Quote:
Originally Posted by JohnnyD
To be fair, this isn't necessarily a tax hike - it's a transfer of tax collection/payment responsibility from the citizen to the business. What states are trying to do is pass legislation so that internet companies that have a presence in their state are forced to collect sales tax, as opposed to trusting citizens to pay the sales tax on internet purchases - which almost no one does. This is why when you purchase printer in from Staples.com or Apple.com, you're charged tax. But purchase the same ink from Amazon.com and there's no tax.
Amazon has affiliates that advertise their products in every state for a commission (well, every state that hasn't passed this "local presence" law). Amazon as decided that complete close their Affiliate programs in the states that pass these laws.
There was a company in [I think it was] Illinois that posted over $30 million in revenue last year. The state passed a similar law and the company picked up and moved across the border within the month. You think the millions of tax revenue lost just from that one company will every be made up?
There isn't a single state that has shown increased revenue due to passing these laws. It's a classic case of politicians creating policy about a topic they don't fully understand.
|
BUt it essentially is a tax hike, because as you said, almost no one will pay that tax. And if the laws force Amazon to pay the tax, then Amazon will pass that cost on to its customers and employees. In other words, people.
I was trying to make a bigger point about the liberal notion that raising taxes on "business" is less disruptive than raising taxes on "people". I say that's baloney, because a business is an inanimate object, and as such, the business can't cut a check to the IRS. Therefore, a tax on business is ultimately paid for by employees, customers, and owners/shareholders. Those tend to be human beings.
Threaded Mode