Wait...I thought there already was an internet tax in California. Everytime I buy something online, it charges me extra for a California tax.
California Assembly Approves $1 Billion "Internet Tax"
- Thread starter Greg Tito
- Start date
It will work in the same way that they collect the tax from physical retailers, You pay sales tax on anything that's sold its simple and all big online retailers already have this built in for other countries that have national sales tax. What's to stop they simply refusing to deliver to address's in California? Well if 9.25% tax rate is going to raise $1 billion that means online sales are worth $9.25 billion, not many business is going to walk away from that.Cipher1 said:
Doesn't California already have insanely high taxes already? From sales tax to property tax? They also have the highest population of any state. Hmmm...wouldn't that mean they are currently bringing in tons of revenue?
I know! How about they stop spending so much fucking money!
I know! How about they stop spending so much fucking money!
I love the liberal hypocrisy in this thread.
Stay classy
Stay classy
Does California just hate computers? It's always the Golden State that seem to be cracking down on it.
Lord Inglip adds to infest trevol.
Lord Inglip adds to infest trevol.
Ahh California and your taxes. You are the reason I am a republican(when it comes to economics).
It's pretty shocking, but most states have not only a sales tax, they expand it to call it a use tax, which sounds just like what it is. You might have bought that item in a different state and paid sales tax on it there, but when you bring it back to a state with a use tax, you're supposed to print out a form, fill it out and mail it in with the sales/use tax.
Needless to say, I'd be surprised if they process many of those forms, but the law exists so that the state -can- come after a company or an individual if they need to, but it's so grossly unenforced that most people don't even know their state has one.
I use Amazon all the time and I like not having to pay sales tax (even though I actually do, since I'm supposed to report it, but like 99.99% of all people, I don't), but I do wonder how Amazon hopes to get away with having a very real and clear business presence in a state and somehow claim that they don't have to collect sales tax like the Barnes & Noble or Best Buy does.
I hope this brings up a wider discussion about why we have sales taxes and what they should be, since they tend to hover close to 8-10% in most jurisdictions in the states, but the idea that Amazon can operate a warehouse in a state and claim it's run by an affiliate (who happens to share the same address as Amazon itself) and avoid taxes just doesn't pass the smell test.
I had to actually go look at the bill itself because that NBC story did such a piss poor job of actually describing what the bill does, and it would appear to only go after online companies that are otherwise said to have a business presence in the state, and broadening that definition to include other entities that are part of a common group under the control of that business. It's because Amazon tries to make the rather ridiculous claim that it's not really doing business there, just its affiliates, even though it controls those affiliates.
If Amazon can do it, could Best Buy just have Internet Kiosks outside their stores that people could use to buy something, and then walk in and pick it up? Or order online from home, pay no tax and then drive over and pick it up? Maybe the real answer is making the penalties for failure to self-report sales/use tax more serious.
I'd rather pay less taxes like most people, but I also want a level playing field for businesses that are supposed to be operating under the same laws.
Needless to say, I'd be surprised if they process many of those forms, but the law exists so that the state -can- come after a company or an individual if they need to, but it's so grossly unenforced that most people don't even know their state has one.
I use Amazon all the time and I like not having to pay sales tax (even though I actually do, since I'm supposed to report it, but like 99.99% of all people, I don't), but I do wonder how Amazon hopes to get away with having a very real and clear business presence in a state and somehow claim that they don't have to collect sales tax like the Barnes & Noble or Best Buy does.
I hope this brings up a wider discussion about why we have sales taxes and what they should be, since they tend to hover close to 8-10% in most jurisdictions in the states, but the idea that Amazon can operate a warehouse in a state and claim it's run by an affiliate (who happens to share the same address as Amazon itself) and avoid taxes just doesn't pass the smell test.
I had to actually go look at the bill itself because that NBC story did such a piss poor job of actually describing what the bill does, and it would appear to only go after online companies that are otherwise said to have a business presence in the state, and broadening that definition to include other entities that are part of a common group under the control of that business. It's because Amazon tries to make the rather ridiculous claim that it's not really doing business there, just its affiliates, even though it controls those affiliates.
If Amazon can do it, could Best Buy just have Internet Kiosks outside their stores that people could use to buy something, and then walk in and pick it up? Or order online from home, pay no tax and then drive over and pick it up? Maybe the real answer is making the penalties for failure to self-report sales/use tax more serious.
I'd rather pay less taxes like most people, but I also want a level playing field for businesses that are supposed to be operating under the same laws.
The funny thing to me is that Hollywood is in California because they wanted to use light bulbs, but not have to pay Edison. Thus they went to a place where the law did not apply.
OT: Who wants to bet that these places will do less business in states where they are charged more? It?s simple economics. Glad I don?t live in California. They could try, you know, spending less.
OT: Who wants to bet that these places will do less business in states where they are charged more? It?s simple economics. Glad I don?t live in California. They could try, you know, spending less.
Colorado attempted something like this--granted only on one service, not on all internet purchases, and Amazon promptly stopped offering that service in Colorado. All that's going to happen is that companies will start charging residents of California sales tax on their online purchases. Or those with more sense may simply stop shipping to California. I'd actually encourage online retailers to boycott the entire state outright. California has been trying all kinds of massively shady tactics lately to squeeze money out of people. They've been declaring people's safe-deposit boxes "abandoned" and looting them, too. You know what they really need to do? BALANCE THEIR BUDGET. Even if this means cutting "services" across the board.
I'm interested to see how this will work. Does everyone have to pay or only residents of the state? As a New York resident I do not feel I should have to pay for California's out of control budget (I already pay for New York's out of control budget) just because I shop with Amazon.
Furthermore, if everyone has to pay whats to stop all states from doing this and levying a tax on any internet purchases if a company resides in said state. Say Giant Sales Company Alpha (GSCA) has an office in California, Ohio, Florida, and New York. Would a consumer in Idaho have to pay all four sales taxes just because the company has several offices?
Furthermore, if everyone has to pay whats to stop all states from doing this and levying a tax on any internet purchases if a company resides in said state. Say Giant Sales Company Alpha (GSCA) has an office in California, Ohio, Florida, and New York. Would a consumer in Idaho have to pay all four sales taxes just because the company has several offices?
I agree 100%. But that will never happen. If you want to cut any program, you must listen to teh other side decry you for hating the poor or hating AmericaJMeganSnow said: