Taxing Internet Purchases

[guido911]

Do you think government should be run like a business? You can't answer direct questions so I'll do it for you, "Why certainly A-man, doesn't everyone?" Well no oh master (de)bater, they don't but let me ask you some other questions as us Welsh are prone to do.

What business would enmesh itself into lightweight moral issues related to God, guns, gays, immigration and abortion, while letting its basic revenue generator be usurped by its competitors? What did Disney do when faced with a large number of its employees coming from the ranks of gay America? What do businesses do when faced with operating issues that are totally unrelated to their mission statements or stockholders best interests? Do they suddenly decide to start producing products that are unprofitable but make them feel good? Do they hire lawyers and pr people whose primary commitments are to truth and justice?

This is working pretty well don't you think?

Are you PWI? What the heck are you talking about? This whole discussion is about whether we should tax internet purchases. Period. You have whined about lost tax revenue and now your talking about competition. Now, we have seen Amazon's response to this approach and now 25,000 affiliates have been shut out. Overstock has similarly responded as I understand it. That's what we can expect if Oklahoma follows suit. Is that good for Oklahoma business? Better yet, is that what Oklahoman's want? Here's an article I found:
http://www.nexusnegotiator.com/blog/oklahoma-considers-repealing-salesuse-tax-nexus-legislation/

And get freakin over with me not answering your questions. I posed several and you haven't answered all of them. Here's a few:

Can anyone tell me where I can get szechuan peppercorns or where I can buy Lou Malnatis pizza in this state? If I can't get it here, why should I pay an Oklahoma sales tax.

Where did I make "social issues" an issue prior to that post in this thread?...What do those these have in common? Making light of them will trigger a response from the right which I believe you were wanting to do.

[AquaMan]

I have to apologize and correct something I posted earlier.

Truth is I am only partially Welsh. Mostly Irish and some Cherokee, English and French. The arguing part may be the Welsh.

If you continue to insist that God, guns, gays, abortion and immigration are the key issues that are causing this state to decline and therefore must be the primary interest of our lawmakers at the state and city level (other than maintaining your wealthy lifestyle by lowering taxes) then so be it. You and Sally will have to explain it all to your friends and constituencies when the state slides to third world status.

Another thing. You get credit for both starting this thread and killing it. No one else is responding and neither am I because you don't play fair, never have and no one wants to play with you.

[guido911]

I have to apologize and correct something I posted earlier.

Truth is I am only partially Welsh. Mostly Irish and some Cherokee, English and French. The arguing part may be the Welsh.

If you continue to insist that God, guns, gays, abortion and immigration are the key issues that are causing this state to decline and therefore must be the primary interest of our lawmakers at the state and city level (other than maintaining your wealthy lifestyle by lowering taxes) then so be it. You and Sally will have to explain it all to your friends and constituencies when the state slides to third world status.

Another thing. You get credit for both starting this thread and killing it. No one else is responding and neither am I because you don't play fair, never have and no one wants to play with you.

I never freakin said they were dammit. You were the one relegating them to the bottom for no reason but to bait. And you are still baiting me by equating me to Sally Kern. And by the way, I don't see the usual apologists coming to your defense. Ever think YOU were the reason this thread died? Nah, because it's what you left off your list of not being Welsh or any other group you descended from that drives you, that of course being douchebagian.

O/T. Here is an interesting take worth the read (imo):

The internet tax debate is a confusing one.  It is often phrased as "taxing the internet," something that surely only a luddite would propose.  What's really going on is that merchants and consumers are being taxed just as they always were.  But there's a new wrinkle.

http://blogs.forbes.com/robertwood/2011/04/18/is-internet-tax-constitutional/

[AquaMan]

I think you are a poor reader or have trouble with comprehension. At any rate, you certainly aren't understanding what I have been doing. I took on your persona, argued with your strategies and tactics, and you couldn't stand it.

Most of what happens on these threads is analogous to kids playing on grade school playgrounds. There are a few adults who patiently stand around and moderate without prejudice or judgement while most of the kids just expend energy. Which one are you?

[RecycleMichael]

I never freakin said they were dammit. You were the one relegating them to the bottom for no reason but to bait. And you are still baiting me by equating me to Sally Kern. And by the way, I don't see the usual apologists coming to your defense. Ever think YOU were the reason this thread died? Nah, because it's what you left off your list of not being Welsh or any other group you descended from that drives you, that of course being douchebagian.

I am worried about you. Take a day off and relax.

[guido911]

I think you are a poor reader or have trouble with comprehension. At any rate, you certainly aren't understanding what I have been doing. I took on your persona, argued with your strategies and tactics, and you couldn't stand it.

Most of what happens on these threads is analogous to kids playing on grade school playgrounds. There are a few adults who patiently stand around and moderate without prejudice or judgement while most of the kids just expend energy. Which one are you?

Funny, I thought this thread was about internet taxation and not your opinion on my persona. Maybe what I should do is bravely change my name in this forum and pretend to have a fresh start.

[AquaMan]

I have no particular opinion of your persona, I merely imitated it to show you how irritating it can be. Even you couldn't stand it! But, different strokes ya know>

Here are some quotes I made in this thread that you seemed to not have read or understood. I am glad to elucidate on them if they are still hazy-

"This is a huge global change in buyer behavior that business is changing to meet. The states seem unable to understand that they also have to adapt to business changes and not expect everyone to mold their behavior to meet antiquated tax systems."

Seems like a pretty innocuous statement of fact. States have been relying on sales tax and it no longer is working.

"I look forward to regional and national governors actually facing up to a new reality instead of merely talking about it then returning home to run on rabid social agendas. They could start like any new business does by taking an accounting of what their real, fixed expenses are and what it takes dollar wise to meet them. Then review which ones can be privatized or eliminated and which ones have to be operated by government for the public good. Finally, recognize how states should form regional tax bases to avoid exploiting each other."

This is business college stuff. Nothing outrageous. In fact it pretty conservative for me.


"Here's a thought and I throw it out for criticism.
........Jettison the sales tax burden.
........Flat rate property taxes, income taxes, estate taxes.
........Institute business licensing based on national, regional and state "footprints".

States then use those fees to revert to their basic purposes that are so clearly laid out by Libertarians. The state or region that does this could grow quite quickly.


Once again, straightforward and factual. This is pretty Libertarian in outlook rather than liberal. Because to me this is where Libertarians and business intersect and find common ground. What exactly is so bothersome to you about these quotes? Or is it a personal thing?

[guido911]

As I wrote in another thread, my daughter just returned from the Univ. of Georgia. In that part of the country they drink Cheerwine, a cherry soft drink. I cannot find it in Tulsa, although one store in OKC supposedly carries it. For me to get that as a treat for her, I have to use Amazon. Should I pay sales tax on that purchase? To me, that is a windfall for a state where the product is unavailable. And if you tax internet purchases, small business that rely on the internet to get their product out to market will suffer.

Here is a fair take on the Amazon tax in California.

By law, consumers who order from out-of-state retailers are supposed to pay the tax themselves, but few do and it is difficult to enforce. And a 1992 U.S. Supreme Court ruling forbids a state from forcing businesses to collect sales taxes unless the business has a physical presence, like a store, in that state.

With the new law, California lawmakers, like those in a handful of other states, have gotten creative about how to define a physical presence - in this case, a California online marketing affiliate.

California consumers who buy merchandise on Amazon won't be affected by Amazon's retreat, nor will the third-party sellers who sell products through Amazon.com and collect the taxes.

But it does affect thousands of California retailers, marketers, bloggers, nonprofits and others who participate in Amazon's fee-for-referral program.

Those affiliates provide a link on their own websites for certain goods sold through Amazon, and collect a fee or commission when a consumer makes a purchase on Amazon. Those fees vary from 4 percent to 15 percent of a sale.

Supporters of the proposed California law estimate the online sales tax could bring in $200 million a year.

But that estimate assumes that Amazon and other online retailers maintain their relationships with their affiliates, said Katie Jaques, a lecturer on taxation at San Diego State University.

"The state won't see those millions of dollars if these affiliates are severed," said Jaques. "And the affiliates will no longer collect their fees, so that is money that will not be coming back into the California economy."

http://www.signonsandiego.com/news/2011/jun/29/amazon/

[nathanm]

And if you tax internet purchases, small business that rely on the internet to get their product out to market will suffer.

A level playing field is unfair?

[guido911]

A level playing field is unfair?

Level playing field? People in California are supposed to pay the tax on internet purchases. If they don't, that's the state's problem, not Amazon's. Because Amazon doesn't want to collect it, now about 10,000 affiliates in California are out in the cold and the state loses all taxes Amazon purchasers could, and should, pay.

[nathanm]

Level playing field? People in California are supposed to pay the tax on internet purchases. If they don't, that's the state's problem, not Amazon's. Because Amazon doesn't want to collect it, now about 10,000 affiliates in California are out in the cold and the state loses all taxes Amazon purchasers could, and should, pay.

Yeah, enforcing nexus is such a terrible thing. All states should do it. This race to the bottom BS is getting old.

[heironymouspasparagus]

AquaMan,
You have been around here a lot longer than I and know that guido never listens to, or responds to anything "off script" - and let's be absolutely clear; it is the RWRE Murdochian/Cheney/Rove script.

The reality that he tries so hard to gloss over is that the lawmakers in this state have for decades - not just since the internet - recognized that mail order of any kind is a sale that is exempt from the state where the business starts and accrues to the state of receipt of the item.  Be it a house kit from Sears or a new battery for the laptop.  That IS the law of the land.  All of the states that have sales tax.  It is and has always been that way.

And along with all his other "entitlement" views, he feels he should be exempt from the law!  (How ironic is that from a lawyer??)

Well, I too feel I should be entitled to be exempt from certain laws.  Just because I feel like it.  I feel like I should never have to pay a sales tax.  Or a property tax.  Or be prohibited from smoking a joint once in a while (this is the King-Dog Major "Libertarian" breakdown point for most of the RWRE.)  Because I am special!!

And his disclaimer of never saying he wants to be "special" is specious, disingenuous as well as just plain old flat out untrue.  It shows in virtually every post.

Now, if he wants to change the law...well, I'm on his side with that.  I will campaign tirelessly to eliminate sales tax and property tax IF he will campaign on my side to eliminate marijuana laws!  Both are an abomination.

(Watch/listen closely AquaMan - a hookah joke may well be on the way, even as we speak!)

[AquaMan]

Yeah, the curious thing is that I seek a level playing field as well. I really don't like that states collect sales tax. They should be eliminated. Tax a business income or charge a license fee that represents the true cost of them doing business in your state, period. The state has certain obligations that they are expected to fulfill and its increasingly difficult under the current system.

Property taxes and sales taxes are horrible ways to fund government and education.

They fluctuate so much that any budget has to be set at a small percentage of expected returns with the idea that a "safety stock" can build up to cover the slow collection periods. But our state lawmakers either spend that sinking fund or return it to taxpayers in $50 checks.

[guido911]

Yeah, enforcing nexus is such a terrible thing. All states should do it. This race to the bottom BS is getting old.

What race to the bottom? Oklahoma does not have a Tony Luke's cheese steak restaurant. I bought that product on the internet. Why should Oklahoma collect a tax on something it doesn't have. I have to agree with the courts that hold that if a company is not present in the state, then they should not have to collect a tax.

[heironymouspasparagus]

Another quick thing about property taxes; another really horrible feature is that once they have been raised - and ALWAYS unequally in Oklahoma, there is no going back down when the property value goes down.  

Two prime examples;  1983 and 2008.

Houses in my neighborhood sold for less than 27% of the pre-Savings and Loan ripoff level from 1983 through 1985.  They did not reach the pre-S&L levels again until about 1989-1990.  Eight were sold at these levels.  5 through HUD repossessions, the remaining through desperate owners just trying to get out.

2008, the house prices did not drop by 70% + again, since there is always big demand for cheap little houses, but it went down by 28% for one house, 22% for another and about 15% for two others.  (All this within 2 blocks of me.)
The area is still below 2007.

Property taxes on the other hand continue to rise throughout.