Marketplace Fairness Act - call Corker and Alexander and tell them to vote NO

[morrisster]

I don't know how many of you engage in commerce online (either buying or selling) but this should be a concern to all of us. Lamar Alexander actually voted FOR this legislation (S.743) that requires retailers to comply with tax collection regulation in over 9000 different jurisdictions around the country. Isn't taxation supposed to be a point of sale type situation? (It has been until now!).  My business pays tax in the county and state where I am located, not to each individual's home state and county of residence. 

Who polices it? Basically this is a backdoor way for the government to track all online commerce (everything really) to make sure we comply. WE DON'T WANT THIS!

 

Call Bob Corker 202-224-3344 and Lamar Alexander 202-224-4944 and tell them to vote NO on S.743

 

I spoke to both of their offices this morning already - had to wait on hold for Corker but it was less than 5 mintues.

 

read about it and decide for yourselves. but I hope you side with me in opposing this tyrannical piece of legislation

 

http://www.nationalreview.com/article/346567/misnamed-marketplace-fairness-act

 

[Hi Point Hooligan]

From what I understand when you order something from another state, (import it) You are liable for taxes on the item. The dept of revenue (TN) on their website have a form for you to voluntarily pay the sales tax on the goods you buy in other states.

 

I would imagine it is not downloaded a lot. So it looks like this law is just enforcing the sales tax law already on the books. Since at one time their have been some misconceptions on what is taxed and not taxed. I am going to cheat and provide a link.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Internet_taxes

 

Now that being said I shop at newegg a lot. And they do charge sales tax because they have a nexus in the state (TN). Also from what I understand is that not all online businesses will have to collect tax. I think it would be based on the revenue of said business. Don’t quote me on that, I read it somewhere..

[Guest 6.8 AR]

Regardless of the revenue amount threshold, which just makes it about as unfair as welfare, it is a crummy

bill, but you know the government loves a new tax. Those bastards think everything is theirs, and we just

get to keep our crumbs at their will.

[DaveTN]

I’m all for it. I pay taxes on purchases locally and I also pay taxes on on-line purchases that have a presence in Tennessee. That tax money goes to my state. If that number drops, the state will not spend less; they will increase taxes in other areas or institute a state income tax. The money will leave our state and go to the states that have the largest on-line retailers… CA, NY, etc.

 

There are no free rides. I’m just surprised it has not been done yet.

 

 

[Garufa]

Do you voluntarily pay taxes on purchses you make from out of state retailers?

[DaveTN]

Do you voluntarily pay taxes on purchses you make from out of state retailers?

Of course I do; it's the law.

[mikegideon]

You're legally required to pay sales tax on everything. It's just easy to avoid on out-of-state purchases. My company pays sales tax on EVERYTHING, even on out of state purchases. The state is more inclined to audit a company. Nothing more painful than paying a few years worth of back sales taxes on millions of dollars worth of purchases.

 

Nobody likes paying the taxes, but it's not a new tax. It's always been the law. They've just figured out how to enforce it. It will take away some of the incentive to buy out of state instead of locally. We've all done it. It's cost + shipping + transfer fee vs. cost + sales tax when you're buying a gun. From a politician's perspective, he'll be helping the in-state businesses by removing that advantage as well as getting some uncollected revenue. At the same time, he's voting against something we all love, but still illegal. 

[Guest 6.8 AR]

It's always about "build up one business and kill another" for the sake of more revenue. Problem I have

is the state governments think they are entitled to everything. No doubt there is a double edged sword,

that doesn't mean you have to make it easier to get more taxes.

 

 

And I thought spending was the problem. Fix that part and there wouldn't be a problem.

 

It reminds me of my visit to the Clerk's office when I was getting a title transfer on a certain car, a while back.

"How come you're trying to charge me more than the car is worth?", I asked. "Because I can", she answered.

[mikegideon]

It's always about "build up one business and kill another" for the sake of more revenue. Problem I have

is the state governments think they are entitled to everything. No doubt there is a double edged sword,

that doesn't mean you have to make it easier to get more taxes.

 

 

And I thought spending was the problem. Fix that part and there wouldn't be a problem.

 

It reminds me of my visit to the Clerk's office when I was getting a title transfer on a certain car, a while back.

"How come you're trying to charge me more than the car is worth?", I asked. "Because I can", she answered.

 

I understand all that. In this case though, it's existing law. The state could force you to pay the tax if they had a record of the transaction.

[Guest 6.8 AR]

Then why do they need help from the federal government? Not their job, Mike.

[mikegideon]

Then why do they need help from the federal government? Not their job, Mike.

 

I don't think the states can reach across the line. Anyway, I'm not campaigning for it. Just saying what I know about it, since my company went thru an audit years ago.

 

BTW... I've been expecting something like this for years.

Edited April 27, 2013 by mikegideon

[Guest 6.8 AR]

I've learned to expect anything from the higher order. :D

[mav]

I'm all for it.  We don't have enough taxes to begin with.  Everybody needs to contributing their fair share.  :shake:

 

Honestly, I don't know why they are d**king around with this weak piece of legislation.  They might as well just go ahead and confiscate our paychecks and retirement accounts. Then they give us back what they think we need to live.  After all, 90% of American people support it, it is for the children, and if just one person might be saved it needs to be done.

[dlm37015]

it will be very hard to keep up with as a retailer.that why i ship nothing to nj or ca

[subsonic]

Article 1, Section 9, paragraph 5 of the Constitution states: "No tax or duty shall be laid on articles exported by any state". SCOTUS ruled in 1992 that if a business does not have a physical presence in a state, they cannot be compelled to collect sales tax for goods sold to someone in those states.

 

This is yet another example of the federal government being mindless of the unconstitutionality of a law that they pass. They're reverse engineering. There should be an amendment requiring that Congress vet the constitutionality for laws being drafted.

[Glenn]

What is this "Constitution" you talk about. We are from the Government. We don't care about any "Constitution"