Supreme court to reconsider sales tax on interstate commerce - Page 2 - FaunaClassifieds
FaunaClassifieds  
 Sponsors »  Breeders | Dealers |  Importers/Exporters | Caging | Feed | Supplies | Services | Events 
  Inside FaunaClassifieds » Product Reviews |  Classifieds!   | Photo Gallery   | Banner Advertising 
 
  Want to help support this site? Click here.

Go Back   FaunaClassifieds > Laws, Legislative Issues & Alerts > General Legislative Discussions

Notices

General Legislative Discussions Any general discussion concerning legislative issues or events. Not necessarily specific to a particular region, or even a type of animal group.

Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
Old 06-22-2018, 08:30 PM   #11
WebSlave
Yeah, but suppose New York state demanded the same info from you? What would you do then?

As for your home state providing that sort of information to each and every other state, I would have a real problem with that sort of information being spread around to whoever asked for it.

I'm thinking this is going to earn attorneys a lot of money.
 
Old 06-22-2018, 09:31 PM   #12
bcr229
Quote:
Originally Posted by WebSlave View Post
As for your home state providing that sort of information to each and every other state, I would have a real problem with that sort of information being spread around to whoever asked for it.
It would be summary info.

WV: Hey NY we audited 100 businesses and 18 of them met your threshold to pay sales tax last year but only 10 of them did. Those other 8 owe a total of $50,000. We'll collect it and send it along.

NY: Cool but we audited 100 businesses and while 20 of them met your threshold to pay sales tax in WV, only 15 of them did. Those other 5 owe a total of $30,000 so we'll collect that and you just pay us $20,000 from what you collect.

As has been pointed out, there's not a lot NY could do to a business in WV - but WV can put the screws to a WV business.
 
Old 06-23-2018, 01:19 AM   #13
WebSlave
I can't help but wonder how the SCOTUS seemingly ignored the issue of jurisdiction for the states? For instance, the state of New York really has no jurisdiction of any persons or businesses in West Virginia whatsoever. Certainly they do over the PEOPLE within their own home state making the purchases, but how is that the responsibility of the company making the sale outside of New York's legal boundaries?

Seems to me this will generate a very robust underground market of basically shadow retailers just acting as fronts with no real traceable store in ANY USA state. Which brings up the next thought I had...

I'm curious how offshore retail sales will be impacted by this? This could prove to be a real boon for China. Heck, I think Ebay has basically been taken over by China lately, and my guess is that China is going to greatly expand their online marketing reach as a result. Does anyone seriously think that China is going to collect state sales tax and send it to every state in the USA? I seriously doubt that. Heck most of the retailers that could be impacted are already selling merchandise manufactured in China, so all they need to to now is to cut out those middlemen.

Seems to me that this is a great opportunity for China to basically put nearly EVERY retail sales business in the USA out of business. Which they have nearly done with USA manufacturing already anyway. Zillions of Chinese companies are already doing direct retail sales through Ebay, so it's going to be only a very small step to expand on that.

I think there are going to be some painful unintended consequences as a result of this decision by the SCOTUS. And it might very well wind up back in their laps in pretty short order. Or else Congress will attempt to neuter it with legislation.

Of course, Trump seems to be for this decision, so no telling how this is going to go if a countering bill reaches his desk, I guess.

But in the interim, my guess is that a lot of online retailers will simply request states to PROVE what they believe they are owed by them. Which means only the largest of fish will be targeted, which will just drive people to the smaller fish still offering sales with no associated state sales tax.

Of course, I'm sure I'm not seeing all the pieces on the board neither, so who knows what is really going on? Besides screwing us, the little people, of course.
 
Old 06-23-2018, 10:25 AM   #14
bcr229
Quote:
Originally Posted by WebSlave View Post
I can't help but wonder how the SCOTUS seemingly ignored the issue of jurisdiction for the states? For instance, the state of New York really has no jurisdiction of any persons or businesses in West Virginia whatsoever. Certainly they do over the PEOPLE within their own home state making the purchases, but how is that the responsibility of the company making the sale outside of New York's legal boundaries?
IDK. I guess it will play out in the courts.

Quote:
Seems to me this will generate a very robust underground market of basically shadow retailers just acting as fronts with no real traceable store in ANY USA state. Which brings up the next thought I had...
Or more buyers and sellers will start using crypto currency, as other forms of payment (aside from cash) are easily traced.

Quote:
I'm curious how offshore retail sales will be impacted by this? This could prove to be a real boon for China. Heck, I think Ebay has basically been taken over by China lately, and my guess is that China is going to greatly expand their online marketing reach as a result. Does anyone seriously think that China is going to collect state sales tax and send it to every state in the USA? I seriously doubt that. Heck most of the retailers that could be impacted are already selling merchandise manufactured in China, so all they need to to now is to cut out those middlemen.

Seems to me that this is a great opportunity for China to basically put nearly EVERY retail sales business in the USA out of business. Which they have nearly done with USA manufacturing already anyway. Zillions of Chinese companies are already doing direct retail sales through Ebay, so it's going to be only a very small step to expand on that.
You'd have to take the cost of shipping retail purchases into account though. I've shipped tank vests internationally and it adds $30-40 per item for shipping and customs fees, and some buyers reported back and said their shipments were inspected to ensure all fees had been paid before they could take possession. So, I think they'll still ship product in by the cargo load and use US companies as retailers.

Quote:
I think there are going to be some painful unintended consequences as a result of this decision by the SCOTUS. And it might very well wind up back in their laps in pretty short order. Or else Congress will attempt to neuter it with legislation.

Of course, Trump seems to be for this decision, so no telling how this is going to go if a countering bill reaches his desk, I guess.

But in the interim, my guess is that a lot of online retailers will simply request states to PROVE what they believe they are owed by them. Which means only the largest of fish will be targeted, which will just drive people to the smaller fish still offering sales with no associated state sales tax.

Of course, I'm sure I'm not seeing all the pieces on the board neither, so who knows what is really going on? Besides screwing us, the little people, of course.
It will definitely be interesting to see how things shake out.
 
Old 06-23-2018, 10:30 AM   #15
bcr229
Incidentally, Pennsylvania passed this last year. The state's reporting limit is only $10,000, which IMO is absurdly low. If the out-of-state seller doesn't collect and remit sales tax then it's supposed to turn over a customer list stating how much each PA customer purchased.

It's almost more complicated to not collect and remit the sales tax when you look at the reporting requirements for electing not to do so.

Pennsylvania Enacts Notice and Reporting Requirements and Economic Nexus Legislation

Pennsylvania has enacted legislation requiring certain remote sellers, marketplace facilitators, and referrers to elect to either collect and remit Pennsylvania sales tax or comply with notice and reporting requirements. If any of the above do not collect and remit sales tax, they must notify purchasers regarding the sales and use tax, and report specified information regarding purchasers or remote sellers to the Pennsylvania Department of Revenue. For purposes of the legislation, a “remote seller” is a person who does not maintain a place of business in Pennsylvania and who, through a forum, makes retail sales of tangible personal property that is subject to sales or use tax. Marketplace facilitators, marketplace sellers, referrers, and employees are not considered remote sellers. A “marketplace facilitator” is a person who facilitates retail sales of tangible personal property by listing or advertising tangible personal property for sale in any forum and either directly or indirectly through agreements/arrangements with third parties, collects payment from the purchaser and transmits payment to the seller. A “referrer” is a person, other than a person who prints or publishes a newspaper, who has an agreement/arrangement with a marketplace seller or remote seller to:

•list or advertise for sale one or more products of a marketplace seller or remote seller;
•receive consideration from the marketplace seller or remote seller from the sale offered in the listing or advertisement;
•transfer a purchaser to a marketplace seller, remote seller, or affiliated person to complete a sale.
•Does not collect a receipt from the purchaser for the sale.

“Referrer” includes a person that may also be a vendor. “Referrer” does not include a person who provides internet advertising services and does not provide the marketplace seller or remote seller’s shipping terms or advertise whether the marketplace seller or remote seller collects a sales or use tax. A “marketplace seller” is a person who has an agreement with a marketplace facilitator under which the marketplace facilitator facilitates sales for the marketplace seller. By March 1, 2018 and June 1 of each calendar year thereafter (beginning June 1, 2019), remote sellers, marketplace facilitators, and referrers with aggregate sales of $10,000 or more in the previous 12-month period must elect to collect and remit Pennsylvania sales tax or comply with the notice and reporting requirements. Click here to access the election form on the Pennsylvania Department of Revenue website. For marketplace facilitators, the election requirement applies to:

•retail sales through the marketplace facilitator’s forum that are made by or on behalf of a marketplace seller that does not maintain a place of business in Pennsylvania; and
•retail sales made by a marketplace facilitator on its own behalf, if the marketplace facilitator does not maintain a place of business in Pennsylvania.

For referrers, the election requirement applies only to retail sales:

•directly resulting from a referral of a purchaser to a marketplace seller that does not maintain a place of business in Pennsylvania;
•directly resulting from a referral of a purchaser to a remote seller; and
•of the referrer’s own products if the referrer does not maintain a place of business in Pennsylvania

Remote sellers and marketplace facilitators will be required to post a conspicuous notice on their forums to inform Pennsylvania purchasers that:

•sales or use tax may be due in connection with the purchase and delivery;
•Pennsylvania requires the purchaser to file a return if use tax is due; and
•the notice is required under statute.

Remote sellers and marketplace facilitators must also provide written notice to purchasers at the time of sale that includes:

•a statement that sales tax is not being collected in connection with the purchase;
•a statement that the purchaser may be required to remit use tax directly to the Department of Revenue; and
•instructions for obtaining additional information from the Department regarding whether and how to remit the use tax.

The notice must be prominently displayed on all invoices and order forms and on each sales receipt or similar document.

Referrers electing to comply with the notice requirements will be required to post a conspicuous notice on their platforms to inform Pennsylvania purchasers that:

•sales or use tax may be due in connection with the purchase and delivery;
•the person to whom the purchaser is being referred may or may not collect and remit sales tax to the Department of Revenue in connection with the transaction;
•Pennsylvania requires the purchaser to file a return if use tax is due and is not collected by the person to whom the purchaser is being referred; and
•the notice is required under statute.

The notice must also contain instructions for obtaining additional information from the Department regarding the use tax.

By January 31 of each year, a remote seller or marketplace facilitator that elects to comply with notice and reporting requirements must provide a written report to each purchaser required to receive the notice. The report must include:

•a statement that the remote seller or marketplace facilitator did not collect sales tax on the purchaser’s transactions and that the purchaser may be required to remit use tax to the Department;
•a list, by date, indicating the type and purchase price of each product purchased or leased by the purchaser from the remote seller or marketplace facilitator and delivered to a location within Pennsylvania;
•instructions for obtaining additional information from the Department regarding whether and how to remit the use tax;
•a statement that the remote seller or marketplace facilitator must submit a report to the department that includes the purchaser’s name and the aggregate dollar amount of the purchases made from the remote seller or marketplace facilitator; and
•additional information as required by the department.

By January 31 of each year, remote sellers and marketplace facilitators that elect to comply with notice and reporting requirements must also provide a written report to the Department of Revenue. For each purchaser required to receive the notice during the previous calendar year, the report must include:

•the purchaser’s name;
•the purchaser’s billing address and, if different, the purchaser’s last known mailing address;
•the address in Pennsylvania where products were delivered to the purchaser;
•the aggregate dollar amount of purchases that the purchaser made from the remote seller or marketplace facilitator; and
•the name and address of the remote seller, marketplace facilitator, or marketplace seller that made the sales to the purchaser.


By January 31 of each year, a referrer that elects to comply with notice and reporting requirements must provide a written report to each remote seller to whom the referrer transferred a potential purchaser located in Pennsylvania during the previous calendar year. The report must include:

•a statement that Pennsylvania may impose sales or use tax on the transaction;
•a statement that the remote seller may be required to elect to either collect and remit the sales and use tax or comply with notice and reporting requirements; and
•instructions for obtaining additional information regarding sales and use tax from the Department.

By January 31 of each year, referrers must also provide a report to the Department containing a list of remote sellers who received the notice described above.

The notice requirements and requirements for providing reports to the Department of Revenue:

•are effective February 1, 2018, and will apply beginning on April 1, 2018, for sales of products and services other than digital products and related services; and
•are effective February 1, 2019, and will apply beginning on April 1, 2019, for digital products and related services.
•The annual notices will be required starting in 2019 for the 2018 activities.

Penalties for non-compliance with the notice and reporting provisions will be $20,000 or 20% of the total sales in Pennsylvania during the previous twelve months, whichever is less, against a remote seller, marketplace facilitator or referrer that makes an election to comply with the notice and reporting requirements or is deemed to have made such election and fails to comply. The penalty shall be assessed separately for each violation but may only be assessed once in a calendar year. For a period of five years after the effective date, the Department may abate or reduce the penalty due to hardship or for good cause. A positive provision in the bill prohibits the filing of a class action against a marketplace facilitator or a referrer on behalf of purchasers related to an overpayment of sales or use tax collected by the facilitator or referrer, regardless of whether such action is characterized as a tax refund claim. Purchasers will retain their right to file for a tax refund from the Department. If federal legislation relating to remote sellers has not been enacted by December 31, 2018, the Independent Fiscal Office, in conjunction with the Department, shall conduct a study assessing the legal implications and fiscal impact of mandating notice requirements for remote sellers. (Act 43 (H.B. 542), Laws 2017)

Posted on November 20, 2017
 
Old 06-23-2018, 11:46 AM   #16
WebSlave
I think a lot of potentially impacted online businesses will simply choose to not comply. Unless they themselves provide the evidence that PA would need to prove their case in a lawsuit, PA has no provable case to pursue in court. I do not believe that PA could force any company to self incriminate in a demand for such evidence.

I know that if I were still selling animals, and possibly impacted, that would be my choice. Sorry, but unless I am within the PA state boundaries, I don't have to pay a damn bit of attention to any laws that PA may pass.

Any government entity can get a law passed. That doesn't necessarily mean it is legally binding, much less legally enforceable. Heck, I can buy or make a speed limit sign and put it on the road through my property. Does that mean anyone has to obey it? Nope. But I guess some will, regardless.

Sometimes you just have to stand by your rights and say "HELL NO!"
 
Old 07-01-2018, 12:21 AM   #17
akane
I can't say the sales tax has much of an impact at all on where and what I purchase. It's nice to look at my checkout total and say "yay, I don't have to pay a few dollars in tax" but it changes little if it's there. If everything online had the same taxes added then it would just eliminate a variable on the totals I compare when the company with tax doesn't always end up more expensive than the one without anyway.

Mostly I don't buy locally because the stores lack options, it takes a lot more time, sometimes I have no good transportation somewhere, and the cost difference online for better options is far more savings than the cost of sales tax. I joke about why can't we just put a giant delivery box with heating and cooling out front and every local business can just deliver my order while I make it from my home computer or phone while out of town. I had to get a new set of good clothes with less than 24hr notice recently and the fact I absolutely could not find the type of shirt I wanted in my size with no time to go to anther store was at least equal to the extremely higher cost in why I am making sure I never have to go into a store for such things again. I'd rather slap a label on it, drop it in the mail box, wait for the refund to appear, and order the replacement size of exactly what I want on those occasions I don't already know my size for that company. I did just that recently with 2 companies to figure out what to keep buying from them in the future.

In the case of amazon prime it shows up at my door with free 2 day shipping nearly all the time so I don't even have to bother maximizing what I put in my cart or waiting to order things together. Sometimes I probably could get something cheaper than amazon but the reasons I don't bother are similar to the reasons superstores first spread across the US. My recent exceptions were the few times available options were not satisfactory. I found a product I liked the best on amazon but only a fraction of what all the company manufacturers so I ordered a pack of samples from the company to put in a large order direct from their website in the future. Others were some of the few specialty items amazon does not really cover.

I'd probably still order online if I had to pay more than local stores for the options, convenience, and time saved. I used to get a lot of my groceries delivered by schwann's despite being more than the grocery store for not really improved quality but the new guy keeps showing up at the wrong times and I no longer have a freezer that is not in the main house for him to just leave it in so it no longer has a single benefit. 10mins to order something when I know exactly what I need and then wait for it to show up in a couple days instead of 10-30mins driving to the correct store, finding it, settling for what they have or driving to another store, going through checkout, and driving home.... It would take a large swing the other direction in price comparison to counter that. I'd rather give up some things I want than waste an entire day worth of time buying stuff that often ranges from not quite to entirely different than what I was looking for in order to save a little money.
 

Join now to reply to this thread or open new ones for your questions & comments! FaunaClassifieds.com is the largest online community about Reptile & Amphibians, Snakes, Lizards and number one classifieds service with thousands of ads to look for. Registration is open to everyone and FREE. Click Here to Register!

 
Reply

Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Edited Supreme Court opinions Lucille Preparedness & Self-Reliance Forum 3 05-25-2014 10:43 AM
Coon Rapids Snake Breeder Appeal Rejected by Minnesota Supreme Court kanozig Herps In The News 0 01-07-2014 12:46 AM
Supreme Court to decide whether police can take your blood without your permission JColt General BS forum 3 01-09-2013 08:04 PM
Supreme Court rules that 'Obamacare' health insurance mandate is constitutional Lucille General BS forum 29 07-02-2012 05:44 PM
Westboro Baptist Church-Emotional free-speech case to mark Supreme Court opening week SamanthaJane13 SOUND OFF!!! 5 10-09-2010 08:18 AM


All times are GMT -4. The time now is 02:40 PM.




Ebates Coupons and Cash Back



TESTING!
Fauna Top Sites


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.7.3
Copyright ©2000 - 2018, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Page generated in 0.05890894 seconds with 11 queries
Content copyrighted ©2002-2018, FaunaClassifieds, LLC