backtop


Print 51 comment(s) - last by notyourmamma2.. on May 11 at 9:23 PM

House Speaker John Boehner now plans to deliver the bill to the House Judiciary Committee

The Internet sales tax bill passed with flying colors in the Senate, but the House of Representatives may prove to be more of an obstacle.

The Senate voted 69-27 in favor of the Internet sales tax bill (also known as the Marketplace Fairness Act) on Monday. The Marketplace Fairness Act would allow states to force out-of-state retailers to collect sales tax on Internet purchases -- even if the e-tailer has no physical presence in that buyer's state.

The legislation offers an exemption for merchants that generate less than $1 million in annual out-of-state revenue.

However, many e-tailers like eBay and Overstock.com oppose the new bill, saying that it would hurt small businesses. 

Those who are onboard with the legislation include Amazon, which is looking to simplify its U.S. state sales tax payments, and brick-and-mortar stores like Wal-Mart and Best Buy, which have complained about the unfair advantage online retailers have when it comes to the lack of sales tax collection in certain states. 

Also, state government's in need of extra revenue like the idea of the new bill. The California Board of Equalization, for instance, said it made $96.4 million in sales tax on internet commerce from September-December 2012, which is the first full quarter that the state started collecting.

Back in April, the Marketplace Fairness Act scored a big victory in a procedural vote of 74-20 in the Senate. It even won backing from U.S. President Barack Obama. 

While the Marketplace Fairness Act has had an easy time in the Senate, things are expected to change in the House of Representatives. The issue is that Republicans control the House, and they refuse to consider new federal revenue from eliminating tax breaks (which would be part of tax reform). 

House Speaker John Boehner now plans to deliver the bill to the House Judiciary Committee. 

Source: Reuters



Comments     Threshold


This article is over a month old, voting and posting comments is disabled

RE: Lies!
By Mint on 5/8/2013 11:20:55 AM , Rating: 2
Your post is a self contradicting mess.

You say internet companies - which benefit greatly from currently not having tax charged on all sales except within their own state - have "far, far fewer employees".

So by taking away part of their advantage, retail stores get more business, right? Retail stores with more employees, according to your own statements. So how does this bill cost jobs?

We also need a bill like this to avoid pointless inefficiency .

If two online companies in NY and CA have the same prices, the current rules make customers in NY buy from CA and customers in CA buy from NY (assuming shipping charges are than the tax), which is ridiculous. We then have all these unnecessary shipping miles, basically shifting would-be sales tax dollars to the shipping companies, all because of this loophole.

You also need to read the article before going on a spiel. Companies with less than $1M/yr in out of state sales are exempted.


RE: Lies!
By dgingerich on 5/8/2013 8:54:45 PM , Rating: 2
The beginning part was expanding on the advantage of online businesses and why they will always have a price advantage and retail stores will never be able to catch up with them. That's all. The rest was about the complexities of this idiotic tax law.

You know what would solve this whole thing without a federal tax law? A simple expansion of the existing local and state sales tax laws with a simple "if it sold here, we tax it here" clause instead of basing it on the location of the buyer. If a company is based out of Anaheim, California, then whoever buys from that company pays Anaheim, California sales taxes. Plain and simple. The feds and the idiots in Congress don't have to get involved at all. Better yet, the business has one straightforward tax law to follow. No complex software would be needed.

There is the side effect of businesses flocking away from California and to tax friendly states like Montana, New Hampshire, or Oregon, and buyers would flock there as well, but I really don't care of California loses a bunch of tax revenue. they deserve to lose it. California has lived high on the hog for far too long. the state is run by a bunch of spoiled, rich idiots that think they own the world, and know what's right and wrong for everyone, just because they happen to have beautiful weather and a bunch of beautiful movie stars.


"The Space Elevator will be built about 50 years after everyone stops laughing" -- Sir Arthur C. Clarke

Related Articles













botimage
Copyright 2014 DailyTech LLC. - RSS Feed | Advertise | About Us | Ethics | FAQ | Terms, Conditions & Privacy Information | Kristopher Kubicki