Interesting People mailing list archives
Re: Fed Internet Sales Taxes
From: David Farber <dave () farber net>
Date: Wed, 21 May 2008 16:32:19 -0400
Begin forwarded message:
From: "Ronald J Riley (RJR-com)" <rjr () rjriley com> Date: May 21, 2008 3:41:22 PM EDT To: David Farber <dave () farber net> Subject: RE: [IP] Fed Internet Sales Taxes
Dave, for IP if you wish.John Levine <johnl () iecc com> said: "If online stores can't exist in 2008 without an artificial 5% or 8% price advantage dueto tax quirks, they're in the wrong business."This is making an assumption which is flat out wrong. On small dollar orders the shipping costs are often greater than the sales tax and when making a purchasing decision I consider them to be a tradeoff.On big ticket items shipping often dwarfs the sales tax (a riding lawnmower for example) and one may prefer a local service provider.So charging sales tax on mail order items will put the mail order provider at a serious disadvantage.Another poster already commented on the issue of company size. Mail order allows me to patronize smaller suppliers who often give much better service than a large entity like Sears whose service is downright atrocious.I own a farm and I cannot tell you how many times I have gone to a local Tractor Supply (TSC) stores to find that they do not have the item in stock. Then they refer me to another store, say 30-50 miles away. When I get there they may not have it. In one case I spent the better part of a whole day going to a total of four TSC stores to get the items I needed. Needless to say I now order much of that kind of product from a mail order supplier who has all the product I order on hand and gets it to me in about three days without all the grief.I see the same kind of crappie service at Lowes and Home Depot, both of whom will keep you on the phone for twenty or more minutes just to get a price and most of the time the person answering is not knowledgeable about the products. They often give wrong information which causes me to waste time and money.It is a fact that all bureaucracies will grow to consume all available resources. Local establishments can effectively compete by having stock on hand and giving good service. If they do not stock what I need then why should they or local government profit?Ronald J. Riley, Speaking only on my own behalf. Affiliations: President - www.PIAUSA.org - RJR at PIAUSA.org Executive Director - www.InventorEd.org - RJR at InvEd.org Senior Fellow - www.patentPolicy.org President - Alliance for American InnovationCaretaker of Intellectual Property Creators on behalf of deceased founder Paul HeckelWashington, DC Direct (202) 318-1595 - 9 am to 9 pm EST. From: David Farber [mailto:dave () farber net] Sent: Wednesday, May 21, 2008 12:13 PM To: ip Subject: [IP] Fed Internet Sales Taxes Begin forwarded message:From: John Levine <johnl () iecc com> Date: May 21, 2008 11:54:04 AM EDT To: David Farber <dave () farber net> Cc: "Patrick W. Gilmore" <patrick () ianai net> Subject: Re: [IP] Fed Internet Sales TaxesI hear this a lot and I always wonder: Will they tax 800-number ordersas well? They are the same thing, just two ways to get a company tomail you a product. The "web" is just a way to remove the humanoperator from a mail order service.The Quill case, which is the 1992 case the article refers to, was about paper mail order catalogs, presumably with telephone ordering, since thecatalogs that Quill sends me have always had a phone number to call. I've never understood why this sales tax question has been framed as an Internet issue, when in fact it applies equally to mail ordercatalog sales, which are still about the same size as online sales. Isuppose online stores are new and sexy while mail order is so 19th century. But the tax issues are the same. Incidentally, I've been making the same points this article does for many years. A decade on the board of my village, including three years as mayor, let me see up close and personal how unfair it is to both the local services that are paid for by sales tax (most of our budget goes to police, fire, and public works) and to the local merchants who have collected the taxes all along. If online storescan't exist in 2008 without an artificial 5% or 8% price advantage dueto tax quirks, they're in the wrong business. Regards,John Levine, johnl () iecc com, Primary Perpetrator of "The Internet for Dummies", Information Superhighwayman wanna-be, http://www.johnlevine.com, ex- Mayor"More Wiener schnitzel, please", said Tom, revealingly.On May 21, 2008, at 10:11 AM, David Farber wrote:Begin forwarded message:From: Robert Atkinson <rca53 () columbia edu>Date: May 21, 2008 10:07:38 AM EDTTo: David Farber <dave () farber net>Subject: For IP: Internet Sales TaxesDave,A call in Wall St. Journal for imposing sales taxes on internetcommerce:http://online.wsj.com/article/portals.htmlExcerpts:Real World Needs 'Net' TaxesMay 21, 2008; Page B9Do you think that billionaire Internet moguls should continue tobenefit from a tax loophole that hurts parks and schools, and makesit harder for your neighborhood bookstore to keep open for business?I didn't think you did.***For starters, by giving online businesses a permanent advantageover their bricks-and-mortar competitors, it helps those who needit least -- huge, profitable e-commerce companies -- at the expenseof often-struggling local retailers.In addition, the tax policy is regressive. It disproportionatelybenefits the upscale citizens most likely to shop online. Worst ofall, as commerce increasingly moves online, state and localgovernments are being deprived of the sales-tax revenues they relyon to run schools, build roads, pay police and firefighters, and doall the other things they're supposed to do.A dozen years ago, one might have been able to make the case that aholiday on collecting sales tax would help the fledgling Internetget off the ground. I don't think that was particularly true evenin 1996; it certainly isn't now.***Opponents of the tax collection are fond of the effective butdishonest slogan that collecting a sales tax would amount to a new"tax on the Internet." But making Amazon collect sales tax on booksis no more "taxing the Internet" than requiring stores to collecttaxes on Valentine's Day chocolates amounts to "taxing falling inlove."OCKQUOTE>love."
------------------------------------------- Archives: http://www.listbox.com/member/archive/247/=now RSS Feed: http://www.listbox.com/member/archive/rss/247/ Powered by Listbox: http://www.listbox.com
Current thread:
- Fed Internet Sales Taxes David Farber (May 21)
- <Possible follow-ups>
- Fed Internet Sales Taxes David Farber (May 21)
- Re: Fed Internet Sales Taxes David Farber (May 21)