Mister Ed wrote:The Use Tax thing has always struck me as ludicrous.
Mister Ed wrote:I'm not sure how "no taxation without representation" is at issue here.
Feralcom wrote:Mister Ed wrote:I'm not sure how "no taxation without representation" is at issue here.
Its collected by the company, from the buyers and then given to the requested state. So while the company isnt taxed directly, they are still paying out the tax.
Feralcom wrote:Mister Ed wrote:The burden and overhead is on the company and the requesting State basically gets free money because said company makes no use of that States tax spenditure.
Mister Ed wrote:Feralcom wrote:Mister Ed wrote:The burden and overhead is on the company and the requesting State basically gets free money because said company makes no use of that States tax spenditure.
The people who are actually PAYING the tax DO make use of that State's tax spenditure, even if the company doesn't.
Feralcom wrote:All business comes down to an individual, partners or share holders (voters) and tax departments, accountants, etc. do not work for free.
I also doubt you would expect a California resident to pay taxes on items they bought while physically in Nevada when they return from vacation.
But i think we just see things differently or at least on some level. Im sure this wasn't meant to turn into a political debate and I don't wish to ruin a toy site with it. Ill just end with saying I hate this situation has hurt a site I love.
Trooper10 wrote:gorram - totally sucks. So effectively CA is trying to tax sales that are occurring outside the state - I would thing that that is actually unconstitutional...me not being a constitutional lawyer or anything.
akunthita wrote:StoutFiles wrote:ikarus wrote:just voicing my thoughs and please keep in mind I'm from Europe and don't know the intricacies of US law:
couldn't you set up a foundation/or LLC in another state that operates FBTB and you as an employee?
Nope. Nor can he get a P.O. Box in another state.
I feel bad it's come to this, but states want thir tax dollars and heavily favor brick/mortar stores that pay taxes and employ people. Small Internet businesses will be trampled before this is all over. Now, at some point a middle man, such as a credit card company will handle tax laws for the buyer/seller exchange...for a fee, of course. Who knows how that much will cost, but it's still a ways away.
For now, I wouldn't hold my breath waiting for this bill to be repealed. Many states have already passed it and it's going to stay, for better or for worse.
This was my first thought too, just set up in an other state. You mention that he cannot do that. But why not? As far as I know he could establish a business presence anywhere! We run a real-estate business in Florida, under an LLC in Nevada. It is really not hard to set up.
Or just find an individual in a different state who would take care of the Amazon Affiliation for FBTB. My first choice would be Nevada, as it is unlikely that such stupid law will be passed there. And there are still many other states who don't have this law, although if they get desparate enough for money they may establish it as well.
The point is that there are definitely options. It may just require some research, consultation and creativity.
StoutFiles wrote:Here's one such bill: "Senate Majority Whip rooster Durbin (D-Ill.) says he plans to introduce a bill, called the Main Street Fairness Act, mandating that all businesses collect the sales tax in the state where the consumer resides. "
hye wrote:There are proponents of a value added tax (VAT) system like they have in the EU, but in the US you'd have to get all the states to agree to it!
Users browsing this forum: Exabot [Bot], MSNbot Media and 5 guests