Calling B.S. On Amazon's Taxation Arguments 762
theodp writes "Over at the Center on Budget and Policy Priorities, Michael Mazerov carefully picks apart Amazon's arguments against collecting sales taxes, arguing that they simply do not withstand scrutiny. While Amazon officials say collecting sales tax in every state would be excessively burdensome, Mazerov notes the e-tailer already collects sales tax in virtually every state for numerous other companies that sell on its website. Mazerov also finds it disingenuous for Amazon to argue that it should not have to help support public services in states in which it has no physical presence when the company fails to support public services in most of the states in which it does have a physical presence. Finally, Mazerov isn't buying Amazon's argument that its opposition to collecting sales tax is not driven by a desire to gain a price advantage over competitors, which he finds at odds with the company's own actions and SEC filings. By claiming sales-tax immunity, says Mazerov, Amazon has enjoyed an unfair 5%-10% price advantage over local retailers, while also depriving states and localities of hundreds of millions of dollars of legally due revenue each year."
Use Tax (Score:5, Insightful)
I think the real problem is that since nobody does this, they expect Amazon to do the legwork.
Realistically, it is a businesses' job to collect tax for the state it currently resides in. It would be an undue burden for just about any business to get the workings of every other state's tax just to do business, say, like a phone order!
Sure, amazon is big enough, but that still crushes the little guys with a hefty start-up capital requirement, and a full time tax guy to figure this out.
What they need is a disclaimer telling customers that they may need to report the use-tax, and give a hyperlink to more info on that.
Re:Use Tax (Score:5, Insightful)
I actually do pay use tax, and the fact that no one else does really makes me feel like a chump.
Legally due (Score:5, Insightful)
fuck (Score:2, Insightful)
taxes.
alternative (Score:5, Insightful)
I'd like to propose an alternate solution
I know, most politicians won't go with it, but here it is: How about cutting spending, not only making the additional revenue unnecessary, but enabling the cutting or even elimination of many taxes and "user fees?"
Re:Use Tax (Score:1, Insightful)
Realistically, it is a businesses' job to collect tax for the state it currently resides in. It would be an undue burden for just about any business to get the workings of every other state's tax just to do business, say, like a phone order!
If it's an "undue burden" to them then they should just sell in their home states. It would be as much an "undue burden" for me to open a bar, since I can't afford one. It's the same thing. If Amazon can't afford to collect taxes for fifty states, someone else will.
I call BS anyway. There are only 50, is it too much to have some schmoe simply look the damned tax up on a sheet of paper? WTF?
but that still crushes the little guys with a hefty start-up capital requirement
What I said about buying a bar. If you can't afford to start a business, that's not the business to be in.
Why Is God Hidden?
He's not, unless you're avoiding him.
Re:Use Tax (Score:2, Insightful)
Hate to say this, but you may be the only one in the country who pays use tax.
Personally, the subject has never come up for me, since I never, ever, ever (really, swear to Ceiling Cat) buy anything on the internet....
Amazon vs. Pirate Bay (Score:5, Insightful)
Paying sales-tax is the buyer's responsibility. The seller is merely charged with helping the State collect. I find it worryingly hypocritical of kdawson — and people like him — to accuse retailers like Amazon of "depriving" States of sales taxes, while defending pirate bays and napsters against charges of piracy, in which the end-users engage.
Maybe, this is because Amazon's stand harms the Government, while the napsters harm private enterprise?
Taxes, taxes, taxes (Score:4, Insightful)
To look at this another way, perhaps Amazon's 5-10% price advantage will pressure the states to drop their sales tax for the sake of local businesses. This is completely feasible - Alaska, Delaware, Montana, New Hampshire and Oregon already have no sales tax.
The money that consumers use to purchase goods was already taxed, twice. First the government taxes their income, then the state takes a slice too. Do we really need to tax people's money as it goes into the wallet AND as it goes out?
States should fix this in their own laws (Score:3, Insightful)
Just stop using sales tax. Most states already have income taxes of some kind, it's a simple matter of ratcheting down sales tax until it's eventually zero and ratcheting up income tax.
Sales tax is unfair because it's a regressive tax. It's base on how much you buy, not how much you make, and the poor are taxed more percentage wise than a rich person. A $20 shirt with 6% sales tax costs the same if you make $10,000 vs if you make $1,000,000. Income tax is the fair way to go.
**Commence flames from the other side of the political spectrum**
wrong (Score:2, Insightful)
"hundreds of millions of dollars of legally due revenue each year."
Legally due revenue? Isn't this the same argument that the RIAA/MPAA uses?
What exactly is legally due revenue?
Re:alternative (Score:1, Insightful)
I'd like to propose an alternate solution
I know, most politicians won't go with it, but here it is: How about cutting spending, not only making the additional revenue unnecessary, but enabling the cutting or even elimination of many taxes and "user fees?"
I'd like to propose an alternate alternate solution
I know, most politicians won't go with it, but here it is: How increasing spending and paying for it with higher taxes and "user fees"? In particular, let's spend more money on roads and mass transit, education, policing, public safety, regulation of the financial system and providing fair access to decent health insurance.
Re:Taxes are good... (Score:4, Insightful)
If Amazon wants to use state provided infrastructure and national defense, they should pay their share of the financial burden.
Their employees and shareholders already pay their share. I know that punishing "big business" is politically popular right now but in the end corporate taxes are nothing more than a hidden tax on individuals. The business will just raise prices to compensate for the taxes that are imposed on it. The end result is that individuals wind up paying the taxes but it's politically popular because some jackass politician can say that he's being tough on "big [insert boogieman of the day here]".
The sad thing is that people eat this stuff up hook, line and sinker.
Government on the attack (Score:5, Insightful)
Then stop attacking the local retailers with taxes.
Re:Government on the attack (Score:3, Insightful)
Re:Taxes are neither good nor bad... (Score:2, Insightful)
What is really needed is a federal clearinghouse for this: have each state (and municipality, etc) register their tax requirements with a central authority, have it publish a computer-readable database mapping address->tax rate, and have it collect the money, remitting to states. This is a clear interstate commerce issue, I don't see how even a libertarian could object to a federal role here.
I would object to it. What you are suggesting is nothing more than a database that would be populated by thousands of different entities. Why does your clearinghouse need to be run by Uncle Sam? We don't expect Uncle Sam to run the DNS root on the internet. We don't expect him to run the routing tables for the PSTN. Why should he run a database that isn't even going to be populated with information from the Feds?
Re:States should fix this in their own laws (Score:2, Insightful)
Sales tax is unfair because it's a regressive tax. It's base on how much you buy, not how much you make, and the poor are taxed more percentage wise than a rich person. A $20 shirt with 6% sales tax costs the same if you make $10,000 vs if you make $1,000,000. Income tax is the fair way to go.
I see where you're coming from, but if you follow this argument out:
Differentiated income is unfair. The cost of living is based on how much you buy, not how much you make, and the poor pay more percentage wise for basic necessities than a rich person. A $20 shirt costs the same if you make $10,000 vs if you make $1,000,000. Identical income is the fair way to go.
What do we learn from this? Life is unfair. Sorry if you're just finding this out.
Mazerov can bite me (Score:3, Insightful)
The sales tax is almost 10% where I live. Up yours, Mazerov, and three cheers for Amazon. And here's hoping a meteor hits Sacramento.
Re:Use Tax (Score:3, Insightful)
So do you imdemnify customers if they collect the wrong amount of tax? I don't see any pricing on your site, so I'm going to go with "it's fucking expensive." Or, an undue burden.
Re:Legally due (Score:3, Insightful)
Re:Taxes are good... (Score:5, Insightful)
I see you included national defense in there as well. Since there is no national sales tax then Amazon already pays all the taxes that would contribute to national defense through federal corporate and income taxes, just like everyone else.
Taxes: a good thing? (Score:3, Insightful)
Why does everyone on /. always react with outrage when someone or some corporation does their best to avoid taxes? I personally hate taxes, hate the fact that the government basically steals a third of my paycheck every month. I have nothing but sympathy for someone who's doing their best to avoid them.
Where does the outrage come from?
Misguided moralizing about obedience to government?
Irritation that someone else is avoiding taxes when you're not?
Enlighten me, please.
NO TAXATION, WITHOUT REPRESENTATION (Score:4, Insightful)
How's that for an argument. I sell a lot of stuff on Ebay (used games, videos, et cetera that I no longer want), and New York State has the gull to tell me I should collect taxes when I sell items to New Yorkers. And then file a tax form with NY and pay the money due. I say:
"No Taxation Without Representation"
I am not a New York citizen and never plan to be. If New York wants to give me and the other ~250 million non-NY Americans representation in their Legislature, then okay tax us. But until that happens, we shall consider ourselves foreigners. We owe neither allegiance nor taxes to any foreign government. The New York Legislature can go get fucked.
Re:Use Tax (Score:3, Insightful)
The real problem is that it wouldn't be so bad if it was just state by state. It really does get down to the county level and sometimes even down to the town.
So suppose I work in one county and live in another. If I order something online does my home county or my work county get the money? Suppose I order it from my cell phone when I am in a different state?
Okay you could just say that I pay the tax where it is delivered? Suppose I guy a game on Steam while I am on trip?
Frankly it is just a HUGE mess.
Re:Use Tax (Score:5, Insightful)
Re:Use Tax (Score:1, Insightful)
>>>If it's an "undue burden" to them then they should just sell in their home states.
Okay how about this then: "No Taxation Without Representation". How's that for an argument. I sell a lot of stuff on both Ebay and Amazon (used games, videos, et cetera that I no longer want), and New York State has the gull to tell me I should collect taxes when I sell items to New Yorkers. And then file a tax form with NY and pay the money due. I say:
I am not a New York citizen and not subject to New York laws.
If New York wants to give me and the other ~250 million non-NY Americans representation in their Legislature, then okay tax us. But until that happens, we shall consider ourselves foreigners. We owe neither allegiance nor taxes to any foreign government.
Re:States should fix this in their own laws (Score:2, Insightful)
Re:Use Tax (Score:5, Insightful)
You forgot to mention the most important bit of info - what state do you live in?
Its called the US Constitution (Score:1, Insightful)
The federal government has the SOLE authority to tax and regulate interstate commerce.
If I were in Amazon's shoes I'd tell each of the states to shove it until the federal government says that interstate commerce is liable for each state's sales taxes - which coincidentally - is exactly what Amazon is doing :)
Re:NO TAXATION, WITHOUT REPRESENTATION (Score:3, Insightful)
Re:NO TAXATION, WITHOUT REPRESENTATION (Score:3, Insightful)
But until that happens, we shall consider ourselves foreigners. We owe neither allegiance nor taxes to any foreign government.
So basically you're a smuggler avoiding tariffs?
Re:Taxes: a good thing? (Score:1, Insightful)
Do you like all the wonderful things your government provides you and the rest of the citizens?
No, and I don't really care about the other citizens... just an FYI.
police
Have you ever needed them? Useless. I'd be better of protecting myself.
fire departments, roads
These are fine, and really do benefit everyone, either directly or indirectly.
medicaid
This can go. As long as the #1 problem in the US is obesity, I will refuse to suppose helping with other's medical bills.
schools
HS in my area is producing graduates that can't even figure out the amount of sales tax. Useless. I also don't have any kids, so I don't see why I should have to pay.
school lunch programs
Wonderful, more useless people not contributing but taking quite a bit. Fuck them.
Where do you think the money comes from that pay for all those wonderful services everyone demands?
I wish most of the "services" would go away.
If you don't like that the government takes a portion of your paycheck to pay for the services the public demands, I suggest you take it up with your fellow citizens.
Ya, because if the public demands something, I should be forced to pay for it even though it doesn't benefit me. of course the drooling retards DEMAND free health care (for them at least, at my expense), but that doesn't make it right.
Re:Taxes, taxes, taxes (Score:4, Insightful)
Taxes pay for very important things.
Unfortunately they also pay for a buttload of useless waste.
Re:Taxes, taxes, taxes (Score:4, Insightful)
If taxes have to be raised, then raise the income taxes or property taxes. Sales taxes are a pain to collect, and they have a dampening effect on retail businesses. Also, they are skewed against the poor, since poorer people typically must spend a higher percentage of their income on retail goods.
Strong beating up weak to save the rich...again (Score:2, Insightful)
Fucking great. More resources wasted by state tax authorities strong-arming middle class shoppers for a couple hundred bucks in sales taxes while corporations and the wealthy *flaunt* the tax system for their own enrichment. Nothing like the strong taking on the weak, who almost always have no choice but to roll over and pay whatever the authorities claim they are supposed to pay because its another 8x defending yourself.
A "consultant" I know works exclusively for his wife's father's business (essentially an employee), but uses all the tax loopholes available to businesses to avoid taxes. Actually he doesn't actually save any money, he uses the loop holes to buy expensive cars and then take the depreciation. Given his sham consultancy, the state lost more on his Mercedes SUV depreciation deduction than any 10 consumers buying crap off Amazon.
But its a good thing the state goes after the little guy rather than the obvious cheat.
The thing I find really amusing about these use tax claims is my local city has a couple of tax surcharges and about every other tax time the paper runs an article with some finance geek from the city spouting his line on how city residents buying stuff outside of the city and hence not paying the city 0.25% surcharge are supposed to remit the difference!
It cracks me up.
Re:The simple solution.... (Score:4, Insightful)
Re:Use Tax (Score:2, Insightful)
>>>The best case would be to just have a national sales tax
And thus State governments would lose a major source of funding. It would be equivalent to if the EU told Germany, France, and UK "you are no longer allowed to collect VAT; we will institute a Europe-wide sales tax". How would the member states fund themselves?
Re:Use Tax (Score:2, Insightful)
You're an idiot, as evidenced by your belief in a mythical being
And you're a troll, as evidenced by your offtopic, inflammitory comment. As to your "myth", see here [kuro5hin.org] and here [kuro5hin.org] (Articles written by me). Also, I believe you're the one lacking in mental facilities, as you make such an unwarranted judgement based on absolutely no facts whatever. Believing that anyone who believes in God [wikipedia.org] is an idiot is in fact idiotic. The wiki link, BTW, is a list of scientists, many esteemed enough to have their own article in wikipedia, who are in fact Christians.
You are, in fact, completely ignorant. Willful ignorance is idiocy. No perhaps we can get back on topic?
Mail order / phone orders don't need to collect, so why do you think amazon should be singled out?
I don't. If they have to pay sales tax, so should mail and phone orders.
Second, is not just looking at a piece of paper.
News flash: we have computers and databases that can hold LOTS of data and are easy to search. There's no way this could be an "undue hardship" to anybody with a business.
For what it's worth, I'm completely against sales, use, and vat taxes as they are extremely regressive. But Amazon's arguments are specious. If they were to say they were against sales taxes because they were regressive I'd agree with them, but their arguments are entirely self serving and bogus.
Re:There are numerous problems. (Score:1, Insightful)
It's simple enough for brick-and-morter to keep track of the taxes where they are, but to keep track of every state, county, and municipality in the US would indeed be burdensome.
We need to go back and redesign, among other things, the entire concept of sales tax to work in the modern economy.
So Amazon can readily keep track of hundreds of thousands of items and associated prices - but a proportionally smaller number of tax variations would be burdensome?
Re:States should fix this in their own laws (Score:3, Insightful)
So, it is better to punish people for being successful rather than punish people for spending foolishly?
How about the fact that people who make more, spend more?
How about the fact that people who make more pay more in other taxes to the point they pay more taxes over all?
How about the fact that people who are poor spend a greater portion of their income on items that are not taxed?
How about the fact that people who are poor benefit vastly more from the services provided by taxes?
You say income tax is the fair way to go, but income tax rates often increase as one's income increases. Would you support a flat rate tax, say a straight 25% off the top, where everyone who earns any income must pay a certain percentage as tax, without any deductions or credits?
You think it is wrong to be charged the same amount for an item regards of one's income? Tell me, do you work for free or for a reduced rate if your employer's profit goes down? Please explain why a shirt should cost less for someone who makes less money when that is not tied to the cost of production and sale of the shirt? Why should the tax rate be different as only a flat rate tax is fair?
Re:NO TAXATION, WITHOUT REPRESENTATION (Score:2, Insightful)
First off, why was I labeled "troll"? Second, you are correct that I'm not losing money but I AM losing time trying to fill out New York tax forms (plus accounting for +/- 1/2% variances across different counties). Why should I be subject to this hassle? I am not a citizen of New York. I am not subject to comply with their laws - I'm in Virginia ~300 miles away.
Let New York collect the money from their own citizen (the buyer) not from a foreigner.
United Kingdom (Score:2, Insightful)
Re:The problem with "legal" taxation (Score:5, Insightful)
The only problem with your conjecture is that the public want their government-provided goodies which cost money. Money that the government gets through taxation.
BTW, before that "tea party" you mention ever happens, it is much more likely that the U.S. government will not be able to continue to sell its debt, resulting in hyper-inflation of the dollar and a collapse of the U.S. economy and probably of the U.S. government.
If you do not understand how and why hyperinflation will occur, you need to go read a book on economics.
Re:Use Tax (Score:3, Insightful)
But wait, there's more. Each county will sometimes have it's own tax rate to add. Here we find [spiritus-temporis.com] that there are over 3,000 counties in the US.
But wait, there's more. Sometimes sales taxes can come from other places. For example [wikipedia.org] "service authorities, and various special districts (such as the Bay Area Rapid Transit district)."
But wait, there's more. Each one of those sales tax codes isn't just a number, it can also include certain items that are exempt, or have different rates.
You're one phone call is now several, and each time they have to tell the tax guy what you are buying so they can determine the rate.
This is exactly what they are doing. However, no one is sending them a bill, because they don't know what is being purchased by whom, for the which I am glad. They don't need to know. Unless you are advocating that Amazon should be sending each tax district an itemized list of everything you bought.
Keep in mind, that Amazon might be able to afford to keep up with all of this, but there are lots of people who sell online who can't.
Re:Taxes are good... (Score:1, Insightful)
Wal-mart employees & shareholders pay taxes; should Wal-Mart be allowed ignore sales tax?
rinse & repeat for Blockbuster, McDonald's, Shell Gas Stations, etc...
Re:Government on the attack (Score:3, Insightful)
Re:Strong beating up weak to save the rich...again (Score:3, Insightful)
corporations and the wealthy *flaunt* the tax system
Like... walk it around town and show everyone how incredibly sexy it is? Or mayhap you meant flout [merriam-webster.com]? :)
Re:Use Tax (Score:3, Insightful)
scrolling though these comments, it amazes me how many people on slashdot have a pretty good idea of what a cluster-fuck sales tax is - yet somehow the "fair" tax idea has traction here.
Re:Government on the attack (Score:1, Insightful)
No, I'm willing to eliminate 80% of government to make up the difference.
Great! Let's start cutting!
Police? Bah, what have they ever done for us? I'm sure our fellow free-market enabled citizens will act in their own self-interest and crime will disappear!
Fire departments, gotta go. I'm sure the Free Market (all glory to the Free Market!) will pick up on the need for fireproof houses after merely a few hundred thousand deaths.
NASA, gotta go. I'm sure private enterprise will pick up all of that non-profitable, very expensive basic space research!
Military, that's gotta go too. What, didn't think that "military" meant "government"?
FTC, SEC and all those other "leeches" keeping the free market down, man! Ditch them all. Because if Enron, Worldcom, the major automakers, Arthur Anderson, Bernie Madoff and the entire predatory lending industry have taught us anything, it's that large companies are always trustworthy, think of long term stability, and would never, EVER lie or obfuscate their terms to trick consumers into giving them their money.
Let's get started!
Re:The simple solution.... (Score:2, Insightful)
If I buy something from a merchant California, you want me to pay sales taxes to California. So, suddenly I'm a taxpayer of California, but what services is the state government providing me? Roads, police, fire department, schools?
The state (CA) is providing the infrastructure for the merchant, its warehouse, and its ability to ship to you. You may not drive on CA's roads directly but you are paying the merchant to pay a shipper (USPS, FEDEX, etc.) to drive on those roads.
taxes are evil (Score:2, Insightful)
I really don't care about the legal technicalities. Mazerov is an evil jerk for arguing against Amazon, and the entire tax-structure is just thinly veiled robbery. It is all evil -- sales taxes, property taxes, income taxes, capital gains taxes, etc. It is allegedly justified by the non-sense of the "social contract", a very weak justification which has been thoroughly rebuked by Lysander Spooner and others. What it really is is just an argument of "might makes right". The bums in the government have done nothing to earn my money; if they did something worthwhile, they should ask for voluntary contributions, or sell services to the market, like hard-working people in other fields. All that they do is legislate the use of force, and have brutes enforce their will. Very similar to mafia bosses, except that mafia bosses and common robbers don't pretend that they are righteous.
Re:NO TAXATION, WITHOUT REPRESENTATION (Score:2, Insightful)
Strangely enough, I agree with this. I'm definitely not against taxes in general and sales tax specifically, but it doesn't make sense to me that a retailer should be required to lift a finger to help a state government from which it gets nothing in return.
Actually the retailer is getting something in return. It is getting the right to make the sale.
Re:Strong beating up weak to save the rich...again (Score:3, Insightful)
You're thinking small and binary*.
It's not a couple of hundred bucks, it's a couple of hundred bucks from a lot of people.
It's not a this or that, they should go after getting there use tax, and they should also work at closing loopholes. These are two separate problems.
BTW, if he is using loopholes, then by definition he is not cheating.
They are supposed to remit the difference. Those people are the cheaters, as in the blatantly don't pay a tax. So if you don't like the person finding legal loopholes, then you should be really pissed at people just plain not paying their taxes.
*I'll forgo the obvious little endian joke.
Re:NO TAXATION, WITHOUT REPRESENTATION (Score:3, Insightful)
That's a semantics issue. Both parties (buyer & seller) are being taxed -- this is a transactional tax. It really doesn't matter who collects and pays the tax from a theoretical standpoint. From a practical standpoint, it does matter, though -- there's an additional cost to the tax, which is the cost of compliance. Sellers don't feel they need to assume this cost if they don't have a presence in the state in question.
My personal feeling? Online tax-free (effectively) commerce is killing retail commerce and state revenues. As more commerce moves online, we've got to figure out how to get states off using sales tax as a major stream of revenue -- it's like the music publishers whose business model is being destroyed by advancing technology. States can adapt their business model, or they can enact more draconian laws to continue using an outdated model. IMO, sales tax is bad anyway, since it is regressive.
Re:NO TAXATION, WITHOUT REPRESENTATION (Score:5, Insightful)
You think every state's sales tax is a single flat rate? Good luck with that. Now it is true that it's a less-than-overwhelming amount of data, but if you haven't thought the problem through enough to know that it's not just a table of 50 rates, then you shouldn't be trying to estimate the difficulty.
A more serious issue is that any state can change its tax laws without any particular schedule or required notice. Realistically the states would have to be responsible for broadcasting this information in a mutually-agreed-upon form.
A system like that probably would work. Note that in my above quote, I didn't say "it isn't reasonable..."; I said "the supreme court doesn't consider it reasonable". With the modern state of technology, I think that's a bogus argument, but it is the current law.
Re:Strong beating up weak to save the rich...again (Score:4, Insightful)
Careful, there. You need to talk to a tax accountant before you get audited. Is $40k reasonable pay for the services you perform on behalf of the corporation? What would someone performing your job get paid in a traditional salaried role?
An acquaintance of mine does tech support in the fashion industry in NY. He got busted by the IRS for doing exactly what you're doing, and had to pay penalties, plus FICA on the difference, and he had to convert the S-Corp into a C-Corp instead (so then he had the joys of paying corporate income tax, paying dividends to himself, paying capital gains on the dividends, and paying income tax & FICA on his salary).
Re:Use Tax (Score:3, Insightful)
4. No guilt about tax evasion.
While this doesn't really apply that much to State taxes, you shouldn't feel guilty about not paying taxes, since the money is wasted anyway, and used to support a corrupt system. What has your Federal tax money been spent on recently?
- bailing out rich bankers who made bad investments in the real estate market. None of that money has helped regular taxpaying Americans.
- bailing out giant auto companies that couldn't run their businesses properly, including a "cash for clunkers" plan which rewarded people who had bought gas guzzlers, and did nothing for people who spent their money wisely.
- financing two quagmire wars, propping up corrupt warlords and killing thousands of American soldiers for nothing.
- pretty soon, it's going to be used to finance a corrupt healthcare "reform" where the monied interests that currently cause healthcare to be ridiculously expensive (inefficient health insurance companies, unethical pharma companies, bad doctors and the resultant malpractice insurance companies and litigation attorneys) get to keep making tons of money, but now guaranteed and socialized by the Federal government.
Paying State taxes doesn't help either, since the Federal government can still survive by taking from the States; it'd be better if we withheld ALL taxes, which would cause the entire system to collapse, and be rebuilt better than before.
Re:NO TAXATION, WITHOUT REPRESENTATION (Score:5, Insightful)
Of course there is; you can refuse to sell there. But then, why is it any of your business? If the people paying the tax - those being the buyer - think an 8% sales tax is worth what the state provides them , that's none of your business. The fact that you would be called on as an agent to collect said tax does not give you a legitimate voice in deciding how high the tax should be.
You make a valid point but...
The state of New York has no authority to "deputize" some guy in Virginia as their tax collector (or else arrest him). Do they? I cannot think of any legal justification for that. Can you?
Re:NO TAXATION, WITHOUT REPRESENTATION (Score:5, Insightful)
Really? So, you don't have the right to sell me something without paying a tax? We can't meet, and mutually agree on the terms by which we'll exchange value for value
Something you have to buy from the government is not a right. You buy services from the government. Rights exist in and of themselves.
Only a dyed-in-the-wool Nanny Stater thinks that rights come (in exchange for cash!) from the government. It's a shame that there are enough I-Want-A-Nanny voters out there to elect Nanny legislators, Nanny governors, and Nanny presidents, but there you have it.
Out of curiosity, what did your right to free speech cost you? Or did someone else pay for that, for you? Yeah, I thought so.
Re:Strong beating up weak to save the rich...again (Score:2, Insightful)
Which US are you talking about? One I live in has ridiculously low tax rates all around, compared to other industrial countries. I almost feel ashamed to see the low tax bracket I am in. If only money that is collected wasn't wasted on all these military operations around the world... :-/
OOPS! You're wrong again (Score:1, Insightful)
"Your argument is invalid because Amazon does use US infrastructure, in the form of roads, and regional shipping centers."
They pay taxes in the locations where they have physicalpresence "shipping centers", and they pay UPS and FED EX, who are the ones ACTUALLY USING THE ROADS. You see, UPS ships for Amazon,and THEY pay taxes for roads. OOPS!
So, you're still wrong, and I'm still not.
YOUR argument is invalid because you're not educated enough to know either of these things.
Re:Ordering from overseas... (Score:2, Insightful)
Of course once a shipment crosses a national border there are import controls that take effect so you can't avoid it.