Make Internet Sales Fair Act [On the President's Desk]

[Bacon King]

You must be logged in to read this quote.

Bill Slot: 5
Sponsor: Bacon King

[Marokai Backbeat]

I know alot of people may initially read this and think "Oh, Christ, what a needless tax" but consider:

The internet is not a fledgling market in the way it was 10 years ago anymore. More and more, people are purchasing from the internet to do a larger and larger percentage of their shopping. The problem is, the internet is still a bit of untouched territory when it comes to taxes. Some might consider this a good thing, but it places an extreme burden on small and local businesses.

One has little to no incentive to purchase locally when all the products you could buy out of state are virtually untaxed. Some larger internet businesses are able to offer their products at very low prices to eat up the competition, with virtually no taxes on them. Some internet businesses even offer low to no shipping costs depending on where you buy from.

This is great for internet businesses that already have very low operating costs, but not so great for smaller businesses who have to pay for space and, in all likelihood, more employees, all the while trying to compete against a market that has no sales tax on it.

As a customer, what would you do?

[Bacon King]

Why not just make the buyer pay the sales tax from the state of the seller? Actually, for precedence on this matter, if I were to buy something from a mail-order catalog based in another state, what sales tax (if any) would I pay? Internet sales tax should sync with standard interstate sales laws.

[Marokai Backbeat]

Why not just make the buyer pay the sales tax from the state of the seller? Actually, for precedence on this matter, if I were to buy something from a mail-order catalog based in another state, what sales tax (if any) would I pay? Internet sales tax should sync with standard interstate sales laws.

I would have no problem with that.

[Bacon King]

Relevant info: http://www.newrules.org/retail/rules/internet-sales-tax-fairness

Can someone type up an amendment and offer it as friendly? My head is too confused as to how to define "nexus" appropriately.

[Franzl]

Why not just make the buyer pay the sales tax from the state of the seller? Actually, for precedence on this matter, if I were to buy something from a mail-order catalog based in another state, what sales tax (if any) would I pay? Internet sales tax should sync with standard interstate sales laws.

I would have no problem with that.

That would work, yeah.

[Bacon King]

Relevant info: http://www.newrules.org/retail/rules/internet-sales-tax-fairness

Can someone type up an amendment and offer it as friendly? My head is too confused as to how to define "nexus" appropriately.

^^^^
Anyone? It will be accepted as friendly

[Obnoxiously Slutty Girly Girl]

I know alot of people may initially read this and think "Oh, Christ, what a needless tax" but consider:

The internet is not a fledgling market in the way it was 10 years ago anymore. More and more, people are purchasing from the internet to do a larger and larger percentage of their shopping. The problem is, the internet is still a bit of untouched territory when it comes to taxes. Some might consider this a good thing, but it places an extreme burden on small and local businesses.

One has little to no incentive to purchase locally when all the products you could buy out of state are virtually untaxed. Some larger internet businesses are able to offer their products at very low prices to eat up the competition, with virtually no taxes on them. Some internet businesses even offer low to no shipping costs depending on where you buy from.

This is great for internet businesses that already have very low operating costs, but not so great for smaller businesses who have to pay for space and, in all likelihood, more employees, all the while trying to compete against a market that has no sales tax on it.

As a customer, what would you do?

The obvious solution to that is to abolish the taxes on the "small and local businesses", not to extend taxation to harm internet businesses just like we've been harming local businesses.

[Hans-im-Glück]

I find this proposal to be unnecessary.

We need no new tax. The existing taxes from Internet shopping should to divide propotional to all states. This is easier.

[Хahar 🤔]

Why not just make the buyer pay the sales tax from the state of the seller? Actually, for precedence on this matter, if I were to buy something from a mail-order catalog based in another state, what sales tax (if any) would I pay? Internet sales tax should sync with standard interstate sales laws.

The problem with that is that sellers will concentrate in states without sales tax. It would be better for the buyer to pay the sales tax of the buyer's state.

[Vepres]

I know alot of people may initially read this and think "Oh, Christ, what a needless tax" but consider:

The internet is not a fledgling market in the way it was 10 years ago anymore. More and more, people are purchasing from the internet to do a larger and larger percentage of their shopping. The problem is, the internet is still a bit of untouched territory when it comes to taxes. Some might consider this a good thing, but it places an extreme burden on small and local businesses.

One has little to no incentive to purchase locally when all the products you could buy out of state are virtually untaxed. Some larger internet businesses are able to offer their products at very low prices to eat up the competition, with virtually no taxes on them. Some internet businesses even offer low to no shipping costs depending on where you buy from.

This is great for internet businesses that already have very low operating costs, but not so great for smaller businesses who have to pay for space and, in all likelihood, more employees, all the while trying to compete against a market that has no sales tax on it.

As a customer, what would you do?

The shipping cost usually cancels out any benefit of the lack of taxation and lower costs (in my experience).

[Marokai Backbeat]

Why not just make the buyer pay the sales tax from the state of the seller? Actually, for precedence on this matter, if I were to buy something from a mail-order catalog based in another state, what sales tax (if any) would I pay? Internet sales tax should sync with standard interstate sales laws.

The problem with that is that sellers will concentrate in states without sales tax. It would be better for the buyer to pay the sales tax of the buyer's state.

That is actually a far superior solution. Good thinking.

[k-onmmunist]

The Department of the Interior recommends against this act as it will hamper demand and thus damage the recovery. While we need to diversify our economy and support small business, this is not the correct method.

[bullmoose88]

I personally am against this bill at the moment.  New taxes during uncertain economic times, no matter how well intended, make me uneasy about damaging the recovery.

That said, I'd like to enter the following article (via link) into the record advocating the reasons for such a tax.

http://www.pcworld.com/article/200870/why_its_time_to_tax_internet_sales.html?tk=hp_new

[Marokai Backbeat]

If anyone would formally propose such an amendment, since others have not decided to amend this as of yet..

You must be logged in to read this quote.

Also, i'd like to note, that Atlasia is not in some sort of depressionary spiral. We've taken serious, robust measures at improving the economy directly and indirectly and we continue to do so. Atlasia's economic fortunes are not nearly as bad as those in the 'real world' so I hardly think that bringing internet sales in line with regional sales taxes would cause some sort of economic catastrophe.

We also made a massive income tax bracket restructuring just months ago. This did not cause disaster.

[Franzl]

I support the amended bill.

[Southern Senator North Carolina Yankee]

I oppose this for a variety of reasons which have already been stated.

[Marokai Backbeat]

I oppose this for a variety of reasons which have already been stated.

You oppose this because you hate taxes. Let's just be honest.

No drastic consequences have come about from our efforts in restructuring income tax brackets. I have a hard time believing simply bringing internet sales in line with regional sales tax rates (of which I don't even think there is any in your region) will cause something terrible to happen. You're defending a situation wherein local and small businesses are disadvantaged against big internet businesses on grounds that are not realistic.

[Fmr. Pres. Duke]

Why not just make the buyer pay the sales tax from the state of the seller? Actually, for precedence on this matter, if I were to buy something from a mail-order catalog based in another state, what sales tax (if any) would I pay? Internet sales tax should sync with standard interstate sales laws.

I stopped reading here. If this was put into place, expect a flood of businesses to states with low or no sales tax. The best solution, if this does have to happen, which I am still on the fence because I really don't like the idea of creating more taxes during this economy, is to charge to buyer whatever the tax is in the state they are getting the item shipped to. For example, if I order something from California, I pay the 6.5% sales tax.

Wait! What if your county has a higher sale tax than the state? Perhaps the bill should read that a tax will be charged based on the county in which it is shipped to. Charleston County has a 6.5% sales tax, while SC has a 6%. Food for thought.

[Southern Senator North Carolina Yankee]

I oppose this for a variety of reasons which have already been stated.

You oppose this because you hate taxes. Let's just be honest.

No drastic consequences have come about from our efforts in restructuring income tax brackets. I have a hard time believing simply bringing internet sales in line with regional sales tax rates (of which I don't even think there is any in your region) will cause something terrible to happen. You're defending a situation wherein local and small businesses are disadvantaged against big internet businesses on grounds that are not realistic.

Frankly I don't give a damn about taxes in general anymore. Come to think about it, I don't really give damn about anything, anymore.... (I could continue but I prefer to run the clock out rather then waste time depressing you in the final act)

I oppose this because I want to keep the internet completely untaxed as much as possible.

[Bacon King]

I offer the Vice President's amendment as friendly and accept it. Senators have 24 hours to object.

[Badger]

I personally am against this bill at the moment.  New taxes during uncertain economic times, no matter how well intended, make me uneasy about damaging the recovery.

That said, I'd like to enter the following article (via link) into the record advocating the reasons for such a tax.

http://www.pcworld.com/article/200870/why_its_time_to_tax_internet_sales.html?tk=hp_new

This is an excellent article, Bullmoose. I'm surprised someone as smart and pragmatic as you would still oppose this measure.

This might help. Now that I can take a breath at work, let me offer the following amendment to the proposed amendment:

Make Internet Sales Fair Act

1. All internet sales transactions shall may be subject to the regional and localsales tax in which the purchase is made at the same rate of taxation subject to non-internet sales transactions.

2. Food purchases and the first $5 million dollars of a business's annual internet sales revenue shall be exempt from the tax.

I believe this offers several advantages addressing several problems pointed out by Senators: It includes city and county sales taxes in the calculation as Yank pointed out; it exempts smaller businesses who generally most need support as Libertas pointed out (and a similar exemption is included in the Main Street Fairness Act proposed by Bill Delahunt as mentioned in the article Bullmoose provided); it ensures equality between regional/local taxation of internet sales and regular sales and comports with other legal restrictions mentioned the article; and most importantly it allows the regional governments to each individually decide whether or not to impose sales taxes on internet purchases rather than mandating it.

This issue is being misinterpreted as an anti-tax/pro-tax debate. The actual issue here is whether to grant regions the flexability to tax internet purchases the same as regular purchases. There is no valid reason I see to discriminate against brick and mortar stores by taxing purchases made there but exempting taxation of the same item purchases on line. This does not mean the regions have to tax internet sales, or even should a region choose to do so does that mean it has to increase the overall rate of taxes it collects. For example, should these measure pass I would likely lobby the Mideast Assembly to extend regional sales taxes to internet purchases as permitted herein, but to also cut the overall sales tax rate so that the end result is revenue neutral. Thus Mideasterners would not see their sales taxes raised (as Bullmoose pointed out, a tax increase being undesirable as the economy is trying to recover), but taxation would be more fairly and consistently imposed rather than continuing the current indefensible tax shelter provided companies like Amazon at the expense of brick and mortar stores in the community.

Thoughts? Acceptable as friendly?

[Marokai Backbeat]

The second clause is watered down unnecessarily. That still burdens small and local businesses with a built-in disadvantage. I don't even understand why the change was necessary, as I figure all the votes were here to pass it anyway. Why water things down when you most definitely don't have to?

[Badger]

The second clause is watered down unnecessarily. That still burdens small and local businesses with a built-in disadvantage.

There is admittedly some truth to the continued competitive disadvantage to smaller local businesses compared to small internet operations. I suppose it can be justified in that there are notable technical and bureaucratic complications for a small business reliant on internet sales to assess the correct state regional and local sales tax applicable to every on-line customer across 50 states and countless municipalities. A local store needs only to assess its own state's and city's sales tax (if any) on purchases.

When a business expands to a certain level it should be expected to manage these complexities of business management and taxation just like Amazon or Wal-Mart does. I'm open to modification of the $5 million limit proposed (which I simply borrowed from Delahunt's bill as it sounded reasonable), but I don't think we should require every tiny internet sales based company--even those run by a single proprietor out of their home--to have to correctly determine and assess applicable sales tax for every sale it makes across the country. That additional burden of paperwork and research would actually place small internet businesses and an unfair competitive disadvantage compared to brick and mortar merchants.

You must be logged in to read this quote.

While I wouldn't swear you're wrong, lets just say I'm not as optimistic about the current vote count.

[Marokai Backbeat]

Well unfortunately I have absolutely no ability to stop what you're doing so have at it.