[k...@att.bizzzzzzzzzzzz]

On Sun, 8 Apr 2012 15:08:39 +0000 (UTC), HerHusband <unk...@unknown.com>
wrote:

New York had that mess forty years ago. It was impossible to get it right,
even on sales within the state. Car registration was a mess, even then.

[Ed Pawlowski]

On Sun, 08 Apr 2012 10:05:39 -0400, Frank
<frankperi...@comcast.net> wrote:



>
>Surprisingly 12% comes from escheat. (I had an inactive credit union
>account a couple of years ago and got notice that since I had not done
>anything for 5 years, if I didn't do something, the State would get it.
>I withdrew the $100 or so in it and closed it out.)

Wow, I'd never guess that much. I always wondered how people could
forget about money. Then I got a letter from an insurance company
(second notice yet) that my pension from a job I left in 1970 would go
to the state in 90 days if I did nothing. The company move and then
went out of business a few years later and I never thought about a
pension. It was a $4500 lump sum! Glade they were able to track me
down.

[Ed Pawlowski]

On Sun, 08 Apr 2012 10:30:43 -0400, George <geo...@nospam.invalid>
wrote:


>

>But it is still unreasonable that a local brick and mortar merchant MUST
>be a tax collector and a online merchant doesn't.

No, the both do the same thing, just a different scale. If the
internet retailer has a "presence" in your state, they will collect
salves tax on all sales shipped to that state. If your local B&M
stores ships a product out of state, he is not obligated to collect
any tax for anyone.

The internet store will collect tax on products sold in the state they
are set up in and any other state they may have an office or
warehouse.

Same rules apply to both. One of my favorite took stores is Coastal
Tool here in CT. If I order on line, I pay the tax. Even with tax,
they are a better buy than most every other place.

[Frank]

It was a big surprise. I let my wife do the banking and this was only
account left in my name only, left over from my working days.
She's got money spread around between several accounts in 3 or 4 banks.
I know some accounts have no activity and now I'm wondering if an
inactive account in a bank where other accounts are active might be
stolen by the state.

Googling escheat Delaware, I can't say I am too happy with this:

http://revenue.delaware.gov/unclaimedproperty.shtml

I think it takes 5 years to fall into escheat and it looks like they
could hit a dormant account in a bank even if others are active at the
bank. I just closed out an inactive no fee checking account that had
been inactive for 3 years as there might have been a new fee for that.

[Kurt Ullman]

In article <9re3o7pmhld7odvsh...@4ax.com>,

Ed Pawlowski <e...@snet.net> wrote:

>
> No, the both do the same thing, just a different scale. If the
> internet retailer has a "presence" in your state, they will collect
> salves tax on all sales shipped to that state. If your local B&M
> stores ships a product out of state, he is not obligated to collect
> any tax for anyone.
>

This isn't anything, new either. We'd buy stuff in other states and
have it shipped back w/o sales tax at least since the mid-80s

--
People thought cybersex was a safe alternative,
until patients started presenting with sexually
acquired carpal tunnel syndrome.-Howard Berkowitz

[Attila.Iskander]

"HeyBub" <hey...@NOSPAMgmail.com> wrote in message

news:c46dnXFM1as1GBzS...@earthlink.com...

You misuderstood him
He really, REALLY wants SYG laws to be reversed.
Apparently he feels that people should be forced to run away when out and
about, and braced by a criminal.