Skip to main content

Grover Norquist speaks at CPAC 2011.
Grover Norquist
The Senate voted 74 to 20 Monday evening to move forward with the Marketplace Fairness Act, which would close the online sales tax loophole. It did so over the objections of an interesting array of opponents including Grover Norquist, Max Baucus and eBay.
“This bill is bad for business and bad for jobs,” said Senator Max Baucus, a Montana Democrat and chairman of the Senate Finance Committee, who said the measure wasn’t ready to debate yet. “It is full of unintended consequences.” [...]

In a letter to lawmakers, Norquist described the bill as a “massive expansion of tax authority.”

Baucus's "bad for business" objections come over the chorus of other senators supporting the bill because it is good for business; it all comes down to which businesses you're thinking about, I guess. And it's not like it only benefits small local businesses—Walmart will be happy about this bill, too, since it already collects sales tax everywhere.

Norquist's objection is especially cute, since the bill doesn't pass any new taxes. It just makes it more likely that taxes that are already supposed to be paid actually will be by making the retailers responsible for collecting them rather than telling consumers to, at the end of the year, add up all their untaxed online purchases and pay taxes on them. (Yeah, right.) But that's the kind of guy Grover Norquist is: He doesn't want to see existing taxes collected.

Since many Republicans in the House are right there on the same page with Norquist, the bill faces a tougher climb there. But enough major businesses support the bill that House Republicans are unlikely to completely disregard it.

Originally posted to Laura Clawson on Tue Apr 23, 2013 at 07:11 AM PDT.

Also republished by Daily Kos.

EMAIL TO A FRIEND X
Your Email has been sent.
You must add at least one tag to this diary before publishing it.

Add keywords that describe this diary. Separate multiple keywords with commas.
Tagging tips - Search For Tags - Browse For Tags

?

More Tagging tips:

A tag is a way to search for this diary. If someone is searching for "Barack Obama," is this a diary they'd be trying to find?

Use a person's full name, without any title. Senator Obama may become President Obama, and Michelle Obama might run for office.

If your diary covers an election or elected official, use election tags, which are generally the state abbreviation followed by the office. CA-01 is the first district House seat. CA-Sen covers both senate races. NY-GOV covers the New York governor's race.

Tags do not compound: that is, "education reform" is a completely different tag from "education". A tag like "reform" alone is probably not meaningful.

Consider if one or more of these tags fits your diary: Civil Rights, Community, Congress, Culture, Economy, Education, Elections, Energy, Environment, Health Care, International, Labor, Law, Media, Meta, National Security, Science, Transportation, or White House. If your diary is specific to a state, consider adding the state (California, Texas, etc). Keep in mind, though, that there are many wonderful and important diaries that don't fit in any of these tags. Don't worry if yours doesn't.

You can add a private note to this diary when hotlisting it:
Are you sure you want to remove this diary from your hotlist?
Are you sure you want to remove your recommendation? You can only recommend a diary once, so you will not be able to re-recommend it afterwards.
Rescue this diary, and add a note:
Are you sure you want to remove this diary from Rescue?
Choose where to republish this diary. The diary will be added to the queue for that group. Publish it from the queue to make it appear.

You must be a member of a group to use this feature.

Add a quick update to your diary without changing the diary itself:
Are you sure you want to remove this diary?
(The diary will be removed from the site and returned to your drafts for further editing.)
(The diary will be removed.)
Are you sure you want to save these changes to the published diary?

Comment Preferences

  •  This is not a tax increase (8+ / 0-)

    although the Rethugs may try to spin it as such.

    •  It's a HUGE Tax Hike on Wkg and Middle-Class (19+ / 0-)

      24B will be raised over one year.

      And I"d be willing to bet that 80% of that 24B will come from working and middle-class Americans.

      It's a Tax Hike which will exacerbate Income Inequality.

      Learn about Centrist Economics, learn about Robert Rubin's Hamilton Project. www.hamiltonproject.org

      by PatriciaVa on Tue Apr 23, 2013 at 08:51:17 AM PDT

      [ Parent ]

      •  Suggest you famialiarize yourself with tax law (7+ / 0-)

        currently in effect.  As stated above,

        It just makes it more likely that taxes that are already supposed to be paid actually will be

        My Karma just ran over your Dogma

        by FoundingFatherDAR on Tue Apr 23, 2013 at 10:12:30 AM PDT

        [ Parent ]

        •  Turbotax has never even asked me (5+ / 0-)
          Recommended by:
          eXtina, fumie, stevemb, Marjmar, peptabysmal

          to do this, and I go through every screen faithfully.

          rather than telling consumers to, at the end of the year, add up all their untaxed online purchases and pay taxes on them. (Yeah, right.)
          A LOT of what I buy, I buy online, and basically I pay no attention to the tax or lack thereof.   I wonder now what the totals might be.    

          However we know that all sales taxes are regressive, right?

          "The extinction of the human race will come from its inability to EMOTIONALLY comprehend the exponential function." -- Edward Teller

          by lgmcp on Tue Apr 23, 2013 at 10:40:29 AM PDT

          [ Parent ]

          •  Your last comment (6+ / 0-)

            represents my only real objection.

            Yes, this helps (e.g.) the local bookstore compete against Amazon; and yes, it eases the continued strangulation of state budgets.  But it does so by means of a regressive tax.

            Dogs from the street can have all the desirable qualities that one could want from pet dogs. Most adopted stray dogs are usually humble and exceptionally faithful to their owners as if they are grateful for this kindness. -- H.M. Bhumibol Adulyadej

            by corvo on Tue Apr 23, 2013 at 10:42:50 AM PDT

            [ Parent ]

            •  Yeah, but a vast majority of those local (1+ / 0-)
              Recommended by:
              akmk

              businesses are looong gone already. This is a revenue bill.

              "Lone catch of the moon, the roots of the sigh of an idea there will be the outcome may be why?"--from a spam diary entitled "The Vast World."

              by bryduck on Tue Apr 23, 2013 at 12:31:59 PM PDT

              [ Parent ]

              •  It might help some of the few (2+ / 0-)
                Recommended by:
                bryduck, Dodgerdog1

                remaining ones.  I'm thinking specifically of the Tattered Cover in Denver, for instance.

                And I'm not arguing the revenue point.  My state requires a public referendum for any tax increase, so we don't see many of these.  Guess what's happened to state funding of infrastructure lo these past 20 years.

                Dogs from the street can have all the desirable qualities that one could want from pet dogs. Most adopted stray dogs are usually humble and exceptionally faithful to their owners as if they are grateful for this kindness. -- H.M. Bhumibol Adulyadej

                by corvo on Tue Apr 23, 2013 at 12:34:01 PM PDT

                [ Parent ]

                •  It might. (2+ / 0-)
                  Recommended by:
                  Nattiq, lgmcp

                  I'm not arguing against this bill, but its effects will be detrimental overall, I'm betting, because it will take money away from people who keep the economy moving, full stop. If I am paying my proper 10% sales tax, then I have 10% less money, regardless of whom I owe it to. Will it make me buy local? Of course not, because a whole lot of what I buy online is not available locally in the first place. it will just leave me less money after I buy.

                  "Lone catch of the moon, the roots of the sigh of an idea there will be the outcome may be why?"--from a spam diary entitled "The Vast World."

                  by bryduck on Tue Apr 23, 2013 at 12:48:20 PM PDT

                  [ Parent ]

                  •  That's all very true; however, (2+ / 0-)
                    Recommended by:
                    bryduck, lgmcp

                    the regressive nature of sales taxes is ultimately a matter that has to be solved at the state level.  (I'm also not denying the regressive nature of a lot of income taxes too.)

                    Yes, a lot of local merchants are gone, but there will still be cases where it will be possible and even desirable to buy something in person, and sometimes fiscally sensible to do so (no shipping charges, for instance).

                    Dogs from the street can have all the desirable qualities that one could want from pet dogs. Most adopted stray dogs are usually humble and exceptionally faithful to their owners as if they are grateful for this kindness. -- H.M. Bhumibol Adulyadej

                    by corvo on Tue Apr 23, 2013 at 12:55:42 PM PDT

                    [ Parent ]

                    •  Absolutely. As I said, I'm (0+ / 0-)

                      not opposed to the law, since it merely tries to enhance enforcement of an existing law. I'm just pointing out the unlikelihood of it helping local biz. After the decades-long twin onlaughts of Wal-Mart and Amazon, how many small retail businesses are still around in the vast majority of the country? And favoring Wal-Mart over Amazon is hardly what one could call a good thing, imho.
                      Meh. Again, it's simply another way of taking my money away. We'll see if the states do anything positive with their new revenue stream. I doubt any of the red states will, because that's how they roll in the first place.

                      "Lone catch of the moon, the roots of the sigh of an idea there will be the outcome may be why?"--from a spam diary entitled "The Vast World."

                      by bryduck on Tue Apr 23, 2013 at 12:59:40 PM PDT

                      [ Parent ]

                      •  Meager as it might be to buy something (0+ / 0-)

                        from Wal-Mart (which I don't do on principle anyway), it at least means a pittance is being paid to someone local.  You can't even say that about Amazon, not in most areas of the country at least.

                        Dogs from the street can have all the desirable qualities that one could want from pet dogs. Most adopted stray dogs are usually humble and exceptionally faithful to their owners as if they are grateful for this kindness. -- H.M. Bhumibol Adulyadej

                        by corvo on Tue Apr 23, 2013 at 01:01:02 PM PDT

                        [ Parent ]

                        •  Yes, but with Amazon I had that 10% more (1+ / 0-)
                          Recommended by:
                          lgmcp

                          to spend elsewhere, which will now go to my state. Will that redound to my benefit? It might (I'm in California, after all), but certainly not directly, and maybe not at all.

                          "Lone catch of the moon, the roots of the sigh of an idea there will be the outcome may be why?"--from a spam diary entitled "The Vast World."

                          by bryduck on Tue Apr 23, 2013 at 01:06:02 PM PDT

                          [ Parent ]

                          •  Maybe, maybe not. (0+ / 0-)

                            As long as it doesn't go to the Federal War Machinery, I can deal.  As for the particulars, well, electorates make their decisions, and the possibility of effecting positive change at the state level isn't as meager as it is on the federal level.

                            Dogs from the street can have all the desirable qualities that one could want from pet dogs. Most adopted stray dogs are usually humble and exceptionally faithful to their owners as if they are grateful for this kindness. -- H.M. Bhumibol Adulyadej

                            by corvo on Tue Apr 23, 2013 at 01:09:57 PM PDT

                            [ Parent ]

                          •  Ahh, but that depends on what (0+ / 0-)

                            you are trying to do and what state you're in. (Think of how ending slavery, the Civil Rights Act, and the Voting Rights Act were effected, for example . . .)
                            I'm ok with California getting more money--I just wish it were done more progressively--but do I want Idaho or Utah to get more money? What blood red legislation and/or enforcement will they be paying for with this potential windfall? Do we want Joe Arpaio (I know, not a state-paid employee, but state money will flow downward to all kinds of people and agencies) to have more money?

                            "Lone catch of the moon, the roots of the sigh of an idea there will be the outcome may be why?"--from a spam diary entitled "The Vast World."

                            by bryduck on Tue Apr 23, 2013 at 01:25:14 PM PDT

                            [ Parent ]

          •  I use TurboTax and I remember seeing this (10+ / 0-)

            asked for (although a bit obscurely).  It's one line on a screen that lists multiple possibilities for additional taxes you may owe but only lists one "yes" or "no" answer at the bottom of the page.  So, yes, TurboTax does ask.

            I've used TurboTax for many years (I think I first used it in 1998) and that question has been there for several years.

            To stand in silence when they should be protesting makes cowards out of men. -Abraham Lincoln

            by Eyesbright on Tue Apr 23, 2013 at 10:47:21 AM PDT

            [ Parent ]

          •  Turbotax asks about it. (6+ / 0-)

            Also, from their website:

            http://turbotax.intuit.com/...

            Sales use tax considerations
            States that impose sales taxes generally impose an equivalent amount of use tax for out-of-state purchases on which no sales tax has been collected. Accordingly, purchasing goods from a neighboring state or on-line where no sales tax has been collected subjects you to use tax in your state of residence. Most states require you to self-report your out-of-state purchases and remit the calculated amount of use tax, and many states are getting extremely aggressive in pursuing this source of revenue.

            In the unlikely story that is America, there has never been anything false about hope.

            by Cixelsyd on Tue Apr 23, 2013 at 10:54:33 AM PDT

            [ Parent ]

          •  Turbo Tax asks you… (2+ / 0-)
            Recommended by:
            lgmcp, mmacdDE

            …if you live in a state that requires it to ask.

            Union-printed, USA-made, signs, stickers, swag for everyone: DemSign.com.

            by DemSign on Tue Apr 23, 2013 at 11:48:03 AM PDT

            [ Parent ]

          •  Turbo Tax always asks (2+ / 0-)
            Recommended by:
            lgmcp, charliehall2

            when your state requires it.  I'm in Louisiana, and the state income tax form has a line for it, and Turbo Tax always asks.  I think it's the same in some other states as well.  

      •  I agree and it is going to be bad for business (3+ / 0-)
        Recommended by:
        stevemb, musiccitymollie, Nattiq

        because what is spent on taxes can't be spent elsewhere.

        Folks will just be forced to still choose--food or medicine or shoes????

      •  No it's not. (6+ / 0-)

        It's only insuring that you pay the sales taxes you should have been paying all along.

        Shop Liberally this holiday season at Kos Katalog

        by JamieG from Md on Tue Apr 23, 2013 at 11:04:06 AM PDT

        [ Parent ]

        •  Yes, and that translates into better (2+ / 0-)
          Recommended by:
          JamieG from Md, charliehall2

          roads and bridges, more mass transit, money for parks, playgrounds, etc.  I buy a product online that is produced in my state (Colorful Images), and they only make me calculate state tax. I do not pay any other local tax on this purchase.

          I am happy to pay taxes. I know the benefits are worth it.  I also don't think municipalities should be giving incentives to big business to locate in their town by waiving their taxes and fees, which is what WalMart is always trying to do.  That, in my opinion, is what hurts the little guy. Those taxes have to be paid by somebody!

          “You can say any fool thing to a dog and the dog will just give you this look that says, 'My GOSH, you're RIGHT! I NEVER would've thought of that!” ― Dave Barry

          by Merry Light on Tue Apr 23, 2013 at 11:49:02 AM PDT

          [ Parent ]

      •  No... (1+ / 0-)
        Recommended by:
        charliehall2

        It's probably more accurate to say that the adoption of e-commerce has lead to an unintended tax cut on consumers. This law would eliminate that "break" that they shouldn't be getting.

      •  Thank you, thank you, thank you, Patricia VA. (5+ / 0-)

        This is incredible.

        'The wealthy' on average had measly 6/10's of One Percent tax hike levied on them as a result of this Administrations' so-called negotiations, and Democratic Senator Mark Warner's Amendment No. 693 to repeal or reduce inheritance taxes passed by a huge margin.

        Yet, in spite of this, 'progressives' are clamoring for a sales tax hike!  

        This is beyond surreal, LOL!

        Here's the reality of where we're going, below.

        And here's what I found regarding Warner Amendment No. 693.

        [Page: D266]  GPO's PDF

        By 80 yeas to 19 nays (Vote No. 66), Murray (for Warner) Amendment No. 693, to repeal or reduce the estate tax, but only if done in a fiscally responsible way.

        Pages S2284, S2285-86

        I'm in a state where the tax isn't excluded on much of anything (RX, I believe--BUT NOT FOR YOUR PETS, BY GEORGE!) and is among the highest in the nation--9.75 percent!

        Half the folks I know shop in a couple of neighboring states because of this exorbitant sales tax.

        The ability to do this could very well 'spur on' the raising of taxes for state revenue, in lieu of state income taxes.

        That's the reason that our REGRESSIVE sales tax is so high--the PtB refuse to implement an income tax, which usually is at least a bit progressive.  No, no, no--can't ask 'the wealthy' to pay, can we?

        I'm going to continue to call my Senators and my Rep (all Republican) and lobby them to oppose this legislation.

        Since both Repubs are of the same mindset of this Administration (corporatists--both of my Senators work with the so-called corporatist, or 'centrist' Gangs), they will probably go along with it.  

        My Rep--not sure.  Couldn't get a commitment one way or the other, way from her office.

        But I'll get calling.  BTW. here are the numbers for anyone else who's incensed by this.

        Here's the White House Comment Line (live and recording):  

        1-202-456-1111

        Here's two Capitol Hill phone numbers (for Speaker Boehner, our Senators and US House Representatives):

        1-866-220-0044
        1-202-224-3121

        [These are current numbers.]

        And this is now a major 'progressive' goal?

        I hope that folks who are supporting this piece of legislation remember this if and when they 'take a haircut' as a result of the federal 'tax overhaul' that the Administration is overseeing now.

        The notion that the so-called 'loopholes' that will be closed will be those used by the corporations and 'the wealthy' is laughable.  

        Oh, they may throw the base a bone, and include a couple of loopholes that target corporations or 'the wealthy,' but watch my word--mostly the 'loopholes' will impact the broader masses--especially lower and middle income folks.

        The [from a previous diary] the statement that . . .

        'The idea is based on the belief that poor people are the least likely to buy online, so they are paying an even more disproportionate tax burden than if the internet sales tax was closed.'
        I say to the CBPP--that is just patently ridiculous.  

        When "progressive' means taking away benefits from low- and middle-income people in order to 'even the playing field' with desperately low-income, or poor people--GAME OVER!  [for the Democratic Party]

        What should be happening is that federal and state income taxes should be raised SUBSTANTIALLY on 'the wealthy' who have enjoyed the benefits of soaring incomes or capital over the past 30 years!

        And instead of Democratic Senator Mark Warner leading the charge to eliminate estate tax (or greatly lowering it), the federal estate tax should also should be raised SUBSTANTIALLY.

        However, IMHO, if folks wonder what's happened to the Democratic Party.  I'd say that this incident is a PERFECT example of what's wrong with it.

        The above notion, put forth by the supposedly left-leaning Center on Budget and Policy Priorities (CBPP)--which I believe ALSO CAME DOWN IN FAVOR OF THE CHAINED CPI, IF with exceptions for the old and the poor, and as part of a 'Grand Bargain' or deficit cutting deal-is exactly why the Democratic Party has veered SO FAR TO THE RIGHT!

        This is from their website, and is parroting the Administration, for Pete's Sake!

        Yikes!

        P.S.  Per Bowles-Simpson's The Moment Of Truth, it is apparent that the main 'loopholes' that lawmakers are going to close are those that mainly are paid by low and middle income folks.  [Although I don't remember if the sales tax loophole was mentioned.  

        Many tax loophole 'closures' proposed are aimed primarily at working class and middle income folks, though.  Like taxing group health insurance premiums, for instance.

        Please folks, read the entire proposal.  It's only 66 pages in PLAIN ENGLISH.  Very enlightening, and spells out the 'austerity measures' that are going to be implemented, if we don't stand up and fight against it!

        Section II, Tax Reform, begins on Page 29.

        Section V, Social Security, begins on Page 48.

        And be sure and bring your cryin' towel with you.

        When you see they deep cuts they have in mind for Social Security (when all are enacted--the least deep of which is the Chained CPI), and how they intend to raise taxes ON YOU, maybe it will become more clear why I so strongly oppose THIS regressive tax increase.  [I am referring to the cuts proposed by the President's own Fiscal Commission, in The Moment Of Truth].

        I fear that this is 'just the tip of the iceberg!'

        I've been linking to the Tax Reform Section of their proposals for months, trying to make this point.

        Now, the point has been made for me.
         

        Expect to see a federal 'tax overhaul' with MANY MORE tax loopholes that affect the average guy, being the ones that will be closed, or eliminated.

        And this is exactly why the Republican Party will gladly go along with this Adminstration's proposed 'Grand Bargin.'

        I am convinced from what I read that the bulk of the loopholes that they will negotiate 'closing,' will be those that pertain to the masses--the 'average Joe.'

        IOW, you and me.  

        We must be vigilant, and read and look beyond the Democratic or Republican talking points!

        [Apologize in advance for redundancy and typos.  In a bit of a push for time!]

        Mollie

        "Only he who can see the invisible, can do the impossible."-- Frank L. Gaines


        hiddennplainsight

        by musiccitymollie on Tue Apr 23, 2013 at 12:12:33 PM PDT

        [ Parent ]

        •  I'm one of those pathetically poor folk who (4+ / 0-)

          continued on-line shopping after Amazon started collecting taxes.  It saves me gas and time on freeways.  I have a computer, Internet access, a debit card, and a really old car.  It's a no-brainer for most of us.  I'm not willing to be outraged that I have to pay what my friends pay at the Mall.  Add a new Internet only tax and I'm all outrage central.

          I'm not looking for a love that will lift me up and carry me away. A love that will stroll alongside and make a few amusing comments will suffice.

          by I love OCD on Tue Apr 23, 2013 at 12:21:04 PM PDT

          [ Parent ]

          •  Hey, I love OCD--go for it, then. As I explained (2+ / 0-)
            Recommended by:
            lostinamerica, PatriciaVa

            [at length], the tax overhaul will make some of us take a real 'haircut,'--including Mr. M and I.  

            Our tax bill will be tremendous next year, if we lose the tax expenditures that we have due to employment, etc.

            Therefore, I am flat-out against a hike in sales tax rates--for anyone, regardless of 'brick and mortar' taxation policy.

            If it's any consolation to you, I fully expect that this bill (and all very regressive tax bills, and/or bills that cut social insurance benefits) will easily pass under this Administration.  

            I hope that you'll be happy with the results, when all is said and done.  ;-)

            Mollie

            "Only he who can see the invisible, can do the impossible."-- Frank L. Gaines


            hiddennplainsight

            by musiccitymollie on Tue Apr 23, 2013 at 12:35:54 PM PDT

            [ Parent ]

            •  im really happy with Obama so far, (1+ / 0-)
              Recommended by:
              musiccitymollie

              and expect to feel even better in 2014, once the serious activists work a mid-term.  What I'm happiest about is that the Republicans are losing the narrative, their lies are out in the open, and we're having national attention paid to things like income inequality, the obscene cost of healthcare, the high price of warfare, how important effective government is if you want quality of life, and how inefficient the private sector is at almost everything of value.  

              I actually care more that we start fighting for what we want in this country than I care about whining that it's not being spoon-fed to us, on our terms, or else!

              I'm not looking for a love that will lift me up and carry me away. A love that will stroll alongside and make a few amusing comments will suffice.

              by I love OCD on Tue Apr 23, 2013 at 06:12:18 PM PDT

              [ Parent ]

              •  Well, since I'm a liberal, I can't (0+ / 0-)

                share your enthusiasm.  

                The truth is, I am deeply concerned what the rest of this term may bring, especially in regard to the cuts to both Social Security and Medicare that the Administration proposed in the 2013 Budget.

                My midterm activism will consist of working on campaigns to 'primary' some of the most offensive of the corporatist Dems.  

                I especially hope to see the Democratic Leadership targeted, IF they push through a 'Grand Bargain' that includes cuts to the social safety net.

                BTW, it appears that what you consider 'whining,' I consider 'advocacy.'  [Maybe you missed the WH and Capitol Hill phone numbers that I posted in several of the diaries on this topic.]  ;-)

                Mollie

                "Only he who can see the invisible, can do the impossible."-- Frank L. Gaines


                hiddennplainsight

                by musiccitymollie on Tue Apr 23, 2013 at 07:26:39 PM PDT

                [ Parent ]

                •  I guess I can't be a liberal if I (0+ / 0-)

                  have my own opinions and my own outlook on politics.  Isnt it interesting that we mock the Republicans for embracing the intolerant Tea Party while displaying the same intolerance toward our own fellows if they dare to think differently.  The Big Tent must be shrunk in order to keep it pure?  That worked so well for the other guys!

                  I'm not looking for a love that will lift me up and carry me away. A love that will stroll alongside and make a few amusing comments will suffice.

                  by I love OCD on Tue Apr 23, 2013 at 08:16:38 PM PDT

                  [ Parent ]

                  •  Excuse me, my intention was not to 'label' you, (0+ / 0-)

                    one way or the other.  Only to explain that I don't share your enthusiasm, and why.

                    Since our definitions of liberal may differ, maybe that was not the best 'term' to use to try and clarify my political ideological views.

                    Personally, I've never 'mocked' the Tea Party.  So please don't include me in that statement.

                    Actually, I admire that they stand up for their beliefs.  I've often said here, that though some of them may 'be a bit in left field,' at least they aren't 'door mats.'

                    And to some extent, I believe many progressive or liberal activists (including myself) might be well-served to take a lesson from that.  Otherwise, I find very little to admire about them.

                    I am sorry that I seem to have upset you.  My conversation was meant to be geared toward policy.  It was not meant to disparage you, or anyone else, because you do not share my assessment of the Administration's policies.

                    As for the "Big Tent" philosophy, I question whether we would have the push by this Administration to cut social insurance programs, if the Democratic Party had chosen to exercise a bit more 'purity.'

                    The take over of the Party by conservative business (or corporatist) Dems, and so many Blue Dog conservatives (although thankfully we've shed a few of them recently, LOL!) has rendered the Party almost unrecognizable, IMO.

                    It's my sincere hope that I can help turn that trend around. ;-)

                    I'm not offended, but I am puzzled that advocating for strongly and sincerely held convictions is considered to be intolerant.

                    I say that because I'll either have to 'sit out' the 2014 midterms, or work actively to better the Party [that's a subjective measure, of course].  

                    At this time, I expect to do the latter.

                    Mollie

                    "Only he who can see the invisible, can do the impossible."-- Frank L. Gaines


                    hiddennplainsight

                    by musiccitymollie on Tue Apr 23, 2013 at 09:38:06 PM PDT

                    [ Parent ]

      •  Online sellers will see only sale price change... (0+ / 0-)

        ... (maybe) all other stuff such as manpower etc. is same. Ground based sellers will have to decide if they want to compete with online price, service, or other conditions of (normal) business practice. Because ground based business' are already paying taxes they may see an opportunity to increase sales and/or market share and meet or beat online sellers price or other options such as extended warranty, buy # get add one free or 1/2 price...yadda, yadda.  Usually the customer is the winner.  just saying

        Our nations quality of life is based on the rightousness of its people.

        by kalihikane on Tue Apr 23, 2013 at 12:13:44 PM PDT

        [ Parent ]

    •  No, it's an utter PITA for small businesses (4+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      lissablack, stevemb, akmk, VClib

      I have a small business. I do my own bookkeeping and accounting. I sell a LOT to out-of-state customers. Right now I pay sales taxes to my home state of Texas. However paying taxes to other states is going to be an extreme pain as now I'll have to learn which states charge what, reprogram my homemade order database, and pay 27 or 51 or 9,000 separate taxing authorities. Paying 1 takes me about 5 minutes. Paying 27 would take me about 6 hours. Paying more would put me out of business as I simply couldn't do it. I want to design and make signs, I don't want to spend a significant chunk of time on tax compliance.

      Union-printed, USA-made, signs, stickers, swag for everyone: DemSign.com.

      by DemSign on Tue Apr 23, 2013 at 11:43:39 AM PDT

      [ Parent ]

      •  This is my concern (0+ / 0-)

        There should be an exemption for businesses under a certain gross income level, and maybe it should be a reasonable level.  Certainly it will put lots of hobby businesses out of business.  I quit selling the salve I make because the paperwork was too onerous for me, and I didn't even have to do this then.  I didn't need the money though.  This will kill people who need the money.  

        On the other hand, I would be more than happy to pay the sales tax to Amazon and other big established businesses.  And Ebay could certainly figure out how to do it for their sellers.  Maybe Paypal could too actually, that could help a lot.  

        It's pretty impossible to figure out what you should have paid for online purchases and send it in yourself.  In NM you are supposed to do that.

        It should go along with killing tax breaks for oil companies and everyone else rich though.  Farm subsidies.  Et al.  It sure is regressive by itself.

      •  You have over a million in sales? (0+ / 0-)

        Pretty big small business.

        If you don't, this doesn't even affect you.

    •  sure it is. (0+ / 0-)

      If you buy $200 worth of things on line and pay $0 tax this year but next year you pay $12 of tax.  That's an increase in the taxes you are paying.  Yeah we all know you should be paying that this year, but you're not.

    •  I can't believe the comments here (1+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      mmacdDE

      We complain about state and local government budget cuts, but don't want to see to it that they get the money they are rightfully owed?

      And we encourage illegal tax evasion???

  •  Ugh. As a Liberal I'm Comitted to Paying for the (24+ / 0-)

    government I need, but being a very small time artisan selling in all 50 states and globally, the burden of tracking and paying 50 different sales taxes at least twice a year would be much harder on me than the money lost.

    The best thing for me by far would be to make all the tax go to my home state. And that makes sense because all the biggest burdens and risks I impose on society by operating a business are in my community and state. They're the ones providing the infrastructure I use for travel acquiring supplies and to the Post Office for shipping; fire and theft protection, utilities for my shop and such.

    I have to compute instate sales anyway; it's no more effort, just a higher payment, if I compute it on all my domestic sales.

    Next best would be some kind of federally operated fund I would pay into which in turn would cut it up into 50 or 49 pieces in some equitable fashion.

    We are called to speak for the weak, for the voiceless, for victims of our nation and for those it calls enemy.... --ML King "Beyond Vietnam"

    by Gooserock on Tue Apr 23, 2013 at 07:31:36 AM PDT

    •  The bill does exempt small businesses (17+ / 0-)

      with sales less than $1 million.

      But overall, I'm not sure what to think of the bill. You make a compelling case that perhaps they could go about this differently.

      •  if someone should be exempted than everyone (1+ / 0-)
        Recommended by:
        lostinamerica

        should be

        "I'm sculpting now. Landscapes mostly." ~ Yogi Bear

        by eXtina on Tue Apr 23, 2013 at 10:44:36 AM PDT

        [ Parent ]

      •  So, Joe the Plumber (2+ / 0-)
        Recommended by:
        drmah, akmk

        Is going to stop selling drain traps online when he gets to $999,999.99 in sales?

        This is what I predict:
        Scumbag $50k per year eBay vendors will "claim" they're operating million dollar businesses and collect an extra 6-8% from every buyer, and then NOT pay quarterly taxes on that free extra income.

        That $50k business just became a $53k business.

        They already know people aren't paying taxes on their internet purchases, what makes them think small Internet businesses are going to pay the taxes they collect?

        We've been spelling it wrong all these years. It's actually: PRO-GOP-ANDA

        by Patriot4peace on Tue Apr 23, 2013 at 10:54:16 AM PDT

        [ Parent ]

        •  tax fraud (1+ / 0-)
          Recommended by:
          kefauver

          and that $53K businessman just opened himself up to arrest, hefty fines, and likely some prison time.

          there are consequences to breaking these laws, you know?

          •  It's not tax fraud (1+ / 0-)
            Recommended by:
            progressivevoice

            if you're operating a $50k business and not paying sales tax on out of state sales.  Selling more than a million ONLINE is the threshold.

            How do you know in January 2013 whether or not you're going to be invoicing a million dollars or more over the coming year?

            If you only invoice $999k do you have to return all those collected taxes, or is it just going to be added to your bottom line?

            How many people are in a position, when they get their Paypal invoice, to ascertain whether or not their trading partner is collecting tax in accordance with this new law, or is simply taking advantage?

            I'm not writing a how to manual here, I'm predicting that some people are going to collect taxes from buyers, and simply add that extra 7% to their bottom line.

            We've been spelling it wrong all these years. It's actually: PRO-GOP-ANDA

            by Patriot4peace on Tue Apr 23, 2013 at 11:34:25 AM PDT

            [ Parent ]

        •  Credit Card companies (2+ / 0-)
          Recommended by:
          Patriot4peace, DSPS owl

          should become the vehicle for collecting and paying sales taxes to the states. Most if not all transactions via internet are processed using credit cards. Every merchant depends on the Credit card company to collect the payment and remit to the vendor. Just another step for them to take but would remove the burden from the vendor.

      •  So how does that work with ebay? (1+ / 0-)
        Recommended by:
        kefauver

        On Ebay, there are a lot of independent sellers.  I know that if I sell something on ebay to someone who lives in my state, sales tax is automatically added which makes me believe that it would be up to the individual seller.  As a seller who sells far less than 1 million in merchandise, it seems that nothing would change.  Does anyone know how that would work?

        “It is the job of the artist to think outside the boundaries of permissible thought and dare say things that no one else will say."—Howard Zinn

        by musiclady on Tue Apr 23, 2013 at 11:00:43 AM PDT

        [ Parent ]

        •  The way I've seen it... (1+ / 0-)
          Recommended by:
          Calamity Jean

          ...is if you buy from someone who is a commercial seller, say, Toys R Us, and they have a presence in your state, they collect the tax when you pay. If you buy from a non-commercial seller, no sales tax is usually collected. Same thing if you buy from a commercial seller who does not have a presence in your state. Presence meaning they have either one or more stores, and/or a distribution warehouse.

          How it would work if they intend to collect taxes on your purchases out-of-state, I don't know. Do they collect sales tax in the seller's state? The buyer's state? Both?

          BTW, I got an email this morning from eBay about this, and contacting the government to quash it. I deleted it.

          Taxes or no, I've pissed away too much money via eBay already. They can do their own damned lobbying.

          Float like a manhole cover, sting like a sash weight! Clean Coal Is A Clinker!

          by JeffW on Tue Apr 23, 2013 at 11:14:28 AM PDT

          [ Parent ]

          •  As an ebay seller (1+ / 0-)
            Recommended by:
            JeffW

            in Maryland, only buyers in Maryland who purchase from me pay Maryland sales tax.  I'm assuming this wouldn't change as I am not a commercial seller.  My preferences are set up to automatically charge sales tax on purchases made by buyers in Maryland.

            I don't sell a lot--typically clothing, some collectibles and used sporting equipment that my kids had.

            “It is the job of the artist to think outside the boundaries of permissible thought and dare say things that no one else will say."—Howard Zinn

            by musiclady on Tue Apr 23, 2013 at 12:34:33 PM PDT

            [ Parent ]

      •  Exemption (5+ / 0-)
        Recommended by:
        mungley, marleycat, wadingo, tardis10, jj32

        It's for small business that do a million in  on-line sales. The States have to provide the collection software free of charge, so at this point (though changing in the legislatures) 27 States have simplified their definitions, coverage, and collection- so there is only one address per state to remit to. Every small business has the Zip plus 4 software- since they ship everywhere- this will automatically add on the sales tax for that jurisdiction.  And it should not  go to the sellers home state-  the seller is not paying the tax- the consumer is. So it goes to that home jurisdiction.   This was supported by the NGA, the Conference of Mayors, League of Cities, NACO, NCSL, labor, and the Retail Federation and Shopping Centers.

      •  I note that the exemption is for businesses (1+ / 0-)
        Recommended by:
        jj32

        doing less than than $1 million in off-site sales. It doesn't count your on-site, i.e. in-state, sales.

        A society grows great when old men plant trees in whose shade they know they shall never sit. - Greek proverb

        by marleycat on Tue Apr 23, 2013 at 11:14:41 AM PDT

        [ Parent ]

    •  I am in a similar but not (1+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      lgmcp

      identical position to you and I really do not know what I think about this yet. Personally I like the home state solution.

      I think that I am too small to be affected much by this but it all depends upon what those further up the food chain do.

    •  Can't even do that (2+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      eXtina, stevemb

      if you're dealing with a state that has different rates depending on county, city, etc.

      Dogs from the street can have all the desirable qualities that one could want from pet dogs. Most adopted stray dogs are usually humble and exceptionally faithful to their owners as if they are grateful for this kindness. -- H.M. Bhumibol Adulyadej

      by corvo on Tue Apr 23, 2013 at 10:43:30 AM PDT

      [ Parent ]

    •  Fifty? More Like Five Thousand (0+ / 0-)

      You know that counties and cities often have their own sales taxes, right?

      On the Internet, nobody knows if you're a dog... but everybody knows if you're a jackass.

      by stevemb on Tue Apr 23, 2013 at 11:09:49 AM PDT

      [ Parent ]

    •  Googling And See That Large Online Retailers (0+ / 0-)

      have software that calculates sales tax by state. I am guessing the programming battle is on in the marketplace to have something like this for small businesses.

  •  the smart plan to oppose this (9+ / 0-)

    is to kill it in the States.

    the law makes clear that no state has to impose this until they have to have a single tax agency, a single tax return, and a single audit.

    And re-writing core tax law and revenue collection administration is oh so simple in most states, so this should be a snap, right?

    The key opponent to this won't be on-line retailers.  It only affects business with over $1M in revenue, and Amazon is already on-board.

    The opposition will be the financial sector.  If you can tax inter-state product purchases today then you can tax interstate financial transactions tomorrow.

    Красота спасет мир --F. Dostoevsky

    by Wisper on Tue Apr 23, 2013 at 07:35:40 AM PDT

    •  The states will like this (5+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      nextstep, Catte Nappe, stevemb, kefauver, VClib

      remember, Red States generally like sales taxes over other things like income taxes.  This is more money for the states without the states doing anything other than simplifying tax collections.  

      •  Many will (0+ / 0-)

        but the better way to kill this is not in DC, its to bog it down state by state.  Usually the right-wing groups are the first ones to jump on that approach anyway...

        This is voluntary anyway.  All it does is allow the States to collect this; it does not compel it.

        Красота спасет мир --F. Dostoevsky

        by Wisper on Tue Apr 23, 2013 at 08:23:17 AM PDT

        [ Parent ]

      •  Alaska doesn't have a state sales tax, but local (1+ / 0-)
        Recommended by:
        We Won

        taxes are high.

        AK might decide to implement a state sales tax if this turns out to be lucrative.

        Extracting money from the consumers means big corporations still get their tax loopholes.

      •  The Red States Will Really Like This (2+ / 0-)
        Recommended by:
        kefauver, We Won

        It's an extra incentive/excuse for shifting away from progressive income taxes toward regressive sales taxes.

        On the Internet, nobody knows if you're a dog... but everybody knows if you're a jackass.

        by stevemb on Tue Apr 23, 2013 at 11:13:36 AM PDT

        [ Parent ]

    •  It's an Amazon Protection Act. (4+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      PatriciaVa, Patriot4peace, stevemb, We Won

      Now that Amazon is firmly entrenched as the world's leading online retailer, this law is just a barrier to entry for any possible competitor who might want to compete with any chunk of Amazon's business.
         The problem for the little guy is not the loss of sales due to state taxes, but the expense of collecting taxes at different rates for 50 separate states.

      •  How little? (5+ / 0-)

        Anyone under $1M in revenue is exempted.

        ...and the only way a new company can launch is to be excused from collecting tax?  No brick and mortar entrepreneur has that advantage.  

        If the argument is that Amazon is better able to do this because they are bigger, well that argument can be used against any industry, on or off-line, at any time in any part of the country.

        What can POSSIBLY be the argument for being excused from tax collection as a protection of small business?

        Красота спасет мир --F. Dostoevsky

        by Wisper on Tue Apr 23, 2013 at 09:06:39 AM PDT

        [ Parent ]

      •  Wrong - Amazon is against this law (0+ / 0-)

        In fact when California tried to make a similar law Amazon, the online monster, tried to fund an initiative to fight the law.

        Small local businesses, and brick and mortar businesses, are hurt by the break given to the online monsters through the lower prices created by this artificial tax break.

        Folks will go into a real store, look at the merchandise, then buy it online because they don't have to pay a sales tax.

        Online giants need to be trimmed. Amazon treats it's workers like crap. It pays in nothing to the states and localities where they sell product. That's bad for everybody but Amazon and the online giants.

        •  Why Amazon Supports An Online Sales-Tax Bill (1+ / 0-)
          Recommended by:
          stevemb
          •  Read the article (0+ / 0-)

            Amazon supports the law because they have no choice.

            That's what happened in California - they gave up.

            Even before the law is passed it's having the desired effect on Amazon -

            The company agreed to start paying sales tax in more states — and it started building huge warehouses near major metropolitan areas in those states.
            That's exactly what the law is intended to do. Amazon now has to employ people in the locations it sells to. It now has to compete locally.

            Planet money, the right wing NPR program, tries to put a positive spin on the situation by claiming that Amazon will win in the future. Nice try.

    •  You obviously don't understand current (1+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      Eyesbright

      tax law.  

      And re-writing core tax law and revenue collection administration is oh so simple in most states, so this should be a snap, right?

       It's not changing core tax law.  As stated above,
      It just makes it more likely that taxes that are already supposed to be paid actually will be
       

      My Karma just ran over your Dogma

      by FoundingFatherDAR on Tue Apr 23, 2013 at 10:20:28 AM PDT

      [ Parent ]

      •  You obviously don't understand the bill (4+ / 0-)

        The states have to opt into this and would only take part when they can distill this down to a single agency (so interstate companies are not forced to disperse payments to counties and municipalities), they have to have a single form for filing and a consolidated audit process.

        If the States can't meet those requirements, companies are allowed to withhold the tax payments with the defense (hard written into the bill) that the process is too cumbersome.

        So yes, states will have to change their internal tax processed in order to opt into this.

        What else don't I obviously understand?

        Красота спасет мир --F. Dostoevsky

        by Wisper on Tue Apr 23, 2013 at 10:35:04 AM PDT

        [ Parent ]

    •  The bill piggybacks on the (0+ / 0-)

      Streamlined Sales and Use Tax Agreement ("SSUTA").  Currently, 22 states are SSUTA states, and possibly a few more would qualify under the bill.

      "Well, I'm sure I'd feel much worse if I weren't under such heavy sedation..."--David St. Hubbins

      by Old Left Good Left on Tue Apr 23, 2013 at 10:31:24 AM PDT

      [ Parent ]

    •  A tax on stocks and bonds. You must be joking. (0+ / 0-)
  •  Technically people are supposed to be paying (13+ / 0-)

    those sales taxes anyway.  Louisiana, in its income tax return form, has a line for how much you purchased from sources that did not collect the tax, and for you to pay the taxes then, with your income tax return.  Of course I'm probably one of the few people in the state who actually does that (I do because I'm a lawyer and I know what is legally required of me).  

    Remember, the purchaser always OWED the tax.  The law is just that, if a company did not have a physical presence in a state, that state could not enforce its laws, including its laws about collecting sales taxes, against that company.  So, if Amazon does not have a physical store in Louisiana, they were not subject to the state laws of Louisiana, and Louisiana could not make them collect the tax from me, although I am still obligated to pay it.  That's why some stores, like Wal-Mart, had to collect taxes from online sales --if they have a physical presence in that state (a store), they are subject to the laws of that state.

    But the vast, vast majority of people out there -- especially people for whom money is tight -- were not aware of the technicalities, did not pay the taxes if the seller didn't collect them, and WILL see this as a tax increase.  There's going to be somewhere close to a 10% increase, in some cases, for what people pay in online purchases.  For the really wealthy, that won't matter much.  And, frankly, if you are really rich, an accountant does your taxes and it's more likely that accountant, knowing the tax laws, had you pay the taxes anyway.  It's middle class, and working class people who didn't pay sales taxes on online purchases if the seller didn't collect them.  Most of them think that they don't pay taxes on internet purchases, so those purchases are cheaper, or that the "no sales taxes" offsets shipping, so they come out even. They definitely will see this as a tax increase on all those internet purchases.

    I can certainly see the fairness argument -- the notion that a seller like Amazon had a competitive advantage over a seller that was both physical stores and online sales.  And, frankly, all of those middle and working class people who made online purchases from companies like Amazon, but who didn't report those and pay the taxes themselves, really are "tax cheats" (yes, I know it's harsh, but it's technically accurate) because they are not paying a tax that they legally owe.    

    But I'm not so sure how the politics of this will play out with the middle and working class families who will see this as a big tax increase on them.  

    •  Ha! So that's one person. (1+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      Inspector Javert
      Of course I'm probably one of the few people in the state who actually does that (I do because I'm a lawyer and I know what is legally required of me).  
      You're the only person I know who does.  I'd say 95% of people aren't even aware of the issue.

      I suppose I might... but I don't do my own taxes, and frankly, I've never asked.

    •  I'm Sure How The Politics Will Play Out (2+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      bryduck, musiccitymollie

      "Those tax-and-spend Democrats are trying to squeeze you dry! Vote Republican!"

      Doesn't anybody on our side of the aisle know how to play this game??

      On the Internet, nobody knows if you're a dog... but everybody knows if you're a jackass.

      by stevemb on Tue Apr 23, 2013 at 11:15:54 AM PDT

      [ Parent ]

    •  If it becomes broadly understood that the major (1+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      stevemb

      tax hike recently enacted on the wealthy on average 6/10's of One Percent, and that Democratic Senator Warner (see my comments above) is pushing to 'repeal' the estate tax, does anyone seriously think that this will play to the Democrats favor?

      They've just handed Republicans another winning topic to run against!  [Along with the Chained CPI, and increased costs to Medicare and Medigap insurance.]

      Now, it may not hurt Democrats across-the-board.  According to one commenter, several states don't have a sales tax.

      And some states may have a 'relatively' moderate one.  My sibling lives in such a state.

      I'm in a state with what I understand is the highest in the nation--9.75.

      Logically, the blowback will likely be worse in states with the highest sales tax rates.

      And probably, many of these are 'red' states, due to the regressive nature of this type of tax.

      That may be the calculation behind this move by Dems to push this through.  Leave their corporate paymasters alone, and tax the heck out of the 'average Joe' in the red states.

      IOW, scr**w the folks in the 'red states,' since Dems wouldn't likely carry them anyway.  

      If that's the Dem's calculation--it stinks, LOL!

      And the fact that some states don't have a state sales tax, while other have one that is off-the-charts, sort of delegitimizes the entire "fairness" argument
      (at least as it pertains to the consumer).  ;-)

       

      Mollie

      "Only he who can see the invisible, can do the impossible."-- Frank L. Gaines


      hiddennplainsight

      by musiccitymollie on Tue Apr 23, 2013 at 03:44:17 PM PDT

      [ Parent ]

    •  I pay it too (1+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      VClib

      since my state (NY) added a line on the income tax return for it.  A bit grudgingly, especially the first year when it appeared unexpectedly on the tax form (I might have chosen my purchases differently if I'd known this tax would be due, and I also had difficulty even identifying all my purchases from the previous year that I didn't know I'd need records of).

      Prior to this appearing on the tax return, I don't think I knew these taxes were owed, and I wouldn't have known how to pay them.

      I pay them now out of civic duty.  Many of those complaining point out somewhat rightly that those at the top have ways to avoid taxes.  Tax avoidance is a slippery slope where if one group starts evading taxes (like the rich with their offshore tax shelters and other gimmicks, some written into law with the help of the lobbyists they pay for), everyone else begins to feel justified in cheating on their taxes too.  It comes down to fairness, when the system isn't fair, people feel justified in evading taxes.  Then we'll end up like Greece, where the rich and powerful shipping magnates legally don't pay taxes (and like with this sales tax push, the poor get stuck with additional taxes to make up the revenue the government isn't collecting from the rich).

      I do still have a few beefs with paying sales tax as the consumer:

      - Knowing which purchases are taxable. Some services are not (merchandise generally is, but online subscriptions, internet services, etc. may not be). When it comes time to figure my taxes I'm not always sure which ones I should pay tax on.

      - Keeping records to pay the actual amount owed is a pain, and adds to my time to prepare my taxes (I don't like my state's other option to pay an estimate based on my income, because I believe the state's estimate is usually higher than my actual tax owed).

      - The tax adds to the total amount due on my income tax (in my state, NY). There's actually a penalty for under-withholding, and sales tax adds to the amount due, adding to the risk of owing a penalty for under-withholding (and even more paperwork to deal with the penalty).  To avoid this, you have to actually have additional tax withheld, or pay estimated tax (4 payments over the year) to cover the tax due if you'll owe substantial sales tax. Otherwise, you'll owe a penalty for owing too much. And if you do make an estimated tax payment at the time of a large purchase (and don't make 4 equal estimated tax payments over the year), you'll likely have to fill out that underpayment penalty form even if no penalty is due, just to prove you paid the tax in the quarter when it was due.

  •  Better to have sales taxes paid through (2+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    Mad Season, DemSign

    Credit and debit card processing with the additional provision that all products have a single tax rate for a given tax jurisdiction for online and mail order sales.

    There are about 9600 different sales tax jurisdictions in the US, so requiring a small business to keep track and send tax payments to hundreds or thousands of tax jurisdictions several times a year is excessive intensive in paperwork and makes enforcement difficult - think making payments of $10 or less to hundreds of jurisdictions per quarter. Part of the complexity in the law as proposed is that jurisdictions are not uniform in what gets taxed.

    Credit and debit processing based upon the card holders address consolidates the work would be easier.

    The most important way to protect the environment is not to have more than one child.

    by nextstep on Tue Apr 23, 2013 at 08:42:03 AM PDT

    •  Consolidating those 9600 jurisdictions (4+ / 0-)

      Apparently is already part of the plan

      States and localities would also need to simplify their tax system to make things easier for retailers—they’d have to have a single tax agency, a single tax return, and a single audit before they could require online retailers to collect.
      http://www.washingtonpost.com/...

      "No one life is more important than another. No one voice is more valid than another. Each life is a treasure. Each voice deserves to be heard." Patriot Daily News Clearinghouse & Onomastic

      by Catte Nappe on Tue Apr 23, 2013 at 10:01:04 AM PDT

      [ Parent ]

      •  Single rate in a state is a big problem (3+ / 0-)
        Recommended by:
        Eyesbright, JeffW, Mad Season

        Large cities such as NYC, LA, San Francisco, Chicago have significant sales taxes above what the state charges.  A single rate in a state will most likely be the rate the state charges.  This approach does not solve the loss of revenue at the local level.

        Having the sales tax for online paid through the credit/debt card would be far less burdensome on businesses, tax authorities and would have better compliance.

        The most important way to protect the environment is not to have more than one child.

        by nextstep on Tue Apr 23, 2013 at 10:17:50 AM PDT

        [ Parent ]

        •  Solving it at the local level is not the goal (1+ / 0-)
          Recommended by:
          Mad Season

          Solving it at the state level is.

          Not going forward with a state fix because the local fix isn't included, is not a compelling argument.

          Those cities will see higher tax revenue due to the state fix, even with the local fix not done.

    •  Tax rates change, too (1+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      stevemb

      so you'll need to keep up with that.

      My state occasionally has sales tax holidays too, for example there may be a 1-week period where sales tax on clothing is waived to boost sales (but this may only apply to sales in brick and mortar stores, not online).

      My state now requires sales (use) tax to be paid for out of state purchases, on its income tax form.  This actually gets complicated for the filer too, because the amount owed sometimes is different depending on the date of purchase, if there were any rate changes or tax holidays during the year.  It's a pain to figure this out.

      Another problem area is knowing what purchases are taxable, and what are not. Some food is not.  Sometimes clothing is not. Services may or may not be, depending on the service.  I also expect different jurisdictions have different rules.  So depending on what a merchant is selling, this could add even more complication of knowing which jurisdictions tax their sales, and which exempt their particular product or service.

  •  I think I want to open a Mailbox Etc company.... (1+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    eXtina

    .... in New Hampshire (or any other non-sales tax state) with the added feature of trans-shipping to your home state.

    Stupid laws that just drive people to skirt them, are so silly.

    The morons of the local stores lobby think this will help? No, the big online sales operations will end up just setting up 50 warehouses and compete even harder for sales.

    Just like Vegas casino's funding anti-online gambling efforts, all that will happen is the in-state stores shooting themselves in the foot.

  •  Grover who? (3+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    Patriot4peace, JeffW, Hohenzollern

    Democracy is a habit, not a circumstance.

    by Troubadour on Tue Apr 23, 2013 at 09:26:50 AM PDT

  •  Oh, Grover. Shave or grow it out (8+ / 0-)

    this in-between stage is too painful for all of us.

    "The extinction of the human race will come from its inability to EMOTIONALLY comprehend the exponential function." -- Edward Teller

    by lgmcp on Tue Apr 23, 2013 at 10:36:03 AM PDT

  •  He did win an exemption for bathtubs, tho. nt (2+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    88kathy, JeffW
  •  Money for nothin', Wars for free. (6+ / 0-)

    Drownin' in the bathtub is the Norquist plan for you and me.

    guns are fun v. hey buddy, watch what you are doing -- which side are you on?

    by 88kathy on Tue Apr 23, 2013 at 10:40:39 AM PDT

  •  Marketplace "Fairness" Act (6+ / 0-)

    more Orwellian speak. Instead of some people paying sales tax make everyone pay, more regressive taxes. How about getting rid of htem. How about making corporations 'fairly' pay tax, or hedge fund managers or financial firms?

    "I'm sculpting now. Landscapes mostly." ~ Yogi Bear

    by eXtina on Tue Apr 23, 2013 at 10:41:04 AM PDT

    •  Fantasyland talk (0+ / 0-)

      This new law will be very good for local businesses.

      •  Actually It Will Hurt Local Businesses (0+ / 0-)

        Consumers With Less Money = Less Business

        The higher sales taxes that will result from this bill (it rewards states for switching from progressive income taxes to regressive sales taxes, since only the former can be levied on people who can't vote the politicians out of office) will add to the economic damage, and exacerbate the Third-Worldization of America.

        On the Internet, nobody knows if you're a dog... but everybody knows if you're a jackass.

        by stevemb on Tue Apr 23, 2013 at 12:34:05 PM PDT

        [ Parent ]

  •  sorry but this is bad for business (6+ / 0-)

    it will reduce demand - I know I will be less likely to purchase something when I have to pay an extra 10% for it
    and tax on shipping!!!!!

    "I'm sculpting now. Landscapes mostly." ~ Yogi Bear

    by eXtina on Tue Apr 23, 2013 at 10:42:42 AM PDT

    •  Amazon is to the internet (1+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      offgrid

      what Walmart is to brick & mortar when it comes to labor. Warehouse employees suffer horrible conditions.

      hopefully that will make us all feel a little better when/if we decide to shop elsewhere

      didn't we all see this coming?

      disclaimer: I'm not saying there aren't some very fine online businesses, I'm talking about the behemoth.

      "Show up. Pay attention. Tell the truth. And don't be attached to the results." -- Angeles Arrien

      by Sybil Liberty on Tue Apr 23, 2013 at 11:43:05 AM PDT

      [ Parent ]

    •  That's not true (0+ / 0-)

      It will promote local businesses.

      •  What local businesses? (1+ / 0-)
        Recommended by:
        stevemb

        They've mostly all given up the ghost already. There is exactly one new and one used bookstore left in my city of 200K+. How is that in any way better from shopping at Amazon?

        "Lone catch of the moon, the roots of the sigh of an idea there will be the outcome may be why?"--from a spam diary entitled "The Vast World."

        by bryduck on Tue Apr 23, 2013 at 12:40:44 PM PDT

        [ Parent ]

        •  Have you heard of a thing called jobs? nt (0+ / 0-)
          •  Amazon pays people, too. (1+ / 0-)
            Recommended by:
            stevemb

            And in any case, you can't get a job from a business that doesn't exist, which was my point. Businesses that died thanks to Amazon's "cannibalization" will not come back to life because of this tax. Yes, this will benefit local biz, which is good. If your "local biz", however, is Wal-Mart (as it is in far too many locales), is that a good thing?

            "Lone catch of the moon, the roots of the sigh of an idea there will be the outcome may be why?"--from a spam diary entitled "The Vast World."

            by bryduck on Tue Apr 23, 2013 at 04:13:26 PM PDT

            [ Parent ]

  •  Sounds like Baucus is speaking for his future (3+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    Stude Dude, SCFrog, Sybil Liberty

    employers. The rest of the Democrats need to ignore him.

  •  I don't like the sound of this (4+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    Stude Dude, kefauver, Not A Bot, stevemb

    An online sales tax sounds regressive to me. I say they need to keep the focus on more revenue for the upper income levels, and removing the corproate tax loopholes. Leave online shopping alone.

    •  It's already in place, just unenforceable (2+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      Mad Season, anonevent

      You already owe the sales taxes on online purchases (unless your state specially disallows sales tax on online purchases, which I don't think any do). It's just a way to make the collection of sales taxes enforceable.

      •  Example please (0+ / 0-)

        I order things from Amazon.com. I pay no sales tax. How is it I owe a sales tax?
        I use H&R Block tax program to do my taxes, at no time am I prompted to "pay an online sales tax." Where is it that I am supposed to pay this?? Which I am not doing.

        •  You pay no sales tax (3+ / 0-)
          Recommended by:
          Capt Crunch, offgrid, Chitownliberal7

          not because none is owed, but because Amazon is not required to collect it where you live.

          As far as where or how you are supposed to pay it, it depends on the law where you live. In Maryland, where I live, for example, any online purchase or purchases made from out of state are subject to a 6% "use tax". It's not on the state tax return, you're expected to report it quarterly on a separate form and submit your check. Nobody does it. This law would give the state a mechanism for collecting that money from the vendor instead of relying on the resident to have to track and pay that money after the fact.

  •  Its a matter of point of sale (5+ / 0-)

    Point of sale is where the item is shipped from. Collect taxes at that rate and send the tax into that state. It makes no sense to make the tax payments to 50 differest states and x# of jurisdictions.

    The physical sale is arguably made at the point of origin because that is where the physical transfer of property happens. the seller accepts payment etc all in fill in the blank state.

    Hopefully Adam B or Armando can weigh in on the intricacies of tax law across state lines.

  •  Shocked by how many people are against this (5+ / 0-)

    Hey, but keep complaining about local unemployment, because it never has anything to do with the fact that most people get to go online and buy things "on sale" by not having to pay a sales tax, meaning not only is it easier to shop online, but unnaturally cheaper too...Nothing like rooting for jobs to leave your local economy...

  •  I'm a big time Amazon.com consumer (3+ / 0-)

    I spend a great deal of money buying from Amazon.  Nearly all of my electronics are bought from them.  That being said I support this bill even if it means paying sales taxes where I never have.  

  •  Is there a distinction between online, (1+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    Inspector Javert

    and Mail Order? I've been doing both for decades. I've only paid sales tax on sales made in my home state. This tax will have to be collected by the online sites, eBay,amazon ect and passed on by the vendors to the customer but how will this affect mail order sales?  what is the legal distinction between online and mail order? I believe there are several hundred tax collecting bodies in the US with varying rates. The volume of paperwork will be overwhelming.

    "Remember, Republican economic policies quadrupled the debt before I took office and doubled it after I left. We simply can't afford to double-down on trickle-down." Bill Clinton

    by irate on Tue Apr 23, 2013 at 11:02:28 AM PDT

  •  Great, More Regressive Taxes for Everyone. (4+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    ChemBob, Jerry056, Christin, jan4insight

    I'm on the fence about this.

    I sell a lot of things on Ebay and I am currently required to charge KY sales tax on items that I sell to customers here in Kentucky.

    I'm assuming the new law would require everyone, regardless of home state, to pay the 6% KY sales tax when buying from me.

    I don't mind new taxes as long as they are progressive, but I'm not fond of sales taxes, as they are as regressive as you can get, and this is just the expansion of regressive taxation.

    On the other hand, a lot of ailing state governments could really use the extra revenue.

    OFA is out to attack seniors, veterans, and the disabled. A DKOS Troll told me so.

    by kefauver on Tue Apr 23, 2013 at 11:03:11 AM PDT

    •  It's actually the opposite. (4+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      kefauver, mungley, anonevent, Capt Crunch

      It would require you to charge the tax rate of the buyer and remit those amounts to the buyer's state government, but only if you sold more than a million dollars worth of goods on Ebay in a year.

      It's not a new tax though.  The law has always been that sales tax is due for these purchases, but the states just had no way of enforcing the taxes due.  If the seller didn't charge them, the buyer was supposed to pay them on their own.  The reason KY could enforce it was that they could come seize your stuff located in KY.  Other states couldn't.  This bill just provides the enforcement mechanism.

      In the unlikely story that is America, there has never been anything false about hope.

      by Cixelsyd on Tue Apr 23, 2013 at 11:07:20 AM PDT

      [ Parent ]

      •  That's What I was Afraid of. (0+ / 0-)

        Having to calculate different state sales taxes for various buyers.

        Luckily, it is for those who sale in bulk, which is good to know.

        I knew this wasn't a new tax, just an expansion of already existing sales taxes.

        Oh well, we'll see what happens.

        OFA is out to attack seniors, veterans, and the disabled. A DKOS Troll told me so.

        by kefauver on Tue Apr 23, 2013 at 11:15:53 AM PDT

        [ Parent ]

        •  Why be afraid of something you won't be part of? (0+ / 0-)

          You'll only be part of it if you sell more than a million dollars per year.

          •  I Know. I'm Only Concerned About the Setup. (0+ / 0-)

            Seems backwards.

            OFA is out to attack seniors, veterans, and the disabled. A DKOS Troll told me so.

            by kefauver on Tue Apr 23, 2013 at 12:28:34 PM PDT

            [ Parent ]

          •  The Income Tax Used To Be For Rich People, Too... (0+ / 0-)

            ...until they gamed the system to shift the burden onto the middle class while getting loopholes for themselves.

            The same thing would happen if this bad idea gets enacted -- it would become a club for big business (which can absorb regulatory costs with little difficulty) to beat down upstart competitors (which can't).

            On the Internet, nobody knows if you're a dog... but everybody knows if you're a jackass.

            by stevemb on Tue Apr 23, 2013 at 12:45:31 PM PDT

            [ Parent ]

    •  You nailed it. What's wrong is that this is a (1+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      kefauver

      the ultimate 'regressive' tax.

      Heck, heard on an interview that this was one reason that Art Laffer [of the Laffer Curve] relocated from California (I believe) to our state--the very regressive tax system.

      No state income tax.  But one of the states with the highest tax in the nation, when it comes to sales tax.

      9.75%

      Mollie

      "Only he who can see the invisible, can do the impossible."-- Frank L. Gaines


      hiddennplainsight

      by musiccitymollie on Tue Apr 23, 2013 at 04:27:32 PM PDT

      [ Parent ]

  •  lobby your state & local reps (6+ / 0-)

    this bill isn't about instituting a sales tax.  It's about allowing the states to properly enforce their already existing sales tax laws.

    If you don't like sales taxes, cheating out of paying them is not the answer.

    Lobby your state and local representatives to do away with regressive sales taxes and replace them with property taxes or income taxes on the highest earners.

  •  In a typical suburban town (5+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    JeffW, mungley, bryduck, jan4insight, stevemb

    ...the only place to buy most products is a chain store.

    The idea of this bill as a boom to Mom-and-Pop stores is dubious.

    If instead of buying a case of canned-soup online directly from the manufacturer, I make the long drive to Whole Foods for canned-soup, it's not a Progressive Victory.

    There is less pollution if UPS drops off the canned-soup with packages for other people at my apt complex, then if I make a long drive to a specialty supermarket.

    •  Unless you were going to be at the market (0+ / 0-)

      anyway.
      1st, you should consider buying your food more than one item at a time.
      2nd, depending on how much you spend, many online retailers will waive the cost of shipping, to the cost of filling your bunker will be the same online as it is at your local store.
      3rd, if you are going to travel to the bank, or the post office, or the gym, or the doctor, or the gun store, there is likely a retailer of soup nearby.  Just walk in there and get your soup in the same trip, thus saving the extra gas and the cost of reshipping an item that has already been delivered to another location. (Retail outlets include the cost of shipping and stocking in their prices.)

      Take back the House in 2014!!!! ( 50-state strategy needed)

      by mungley on Tue Apr 23, 2013 at 11:25:06 AM PDT

      [ Parent ]

    •  Not real world (0+ / 0-)

      When you buy something locally you support jobs and employment.
      The shipping is going to happen no matter what way you by things.
      This bill is good for local business.
      This bill is good for creating jobs.

  •  God forbid taxing the wealthy a smidgen more, (4+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    Eric Jaffa, JeffW, stevemb, Christin

    but enacting what amounts to a huge tax increase on the middle class? No problem.

  •  This Bill Is Actually A Teabagger's Dream (2+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    Eric Jaffa, PatriciaVa

    What could please the government-eliminationist fringe more than to simultaneously corrode both pillars (taxation by consent of the taxed via their elected representatives and taxation in exchange for government services) on which the moral legitimacy of taxation rests?

    As an extra bonus, they get a system that rewards regressive states that raise sales taxes in order to finance cuts (or elimination) in income taxes.

    On the Internet, nobody knows if you're a dog... but everybody knows if you're a jackass.

    by stevemb on Tue Apr 23, 2013 at 11:07:56 AM PDT

  •  Sorry, but I'm with Grover on this one. (5+ / 0-)

    Sales taxes are regressive. They should all be eliminated. Certainly no new ones should be imposed, and in an economic downturn this is about the dumbest thing the Senate could have done. It's almost like someone is trying to insure that Obama doesn't get a third term.

    Ceterum censeo Factionem Republicanam esse delendam.

    by journeyman on Tue Apr 23, 2013 at 11:09:05 AM PDT

    •  he's never right (1+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      Sybil Liberty

      so that's your first clue right there

    •  funny (1+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      Capt Crunch

      California voters (not necessarily known for their "regressivity" on a scale of 1-10) recently voted to a temporary increase in sales tax.

      "Show up. Pay attention. Tell the truth. And don't be attached to the results." -- Angeles Arrien

      by Sybil Liberty on Tue Apr 23, 2013 at 11:29:39 AM PDT

      [ Parent ]

    •  It's not a new tax, though (2+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      journeyman, musiccitymollie

      It's the sales tax you are already subject to by virtue of living at the address you do.

      But, I do agree this is bad.  And with it taking a new federal law to pass this, Senators and House members will get the blame, even though no new revenues go to the feds!

    •  I'd like to make Grover happy with this tax (0+ / 0-)

      His pledge is about now new taxes without additional corresponding cuts in taxes. I remember when our state tax was 4%, now it's 6%. If the over-all tax rate could be lowered by fairly collecting sales tax, I'd be real happy. That would be a tad less regressive because I think the really poor don't buy much online. Not that a lower rate would just happen. We'd have to push hard for it and this ammunition could help.

      •  Grover Will Be Happy When He Realizes... (1+ / 0-)
        Recommended by:
        musiccitymollie

        ...that this is the "Hey! States! Replace Your Income Taxes With Sales Taxes And Get Free Money From People Who Can't Vote You Out Off Office" bill.

        On the Internet, nobody knows if you're a dog... but everybody knows if you're a jackass.

        by stevemb on Tue Apr 23, 2013 at 12:42:18 PM PDT

        [ Parent ]

  •  Could be a nightmare (2+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    white blitz, stevemb

    My wife is starting a small business on-line selling my books and audio-books and other items related to my work. As it currently stands, she has to track sales to Mass, since we're in mass, and charge tax on those.

    Sales taxes are regressive, but worse than those regarding this bill, I fear, will be the nightmare it can impose on businesses - yes, I know about the $1 million threshold.

    If they need to do this, then how about just making a straight, flat Federal VAT and then having that apportioned to the states based on contributions?

    •  Not necessarily (1+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      white blitz

      First, to participate in this, each state will have to consolidate all online sales taxes to a single rate that is to be submitted to a single address.

      Second, what will probably happen is that clearinghouse businesses will spring up that for a small fee disburse your tax receipts to the appropriate states. Send them a spreadsheet with your sales per state, they will let you know how much you owe, and then you write a single check for that amount at the end of the quarter.

      "A government that robs Peter to pay Paul can always depend on the support of Paul." - George Bernard Shaw

      by Drobin on Tue Apr 23, 2013 at 11:21:35 AM PDT

      [ Parent ]

      •  No.. that provision has been dropped (1+ / 0-)
        Recommended by:
        stevemb

        That was in the earlier version some years ago.

        This bill has no stipulation about states reforming their sales tax structure.

        A business owner selling online will be forced to determine under which of up to 10,000 taxing entities their client falls.

  •  I'm sorry (1+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    drmah

    but why is the recipient's locale more deserving of sales tax than the seller's locale?

    With a physical object, what about every locale it transits through?  Why don't those states deserve their sales tax on the item?

  •  I don't like sales tax any more than (0+ / 0-)

    the next guy. I certainly agree it is regressive. But in WA for example, we have sales tax instead of income tax, so it's important that we collect all of our sales tax or we can't fund public goods and services.

    At the Oregon border, lots of businesses on the WA side have to pay the tax themselves or lose business to the other side where there is no sales tax. It's not a fair situation, but it's a fact. There are similar incentives with buying online. It is I think at least part of how Amazon was so successful so quickly. (It doesn't help me anymore now that I am in WA but I still buy from Amazon.)

    There is something unjust about businesses not collecting sales tax when either the business's home state or the customer's state has a sales tax, but I don't know which state has the jurisdiction to charge (and collect) the sales tax.

    Mail order has been dealing with this issue forever, hasn't it? Why doesn't the Internet use the same rules as mail order?

    Came for the politics, stayed for the pooties.

    by DreamyAJ on Tue Apr 23, 2013 at 11:24:39 AM PDT

    •  Sales tax instead of income tax. That's regressive (2+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      stevemb, musiccitymollie

      This bill may make it easier for more states to move to that. Right now they have to worry that if they make sales taxes too high, people will buy more on the Internet.

      •  Yep. We're just backwards from Oregon (1+ / 0-)
        Recommended by:
        musiccitymollie

        where there is income tax and no sales tax. There was an attempt here to create an income tax for the top earners only but it didn't go anywhere. I think the concern is that we would be taxed coming and going, rather than replacing any of the one with the other. But I'm originally from California where we had both, so having only one doesn't feel bad.

        Came for the politics, stayed for the pooties.

        by DreamyAJ on Tue Apr 23, 2013 at 01:19:40 PM PDT

        [ Parent ]

  •  It is the states doing the lobbying. (0+ / 0-)

    The states need the revenue and as a online consumer I have wondered how long it would take the states to finally impose a law to collect sales taxes from online sales.

    Norquist does not want the governments of the states to find revenues that will enable the state agencies to continue to operate. Remember the drowning govt in a bathtub thing.

  •  You already owe this!!! (1+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    Bill W

    It's sad how many people seem to think that this is a new tax.  It's not.  If you haven't been paying it at the point of purchase, and you have not been sending your state your due amount at the end of the year, then you have been breaking the law.  This law makes it easier not to break the law.

    "But the problem with any ideology is that it gives the answer before you look at the evidence." - President Clinton

    by anonevent on Tue Apr 23, 2013 at 11:29:16 AM PDT

    •  I suspect a lot of people taking advantage (0+ / 0-)

      of this are the kinds of people who can afford an internet connection, can afford to have a large number of things delivered to their house because someone is at home during working hours, and can afford to wait for something because they don't need it immediately.  You know, non-poor people.

      "But the problem with any ideology is that it gives the answer before you look at the evidence." - President Clinton

      by anonevent on Tue Apr 23, 2013 at 11:32:52 AM PDT

      [ Parent ]

      •  Actually, I suspect wealthy people (4+ / 0-)
        Recommended by:
        Bill W, stevemb, nextstep, VClib

        have been paying the tax.  Wealthy people have accountants do their state tax returns, and many state income tax forms specifically ask for this.  An accountant would risk his/her license if they left the line blank, or put in a false number, when they knew it was not true.

        Even people who use Turbo Tax know about it, at least.  When it comes time for a state return, if the state has a sales tax, most have a line on the return asking for your out of state purchases where you didn't pay sales taxes, so Turbo Tax will specifically ask about that.  If you tell Turbo Tax "none," and that's reflected on your return, that's tax fraud.  

        •  Maryland (0+ / 0-)

          doesn't have a space for it on the state tax return, which makes it even less likely people are actually going to pay it. We technically are supposed to submit a use tax form quarterly, but I've never seen the form and have certainly never filed one. The state comptroller has said that he won't enforce the tax because its such a burden on consumers.

        •  It's pocket change for the wealthy. (1+ / 0-)
          Recommended by:
          musiccitymollie
        •  Interesting thing about TurboTax... (1+ / 0-)
          Recommended by:
          VClib

          When you've finished entering your numbers, it runs a check for "red flags" that are likely to trigger an audit.  Home office deduction, old car donated to charity, that kind of thing.  I have it on very good authority that leaving the "use tax" field blank does not trigger TurboTax's audit risk indicator.

          About twenty years ago, I actually got dinged by the state for a mail-order purchase.  It seems that the electronics store I bought a fax machine from was engaged in some kind of federal fraud, and in the course of the investigation I guess their sales records were shared with my state.  Anyway, I got a bill from the state treasury for fifty bucks or so for sales tax due.  Not sure what the statute of limitations is on something like that, but just imagine if states decided to go after present and past unpaid sales taxes.

          •  I suspect that's correct (2+ / 0-)
            Recommended by:
            Bill W, VClib

            But if your tax form has that question, you still have to make a decision what to put on that line, or whether to leave it blank.  And if you made out-of-state purchases without the seller collecting sales tax, and you leave it blank, that's tax fraud.  

            If you buy a lot from a single entity, like Amazon, it's not that hard to figure out, since you can go to your account and see all your purchases for the year.  I also look at my credit card statement for the past year (since that's what I use for online purchases) and I can see pretty quickly which online purchases were from a seller that does not have a presence in my state and so would not have collected sales tax.  

            Maybe I'm a sucker for following what the law requires me to do (since I probably would never get caught if I didn't), but that's what I do.

          •  TurboTax prob does not flag CA sales tax (1+ / 0-)
            Recommended by:
            VClib

            as TurboTax puts less functionality into the states such as help, copy of state tax instructions etc.

            The most important way to protect the environment is not to have more than one child.

            by nextstep on Tue Apr 23, 2013 at 01:46:50 PM PDT

            [ Parent ]

  •  Don't care what it is...if Grover... (0+ / 0-)

    ...Norquist is again it...pretty good bet it will benefit majority of Americans.

    Our nations quality of life is based on the rightousness of its people.

    by kalihikane on Tue Apr 23, 2013 at 11:40:30 AM PDT

    •  Respectfully, this is the kind of thinking that (1+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      stevemb

      got us a corporatist Dem Administration.  

      As progressives, we have a responsibility to do more than to 'cheer for the team.'

      Unfortunately, we are living the results of having done this for many decades, now.

      Mollie

      "Only he who can see the invisible, can do the impossible."-- Frank L. Gaines


      hiddennplainsight

      by musiccitymollie on Tue Apr 23, 2013 at 03:53:48 PM PDT

      [ Parent ]

  •  This will allow states to dramatically increase (1+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    stevemb

    sales taxes without worrying about people switching to online shopping. Lowering or eliminating state income taxes and replacing them with sales taxes would be easier.

  •  When I heard Norquist's voice on NPR this morning, (1+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    Paddy999

    All I could think was, "Why the f#ck do I have to listen to what this trust-funded anti-government blowhard thinks about anything?"

    "War is not the answer, for only love can conquer hate." ~ Al Cleveland & Marvin Gaye (1970)

    by JBL55 on Tue Apr 23, 2013 at 11:43:13 AM PDT

  •  Free Internet access is available at public (0+ / 0-)

    Libraries.

    A new google chrome book is $199 with free shipping.

  •  Huh?? How is this progressive? (3+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    PatriciaVa, stevemb, musiccitymollie

    The internet sales tax should be killed. Sales taxes are regressive, and if states are hurting for the money, they should pass or raise progressive income taxes. Unlike much of the toxic sewage that comes out of Grover's mouth, he is correct here: This will hurt small businesses and hurt job growth when we need it the most.

    This is absolutely the wrong call for the progressive community. This a tax hike for the poor and middle classes – people who desperately need stimulus – while the rich continue to bathe in free money.

  •  Peachy!One more HUGE advantage for Chinese eBayers (1+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    We Won

    As if it weren't already tough enough for we eBayers with eBay's exorbitant fees and the competition from China.

    For example:  Look through all the auctions and Buy It Now listings for items like craft supplies (ribbon, trims, sequins, appliques) etc. You will find a sea of Chinese manufacturers on eBay up against domestic retailers.  

    Now go through eBay and look at any new (not used) product you fancy...chances are there are 50 retailers, some domestic and many of them in China or Thailand or wherever.

    Now ask yourself honestly -- who are online buyers going to choose?

    the domestic-based eBayer with sales tax
    OR
     the out-of-country (usually in China) with ZERO sales tax.

    Harummph!

    This may level the playing field between brick and mortar retailers and America-based retailers, but it is A GIFT to Chinese retailers!

    Clearly whoever thought up this bill thinks people stay within borders online...sigh.

    Be who you are and say what you feel because those who mind don't matter and those who matter don't mind. Dr. Seuss

    by Turn CO Blue on Tue Apr 23, 2013 at 11:59:51 AM PDT

    •  Peachy, one more huge advantage for Chinese e-bay (0+ / 0-)

      I want to see the bill.  Hopefully there is something in it that says you have to pay...even if the sellers are in China.  
      I do not buy online to avoid sales tax; I use on-line buying for something I cannot find locally.  And, yes, a lot of my purchases include sales tax..because they have reciprocal clauses in their laws with another state, so sales tax is collected.    

  •  It's a Trojan horse for Wall St. taxes. It could (0+ / 0-)

    do some good after all.

  •  It's about picking the consumers' pockets pure and (3+ / 0-)

    simple.

    So much easier than tax increases for the wealthy.

    Just like chained CPI so much easier (for Congress) than raising the payroll tax cap for Social Security.

  •  I don't like this either....why to we insist on (5+ / 0-)

    making every revenue bill about the shoulders of poor and middle America.  

    How many college students and teachers depend on Amazon and like places for textbook and supplies when the mom and pop places raise the prices double what they are worth and also have limited selection?

  •  Sales taxes are regressive. (4+ / 0-)

    It is sad that on taxes, they are closing a loophole that actually helps working families.

    http://punkitechs.blogspot.com/ (Punk, Technology, politics-my blog)

    by greenpunx on Tue Apr 23, 2013 at 01:04:03 PM PDT

  •  Let's Just Get Rid Of (3+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    PatriciaVa, musiccitymollie, stevemb

    sales tax altogether, or at least on items under $1000.

  •  I heard Norquist on NPR today (0+ / 0-)

    Must be that "liberal media" I keep hearing about.

    He sounds every bit as whiny as I imagined he would.

    If the pilot's good, see, I mean if he's reeeally sharp, he can barrel that baby in so low... oh you oughta see it sometime. It's a sight. A big plane like a '52... varrrooom! Its jet exhaust... frying chickens in the barnyard!

    by Major Kong on Tue Apr 23, 2013 at 01:28:25 PM PDT

  •  i don't see how (0+ / 0-)

    a representative could be against this.  Tax dollars that belong to your district and state aren't there! If this is bad for internet business, wouldn't this be good for LOCAL business?

    The Senate has no guts. The House has no brains.

    by gossamer1234 on Tue Apr 23, 2013 at 04:44:37 PM PDT

  •  Sales taxes are the most regressive of all.... (1+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    stevemb

    So why are Democrats supporting it?

    I keep forgetting. They're Modern Democrats.

    The modern Democrat is one who promotes old GOP ideas and calls them progressive in comparison to new GOP ideas.

    by masswaster on Tue Apr 23, 2013 at 05:58:49 PM PDT

    •  Because this isn't... (0+ / 0-)

      ...a bill about whether or not on-line purchases are subject to sales tax.  The current law says they are.  

      Introduce a bill eliminating your state's sales tax, and then you can judge your legislators based on how they vote.

Subscribe or Donate to support Daily Kos.

Click here for the mobile view of the site