OBAMA APPROVES OF ANOTHER FEDERALIZED TAX ON MIDDLE CLASS AMERICANS........

[Seedy]

Originally Posted by CJ7

its really easy pal .. I had 1 girl with limited skills do it, and she was flawless. Don't make too much out of it

Dam it CJ, don't you see it is just another power, and money grab. And I do not want to hear about brick and mortar stores. I have a brick and mortar home. I pay all kinds of fucking taxes, hoa fees, upkeep on the house, utilities, there is nothing free, except for the politicians, god damn cocksuckers.

[CJOHN]

it call when everyone else get a pay raise, I want one TOO ... solution reduce pay or cut job or collect more revenue ... SIMPLE SOLUTION

[CJ7]

Originally Posted by seedman55

Dam it CJ, don't you see it is just another power, and money grab. And I do not want to hear about brick and mortar stores. I have a brick and mortar home. I pay all kinds of fucking taxes, hoa fees, upkeep on the house, utilities, there is nothing free, except for the politicians, god damn cocksuckers.

if you don't want your customers to pay the sales tax that supports all of the state wide services, and you'd rather pony up out of your own pocket, its fine by me

[Guest040616]

Originally Posted by CaptainMidnight

AYou never answered it. It's pretty simply, really. Why do you support giving specific competitive advantages to one class of merchants (internet sellers) while denying them to another?

Trendy speaks out of both sides of his mouth!

[CuteOldGuy]

Ok. According to my understanding of this bill, retailers with less than $1 million in gross revenue are exempt from collecting this tax. This excludes the small online businessperson.

So I may surprise some of you. I'm having trouble finding anything wrong with this tax. People do dodge the state sales tax by buying online. This hurts the hometown retailer, who just might be a small businessperson. And states do lose revenue this way. Not that they ever spend it properly, but still, they do lose it.

Secondly, this tax measure is well within the bounds of the Commerce Clause in the US Constitution. These items cross state lines, in commerce, and it is well within the authority of the federal government to allow states to collect sales tax on items purchased in another state for use in their home state.

Thirdly, I don't see where the federal government benefits from this. The tax revenue raised will be going to the states, so this is not an Obama tax on the middle class.

I do a lot of shopping online, because it is much more convenient. I know this will increase the taxes I pay. But I cannot see how it is an unfair, or unconstitutional tax. In fact, I think this is an act whose time has come.

Sorry, guys. If the Obama administration is supporting this, I guess I'm on their side, for a change. I don't think it is a problem for Amazon, Barnes and Noble, NewEgg, or other major companies to collect the tax for the states from which they derive their sales.

Now if they were requiring the small online retailer to collect the tax, my view might be different. I think it is a good idea to exempt small businesses from the act. The cost of enforcing the act against them exceeds the amount of revenue to be gained.

Whaddya know? When have you EVER seen me support a tax? But this one does not violate the Constitution, and makes sense. I'm surprised Congress is even considering it.

[Whirlaway]

Bricks and mortar businesses are the one's getting the bigger subsidies; roads, utilities, police/fire protection, mass transit, interstate highwasy system, yada , yada............

Originally Posted by ExNYer

Good.

The more sales tax revenue there is, the less pressure there will be to raise income tax rates....if you believe that, you believe in the tooth fairy; what passage means is pressure to raise both income and sales tax rates !

And besides, why should on-line retailers get a tax subsidy compared to bricks-and-mortar establishments?

[Whirlaway]

COG,

Originally Posted by CuteOldGuy

..........
Now if they were requiring the small online retailer to collect the tax, my view might be different. I think it is a good idea to exempt small businesses from the act. The cost of enforcing the act against them exceeds the amount of revenue to be gained......This is exactly what the law is intended to do ! Exempting under $1 million sales isn't much of a concession to small internet retailers......and make no mistake, that $1 M deminimis will be ratcheted down over time....it is what government does....why would you support more taxation mechanisms?

..........

[Yssup Rider]

Uh, again you post a thread based on a lie of your own device.

Obama has not had a bill to sign into law, has he? Hasn't passed through the House of Obstruction, has it? It's just another piece of legislation at this point. Absolutely deserving of a Whineaway all-caps hysterical headline full of spin and attacks on POTUS.

Post the honest truth for a change, you malicious anti-American.

[jbravo_123]

Originally Posted by Whirlaway

Bricks and mortar businesses are the one's getting the bigger subsidies; roads, utilities, police/fire protection, mass transit, interstate highwasy system, yada , yada............

Internet sellers benefit just as much from those though. They have to use all of those things just like brick & mortar stores do. Some parts (such as those involved in shipping & delivery) internet sellers likely use even more.

[CuteOldGuy]

Whirly, I understand your point. It is always the right move to distrust Congress. However, I see this as returning some authority to the states. Instead of the federal government telling the states they cannot collect a tax rightfully due them, the states are now free to collect those taxes. When Congress tries to ratchet down the exemption, we'll have to address that then.

[Whirlaway]

Get real. Not on the same level; a small internet retailer located in Oshkosh; who sells vacuum cleaner replacement parts and bags through ebay uses significantly lower local infrastructure and services than does the local Wal-Mart, who sells to the same customer.

Where is the level playing field on that side of the coin?

You want a "level the playing field tax" on the local consumer to offset the disadvantage of the small out of state retailer ?

According to your logic fair is fair; tax em !

Originally Posted by jbravo_123

Internet sellers benefit just as much from those though. They have to use all of those things just like brick & mortar stores do. Some parts (such as those involved in shipping & delivery) internet sellers likely use even more.

[Randy4Candy]

You folks on the anti-side of this have got it all wrong (pretty much as usual). All states have in their sales tax laws that you are supposed to keep track of purchases made out of state and either shipped, delivered or brought into your home/business and are to remit the sales tax due to the appropriate office that collects sales tax. Well, surprise, surprise, surprise Goober/Gomer, no one does it and there's absolutely no way for any state to enforce it.

So, since sales taxes are currently in force, where's the "new?" OH, you mean that now you actually might have to pay for what you have owed all along that it is suddenly "new?" Yeah, right, geniuses.

[jbravo_123]

Originally Posted by Whirlaway

Bricks and mortar businesses are the one's getting the bigger subsidies; roads, utilities, police/fire protection, mass transit, interstate highwasy system, yada , yada............

Originally Posted by Whirlaway

Get real. Not on the same level; a small internet retailer located in Oshkosh; who sells vacuum cleaner replacement parts and bags through ebay uses significantly lower local infrastructure and services than does the local Wal-Mart, who sells to the same customer.

Where is the level playing field on that side of the coin?

You want a "level the playing field tax" on the local consumer to offset the disadvantage of the small out of state retailer ?

According to your logic fair is fair; tax em !

Wait, you're trying to somehow argue that Wal-mart is a Mom & Pop small business, which the proposed law already exempts? Not to mention that Wal-mart is a poor example to use given that it also has a huge online sales presence.

And if you want to use an extreme example, I can throw one back at you - Amazon.com is an internet seller that eats up much more local infrastructure and services than your Mom & Pop shops.

And yes, fair is fair - if you're going to do business in a state, you should be subject to that state's laws (in this case, sales tax).

[Whirlaway]

You made the claim that small internet businesses use the same level of local infrastructure and services as the big retailers with a local presence....

They do not..............

"Internet sellers benefit just as much from those though. "

[WTF]

Without roads , airports and other infrastructure the online sales could not receive materials to build their products nor be able to ship anything.

This is a no brainer. Probably why a few on here are aganist it!