Just curious. Any concerns about this topic?

[Brian Van Horn]

https://www.wsj.com/articles/supreme...ase-1523990816

[nolemmings]

I would not expect the Court to change the law by overturning the Quill case from a quarter century ago. The justices' questions appear to show they believe that Congress should step in and address the situation if and as needed.
And we all know how quickly Congress acts

[Brian Van Horn]

I would say this case comes down to Breyer with the other justices split evenly. I have to admit I love the quotes from Alito in his line of questioning.

[nolemmings]

I doubt it will be that close.

[Brian Van Horn]

Originally Posted by nolemmings

I doubt it will be that close.

Todd,

I hope you're right, but if you're wrong, it would be very messy/interesting.

[nolemmings]

I have seen the reporting that it will be close, but it really is a matter for Congress. If Quill is overturned, I would expect all hell to break loose, and Congress may be forced to act. Which might be the aim, although those who decry judicial activism would have some grounds to complain.

[Exhibitman]

All the angst is over nothing: even if e-tailers are required to collect sales tax on everything the net effect is ZERO. None of these purchases are tax-free under current law. If your state has a sales tax it has an analogous use tax you are supposed to pay for the stuff that you import for your use in-state without paying a sales tax. All the precedent allows for with interstate sales is for the retailers to devolve the duty to collect and remit the tax to the customers. Before the internet and e-filed taxes, it was a miserable chore to track sales in 50 jurisdictions (and the many special tax zones in each state) and do hard copy returns and remit. Now, with most of the states allowing for online remittance and filing, and with sophisticated accounting software that allows easy tracking of sales by jurisdiction, it is much easier for a retailer to remit in multiple states, and there is a movement afoot to re-involve the retailers in collecting and remitting sales tax instead of hoping that the buyers will track and remit. The only people hurt by this will be the scofflaws who don't pay their taxes now. Frankly, I would prefer it if I could just pay the tax on everything directly with the purchase and not have to try and track stuff and remit annually with my resale permit return. It is a real PITA and I am sure I make errors that would not be made if I just had to pay everything at the point of sale.

[Brian Van Horn]

Originally Posted by Exhibitman

All the angst is over nothing: even if e-tailers are required to collect sales tax on everything the net effect is ZERO. None of these purchases are tax-free under current law. If your state has a sales tax it has an analogous use tax you are supposed to pay for the stuff that you import for your use in-state without paying a sales tax. All the precedent allows for with interstate sales is for the retailers to devolve the duty to collect and remit the tax to the customers. Before the internet and e-filed taxes, it was a miserable chore to track sales in 50 jurisdictions (and the many special tax zones in each state) and do hard copy returns and remit. Now, with most of the states allowing for online remittance and filing, and with sophisticated accounting software that allows easy tracking of sales by jurisdiction, it is much easier for a retailer to remit in multiple states, and there is a movement afoot to re-involve the retailers in collecting and remitting sales tax instead of hoping that the buyers will track and remit. The only people hurt by this will be the scofflaws who don't pay their taxes now.

Adam,

Thank you. Still, even with the software, that is a mess in my opinion.

[Exhibitman]

Yeah it is a mess. All taxes are a mess. But the retailers already sit in the mess with their sales tax returns, so the infrastructure is already there. trying to get customers to track and remit use tax is a losing battle; it is just too hard to keep track of it all. I barely manage, and I have to file a sales tax return anyway.

[nolemmings]

I disagree. Whatever the effect is supposed to be under current law, it will cause chaos to put this onus on internet sellers--at least the small to medium ones. You will not be able to simply buy a $50 software package that neatly calculates all applicable sales taxes, which I assume would or could be not only state but county and/or municipal sales tax. As pointed out in oral argument, some goods sold may be subject to different tax or no tax depending upon their classification, which might be subject to interpretation. Jurisdictions can pass special tax laws at all different times, meaning the software would need to be able to track changes nearly on the fly. Sellers in theory could also be subject to audit and the jurisdiction of far away authorities who believe they are being shorted.

[tschock]

Originally Posted by nolemmings

I disagree. Whatever the effect is supposed to be under current law, it will cause chaos to put this onus on internet sellers--at least the small to medium ones. You will not be able to simply buy a $50 software package that neatly calculates all applicable sales taxes, which I assume would or could be not only state but county and/or municipal sales tax. As pointed out in oral argument, some goods sold may be subject to different tax or no tax depending upon their classification, which might be subject to interpretation. Jurisdictions can pass special tax laws at all different times, meaning the software would need to be able to track changes nearly on the fly. Sellers in theory could also be subject to audit and the jurisdiction of far away authorities who believe they are being shorted.

And the small retailers (say one in PA) really have no voice in state taxes imposed in other states (say one in OR), along with the morass you've brought up. That, of course, doesn't mean it won't be done.

"In Minnesota, blankets are taxable, but baby receiving blankets are not taxable. In Texas, deodorant is taxable, but deodorant that has an antiperspirant is not."

[tiger8mush]

Please forgive my ignorance, but when I buy $100 worth of baseball cards (lets say its from an auction house), I don't have to pay sales tax right? But when I sell it 10 years from now for $150, I have to pay capital gains taxes on the $50 profit? That sound about right or am I way off?

[ALR-bishop]

Oh oh Rob, are you a use tax scofflaw ? :-)

[tiger8mush]

Originally Posted by ALR-bishop

Oh oh Rob, are you a use tax scofflaw ? :-)

Its sounding like it!

[steve B]

Originally Posted by tschock

And the small retailers (say one in PA) really have no voice in state taxes imposed in other states (say one in OR), along with the morass you've brought up. That, of course, doesn't mean it won't be done.

"In Minnesota, blankets are taxable, but baby receiving blankets are not taxable. In Texas, deodorant is taxable, but deodorant that has an antiperspirant is not."

And for a while MASS had a once a year "Sales tax holiday" to encourage spending to help the economy.

So if I bought something online, would it be tax free if I ordered it on that day? Or would I have to order it earlier and hope for delivery on that day?

As I understand it, the transaction isn't complete until the item is delivered right?

[Leon]

Amazon and Ebay users charge tax on a lot of stuff. It seems every order from Amazon is taxed already. As Adam said it is already the law to report sales regardless of venue where bought.