I always knew the Supreme Court when eventually rule this way.

ty_ger07
Old news. Most of us were supposed to be paying sales tax all along.

It's not old news. The Supreme Court made the decision today. Most of us know we owe taxes for online purchases per our state laws, but this will cause the price of products to go up for everyone as it will create more work for online sellers. That's why I said get ready to pay higher prices, not taxes.

Not only does allowing states to collect these new taxes on consumers have the potential to raise online prices, it could also harm some businesses.
 
Amazon and eBay’s third-party vendors, for example, are often cited as an example of small retailers that could suffer from changes to the tax structure. While Amazon already collects sales tax on products it sells, its small vendors do not.
 
“Imposing taxes on [small, third party vendors] would add a large compliance burden – especially to small e-tailers – that would harm the economy,” Chris Edwards, director of tax policy studies at the Cato Institute and editor of DownsizingGovernment.org, told FOX Business.
Each state has a complex sales tax system, which was cited in the 1992 Quill case as a reason against requiring businesses to collect the dues in states where they had no physical presence.
 
As a result, some small companies could stop selling to certain states in order to avoid compliance, Ilya Shapiro, a senior fellow in constitutional studies at the Cato Institute, previously told FOX Business.
 
Alternatively, some people argue that the costs associated with being forced to comply with these new regulations could put some smaller retailers out of business entirely.

transdogmifier
Small businesses will die....and prices will rise..but hey...at least the government can get their extra taxes...since we already pay income taxes...property taxes..gas taxes..sales taxes...(the only one we SHOULD pay is income...except in states like florida that have no income tax...)..
 

How many times have you seen people write "I bought it from XYZ.com. No sales tax!".

They're just leveling the playing field between out-of-state online retailers and businesses and retailers within the state. I support it. The background tax grumblings should be a different topic. Since we have to pay taxes, like it or not, this is fair.

ty_ger07

transdogmifier
Small businesses will die....and prices will rise..but hey...at least the government can get their extra taxes...since we already pay income taxes...property taxes..gas taxes..sales taxes...(the only one we SHOULD pay is income...except in states like florida that have no income tax...)..
 

How many times have you seen people write "I bought it from XYZ.com. No sales tax!".

They're just leveling the playing field between out-of-state online retailers and businesses and retailers within the state. I support it. The background tax grumblings should be a different topic. Since we have to pay taxes, like it or not, this is fair.

 
Not the point. Your money is taxed for income tax....then the same money is taxed again..and the store also gets taxed...and I pay taxes on my property..and m..nevermind..
 
If you don't get it, you never will.
 

transdogmifier

ty_ger07

transdogmifier
Small businesses will die....and prices will rise..but hey...at least the government can get their extra taxes...since we already pay income taxes...property taxes..gas taxes..sales taxes...(the only one we SHOULD pay is income...except in states like florida that have no income tax...)..

How many times have you seen people write "I bought it from XYZ.com. No sales tax!".

They're just leveling the playing field between out-of-state online retailers and businesses and retailers within the state. I support it. The background tax grumblings should be a different topic. Since we have to pay taxes, like it or not, this is fair.

 
Not the point. Your money is taxed for income tax....then the same money is taxed again..and the store also gets taxed...and I pay taxes on my property..and m..nevermind..
 
If you don't get it, you never will.
 

Again, not the point of this thread. Go make your own thread complaining about taxes. Since you have to pay taxes as legally required and always had to, nothing has changed other than enforcing something fairly which was previously being abused.

Delaware - No sales tax.. win!!!

kram36

Not only does allowing states to collect these new taxes on consumers have the potential to raise online prices, it could also harm some businesses. Amazon and eBay’s third-party vendors, for example, are often cited as an example of small retailers that could suffer from changes to the tax structure. While Amazon already collects sales tax on products it sells, its small vendors do not. “Imposing taxes on [small, third party vendors] would add a large compliance burden – especially to small e-tailers – that would harm the economy,” Chris Edwards, director of tax policy studies at the Cato Institute and editor of DownsizingGovernment.org, told FOX Business.Each state has a complex sales tax system, which was cited in the 1992 Quill case as a reason against requiring businesses to collect the dues in states where they had no physical presence. As a result, some small companies could stop selling to certain states in order to avoid compliance, Ilya Shapiro, a senior fellow in constitutional studies at the Cato Institute, previously told FOX Business. Alternatively, some people argue that the costs associated with being forced to comply with these new regulations could put some smaller retailers out of business entirely.

I think that it is disingenuous.  If the business truly will suffer, I think that the business will raise their voice.  I think that it is telling that most of the people who are raising their voices at the moment are consumers "fighting for the businesses" who are being disingenuous because truly they are just fighting to return things as they were so that they can continue to ignore the law, abuse the law, and buy items online "tax free" illegally.
 
Secondly, I agree with the ruling because, even though I disagree that the ruling will likely cause pre-tax prices to increase noticeably for most businesses, EVEN IF IT DOSE, your local business has been operating this whole time under this same burden of collecting and paying taxes.  So, no matter how you look at it, it just makes everything fair.  I support local economy and local businesses, therefore I would have to support this ruling.  Local economy and local business pays most local people's wage.
 
I think that there will be some outliers who raise a huge stink, jack up prices, and kick and scream until they either comply or close down business, but it won't be the first time that businesses have grabbed onto something as an excuse for why their business is failing or why they were grossly inflating prices.  Remember credit card fees?  Some back-woods businesses still claim that it will cost the customer $5 to use a credit card (when truly it costs them $0.25 or whatever) just so that they can encourage cash transactions, cook their books, not pay their full taxes, or embezzle money.

ty_ger07

kram36
So now if I sell an item on eBay, I have to collect tax on it and send the money to the state the person lives in that bought the item? So now I have to know the tax laws of every state.
 
I don't think some people realize the implication of this ruling.

I don't think it applies to you as an individual unless you represent yourself as a business. If you sell as an individual, the person who buys from you is responsible for self-reporting and paying sales tax or use tax the same as they always were supposed to.

It most certainly does. It will be up to the seller to collect the tax and send it to the buyers state. eBay does not hold the tax and send it to the state, the seller has to do this.

ty_ger07

kram36

ty_ger07

kram36
So now if I sell an item on eBay, I have to collect tax on it and send the money to the state the person lives in that bought the item? So now I have to know the tax laws of every state.

I don't think some people realize the implication of this ruling.

I don't think it applies to you as an individual unless you represent yourself as a business. If you sell as an individual, the person who buys from you is responsible for self-reporting and paying sales tax or use tax the same as they always were supposed to.

It most certainly does. It will be up to the seller to collect the tax and send it to the buyers state. eBay does not hold the tax and send it to the state, the seller has to do this.

But you, the individual, are not an online retailer.
You, the individual, selling via eBay, craigslist, email, magazine, phone, post card, or any other method to an in-state or out-of-state individual have no responsibility to collect or distribute taxes; it is the buyer's responsibility, and always has been.  As an individual, not claiming to be part of a business, this will not be your responsibility unless eBay's arm is twisted by the law and eBay decides to push the responsibility onto you.  If eBay pushes the responsibility onto you, eBay will either need to make it really easy for you, or eBay will lose a lot of business.

Um, no. This Supreme Court decision makes the seller responsible to collect the tax and send it to the buyers state.

ty_ger07
It has always been ultimately the buyer's responsibility to ensure that taxes are paid.  Businesses had the extra burden of making sure that the taxes were collected and paid at time of sale, but ultimately it was still the buyer's responsibility to ensure that the business collected taxes or pay the taxes themselves if the business failed to collect taxes or if they purchased from an individual (non-business) which didn't collect the taxes.  The only thing which should have changed with this ruling is that online businesses are now responsible the same as any other brick-and-mortar business.
 
My guess is that services such as eBay and Craigslist will not get involved in this tax collection issue other than providing new resources to remind buyers and sellers of their obligations depending on whether they claim themselves to be businesses or private-party sellers.

The Supreme Court ruling places the burden of collecting the tax and sending it to the purchaser's state on internet sales to the seller. Why do you think they made this ruling? Taxes are owed if you sell in a garage sale or sell something on Craigslist if your state laws require it.
 
As I posted before.
 

Not only does allowing states to collect these new taxes on consumers have the potential to raise online prices, it could also harm some businesses.

Amazon and eBay’s third-party vendors, for example, are often cited as an example of small retailers that could suffer from changes to the tax structure. While Amazon already collects sales tax on products it sells, its small vendors do not.

“Imposing taxes on [small, third party vendors] would add a large compliance burden – especially to small e-tailers – that would harm the economy,” Chris Edwards, director of tax policy studies at the Cato Institute and editor of DownsizingGovernment.org, told FOX Business.

Each state has a complex sales tax system, which was cited in the 1992 Quill case as a reason against requiring businesses to collect the dues in states where they had no physical presence.

ty_ger07
Yes, "vendors", "businesses", "third-parties", "retailers", or any other name for somebody who calls themself a business. Rules for private party sales should not be affected.

The tax burden has always been on the buyer. Businesses were roped into ensuring its sales were taxed because revenue indicated that too many buyers were not complying with their tax burden. Now, online businesses are in the same position because, again, revenue indicates that too many buyers are not complying with their tax burden.

In private party sales, the court will go after the buyer instead of the seller since it has been the seller's responsibility all along to ensure that taxes have been collected or to pay any taxes which have not been collected.

No Sir. When you sell on Amazon or eBay you are a 3rd party vendor. Doesn't matter if you have a company name, LLC or whatever.
 
The court ruling has done away with putting the burden on the buyer, it's now on the seller. Whether you're just a person selling stuff on eBay or Newegg selling on eBay.

This'll just force online retailers to be on some 3rd world island. Businesses will always game the system.

Welp, This is what's going to kill online shopping for me =P I already had to pay taxes for most orders, but what I loved is some spots didn't charge it... I'll go in store from now on....
 
yeah right... the sales are too good online lol

The important thing to remember is that the new SCOTUS ruling doesn't immediately change anything.  States must still pass some sort of legislation requiring the collection of sales tax for transactions that occur within the state (let's be simplistic and just assume we're talking about the seller in one state collecting sales/retail tax for the "buyer's" state).  States are free to choose how they collect, or if they even wish to collect sales tax, and in what types of transactions they want to collect sales tax.  A state could easily fashion a rule requiring businesses to collect sales tax for businesses that are registered with the Secretary of State, while ignoring private transactions between individuals on sites like eBay or Etsy.
 
For example:

• South Dakota requires online merchants to make more than $100,000 before needing to pay sales tax
• Washington (state) requires $10,000 in transactions from marketplace vendors before requiring sales tax

However, the sales tax would presumably be collected directly for buyers/sellers by sites like eBay or Etsy (source), and not by the individuals/businesses that place items for sale on the site.  eBay and Etsy could charge sellers a higher fee for items that sell on the site to make up for the additional work they will have to do, which can simply this entire process.
 
Businesses also have access to plenty of software that can update new accounting rules as states pass new legislation and have the process automated.  Yes, that would probably affect mom&pop shops a lot more but nearly all businesses online have some sort of payment system that takes care of these things for them.  Besides, brick and mortar stores are generally the ones that are already in compliance with local sales tax laws; it's the larger online resellers that have been able to avoid paying sales tax to states.
 
More importantly, this provides a much clearer avenue for both legal policies and legislation to move forward.  Acknowledging that online retail is significantly different than the older, standard business models, we can hope to see more legislation directed at creating a comprehensive plan to even the playing field for different types of online merchants.