Tax increase to be attached to unrelated national defense bill


#1

The “Marketplace Fairness Act,” which will create a federal requirement that online retailers enforce sales taxes, has been the focus of extreme lobbying efforts by large corporations such as Wal*Mart and Target, both of whom stand to gain if their online competition is subjected to this tax increase. At this point, the tax is receiving bipartisan support. For instance, Haley Barbour argues that this tax increase is necessary in order to prevent “government distortion of the free market.”

Support the Marketplace Fairness Act - Haley Barbour - National Review Online


#2

Barbour’s arguments are extremely disingenuous. His attempt to say that this tax increase will help small businesses is simply laughable. It’s large small-business-devouring corporations such as Wal*Mart and Target pushing for this tax increase. Now, think about it: who will this tax increase affect? Amazon is primarily a conduit for small business owners to sell their products online. A tax increase on Amazon sales will primarily affect those true small business owners who deal through amazon and other online retailers, typically because the local business regulations are heavily skewed in favor of large and wealthy businesses. This is a transparent shot at small business owners in order to please the mega-corporations who are lobbying for this tax increase.


#3

If it moves, tax it!

Anyway, thank goodness I live in a state without a sales tax, something conservatives have come to love in the past 20 years or so. Wait, no, we’ve got the gross revenues backdoor sales tax billed and passed by voters a couple of years ago as a tax on the evil, rich corporations. I wonder if my state will try to charge Amazon based on its gross revenues in Oregon if this passes.

Conservatives know that when loopholes are closed, the tax system can have lower rates for everyone.
Really? Around here, they just budget the extra if they can. The voters, the people, keep telling the state to bug off on what we call the individual “kicker.” That’s money we get back when revenues exceed projections. The politicians, left and right, keep trying to keep it. And with the voters help they did take away the corporate kicker last month (meanwhile unions can still spend coercive dues on political campaigns). Locally, when property tax revenues are higher than anticipated, they keep it and spend it.

When loopholes are closed, they government will just keep it if they can.

Conservatives ought to be figuring out how to get the government out of the economy and finding ways to limit spending and taxation not justifying more taxes.

Sorry, just ranting here in general.


#4

[quote=“J.Anderson, post:2, topic:37417”]
Barbour’s arguments are extremely disingenuous. His attempt to say that this tax increase will help small businesses is simply laughable. It’s large small-business-devouring corporations such as Wal*Mart and Target pushing for this tax increase. Now, think about it: who will this tax increase affect? Amazon is primarily a conduit for small business owners to sell their products online. A tax increase on Amazon sales will primarily affect those true small business owners who deal through amazon and other online retailers, typically because the local business regulations are heavily skewed in favor of large and wealthy businesses. This is a transparent shot at small business owners in order to please the mega-corporations who are lobbying for this tax increase.
[/quote]Do people shop online in sales tax states to avoid sales tax?


#5

Honestly, I’m not sure about the research on this. But if they do, then I think the answer should be to lobby for getting rid of or lowering the sales tax, and not federal mandates applying sales taxes to online purchases. I think this bill is rather outrageous. It’s an extremely regressive tax increase on small business owners to the benefit of mega-corps.


#6

[quote=“J.Anderson, post:5, topic:37417”]
Honestly, I’m not sure about the research on this. But if they do, then I think the answer should be to lobby for getting rid of or lowering the sales tax, and not federal mandates applying sales taxes to online purchases. I think this bill is rather outrageous. It’s an extremely regressive tax increase on small business owners to the benefit of mega-corps.
[/quote]I certainly agree about how to handle the sales tax. There was a time conservatives agreed with me, at least in Oregon.


#7

Not really - I just shop on line because it’s convenient - and because I can find stuff there that I can’t find in the stores. The avoidance of sales tax is just a bonus.


#8

[quote=“Susanna, post:7, topic:37417”]
Not really - I just shop on line because it’s convenient - and because I can find stuff there that I can’t find in the stores. The avoidance of sales tax is just a bonus.
[/quote]I was talking to a friend the other day and he asked me to look up a place where he wanted a certain type mug with a logo on it and when I brought it to the “cart” there was no inclusion of sales tax and he had some doubts about that. I said he should ask when he called the 800 number.


#9

[quote=“Susanna, post:7, topic:37417”]
Not really - I just shop on line because it’s convenient - and because I can find stuff there that I can’t find in the stores. The avoidance of sales tax is just a bonus.
[/quote]I suspect that might be a common attitude.


#10

Exactly, burdening a business in Kansas to collect taxes for California (especially when every County in California has a different rate) is ludicrous and would require Federal Enforcement.

What these States are not admitting is that the sales tax alone would not be much different than the shipping costs. The reason online retailers frequently have much lower prices to begin with is all the beatings that brick and mortar stores take in States like California from Government regulations, these costs are reflected in everything they sell before the sales tax is ever levied.

The State governments do not want to back off the oppression they are causing that would actually allow their in-state stores to compete because they think they can get the sales tax from online retailers and keep all the local crap in place.

The “competition” claim is just a ruse.

Amazon is now collecting sales tax for California from online retailers located out of State, the delivered prices are still 15 to 20 percent lower for like items purchased out of State even with the tax added. No local retailers will benefit from this change but the State will get to keep raping businesses in their own State while also collecting the sales tax from other States.

The only way that Market forces can do their job of FORCING the States to compete with each other in regards to the business climate they structure is to let technology like the Internet expose their Confiscatory and Authoritarian philosophy for the failed model that it is.


#11

Careful, RET, *they * will invent a new tax that will be calculated based on regulatory costs in the delivery states. Don’t give them any ideas.


#12

Exactly, that would be no more ridiculous than most of the crap that comes out of Sacramento.


#13

Curious that these two (Wal*Mart and Target) would be complaining because they BOTH have online shopping.

I have noticed lately that I’m paying sales tax online much more, in fact I don’t think I have purchased anything in the last five or six months online WITHOUT paying sales tax. :angry:

.


#14

Walmart and Target have a physical presence in every State so they have to charge sales tax to every online buyer if the State the buyer lives in has a sales tax, they are trying to force smaller online retailers who do not have a physical presence in every State to adhere to the same criteria when they sell across State lines.


#15

Exactly! I buy from one company whose main location is in my state. When I buy on line a “possible” sales tax shows up before the final invoice. But most of the stuff I buy there (clothing) is not taxable in this state, so there’s no tax on it anyway.