Rock Island Auction this past weekend|Page 2|Winchester Rifles|Forum|Winchester Collector

Correct.  If you go on a 49 state vacation, you don’t have to pay home state sales tax on all the crap you bought when you get home.  It has to do with “doing business in”.

It’s been a million years since I looked at this, but here’s how I remember it (I don’t know squat about the USSC decision referenced above).

As a purchaser, you do business where you do business and you pay sales tax there.

As a seller, if you do business in another state, then you collect sales tax for that other state.  “Doing business in” can include the internet or advertising or seeking out and soliciting customers in that other state.  You don’t have to physically leave your home state (Delaware?) or drag your product to that other state and exchange in person.  You can mail the widget or what have you.

One might argue that the buyer is “leaving his state” when buying from an out of state seller, and it is the seller who has not left his state.  But it has to do who-sought-out-who.  If the seller did not seek you out in your state and had no “substantial contacts” with your state, and you contacted him and he sold you the widget, then he doesn’t have to collect taxes for your state.  But once the seller establishes contacts with other states, through advertising or otherwise, then he stipulates to that state’s laws.  And the buyer and seller can’t place the burden on the state to prove who made the contact.  It’s based upon whether the seller had contacts with the buyer’s state; i.e. “put himself out there to be found” by residents of the other state.

It is true that it is difficult for states to find out about mail order, internet, phone sales, etc. but another way of looking at it, is this:  If I’m an in-state retailer of widgets and have to collect sales tax, but Giant Retailer does not, then Giant Retailer has an advantage over me that constitutes another nail in the coffin of the resident brick-and-mortar little guy.  Way of the world?  Maybe.  But there will be a compounding of revenue loss in states where retail dries up.  Those states will have to raise other taxes and incur the wrath of their citizens for that.  For instance, food, clothing and shelter, which are pretty damn local, can be exempt from sales tax.  But if everyone starts buying other things tax free, out of state, then the regression actually starts when states put sales tax on local stuff.  So the absence of a sales tax on foreign purchases is actually more regressive than a local sales tax.  Sales tax is a consumption tax.  Don’t consume, don’t pay.  Exemptions can be made for food, clothing and shelter if there is enough coming in from rich guys buying old Winchesters from out of state auctions.    Or, we can raise income taxes, or property taxes or . . . we can not raise any taxes at all then let the bitching really begin.

Again, I don’t know about the Supreme Court decision but it may be about leveling the playing field for local businesses.  Not sure.

Running for cover . . .     

Also, I’m not aware of a requirement to collect sales tax on some used stuff I sell if I’m not a retailer.

1873man said
Slick Willie when he was Gov of Ark put sales tax on the sale of groceries.

Bob  

Arkansas allows taxation by executive order?

clarence said

How can you not consume the necessities required for daily life? Only exemption I’ve heard of is food, except evidently in Ark. People living from paycheck to paycheck aren’t buying old Winchesters from out of state auctions.  

The least unfair way of collecting taxes is by basing it strictly on personal wealth.  (Even though those possessing significant wealth can hire the lawyers & accountants it takes to beat the system.)  

That’s my point.  You can’t not consume the necessities for daily life.  Thus, some people believe those necessities should not be subject to sales tax.  Food often is not taxed.  Other necessities don’t have to be taxed (but often are).  More often than not, these necessities are “local” and in state.  So, if local, in-state necessities are not taxed, and everyone buys all their non-necessities out of state and don’t pay taxes, then there is, effectively, no sales tax at all.  Thus, revenue will be made up through other taxes.  Since the local government would not be able to tax out of state sales, they would start looking around for in-state sales to make up the difference.  They could start taxing necessities, like food, or if not food, then clothing and shelter.  Or, if there was a baseline exemption for something like clothing or shelter (say $200/yr/person for clothes or likewise for rent/mortgage), they could start chipping away at that.  In short, not being able to collect sales tax when every one buys from out-of-state Giant Retailer could have a greater regressive effect than if Giant Retailer collected sales tax for the state.

I agree on your final paragraph.  But that’s another example of what I was saying: When you own the government, you can make sure everyone but you is paying tax.  So the government collects from those who don’t own it (i.e. the people).  Regression.  I think Amazon might be an example.  Did they pay any tax last year?

mrcvs said
In any event, the more we are taxed, it seems the more broke all levels of government are.  The worst offenders are the more anti firearm states!

Most high-tax states send more money to Washington than they get back in federal spending. Most low-tax states make a profit from the federal government’s system of taxing and spending.  Thus, the latter can have lower state and local taxes.

In any event, because of the near-universal foundation of the petro-dollar, nobody pays their fair share.  We run a huge deficit because we can print money because the rest of the world uses the petrodollar.  If anyone steps out of line and tries to barter (Venezuela), or switch to the petro-Euro, then we get our sanctions or our war on (Saddam, Iran, et al).  Our “enemies” aren’t much worse than our “friends” when it comes to human rights and whatnot.  It’s just that our “friends” tow the line on the dollar and our “enemies” don’t.

I don’t feel over-burdened by taxes, but then I utilize the advice of good CPAs and legal loopholes.  While I do disagree with how some tax dollars are spent, I think every person, from every angle of every spectrum, can say the same.  It beats the hell out of Somalia and Afghanistan.  Could it be better?  Yes.  No argument from me there.

I think we’d all be surprised at out of state sales.  I think there is data out there on that.  It’s growing, too.

clarence said

Not me–I live 50 miles from the nearest Walmart, Lowes, etc.  Even if I lived closer, I’d rather take a beating then face the crowds in one of those giant stores, fight for a parking space, etc.  Except for the local grocery, hardware, drug stores, & a recently opened Family Dollar store, it’s online mail order for me, & most of the sellers are out of state.  

 You’re missing out on the joys of cheap plastic Chinese crap that breaks when you get it home.  Don’t you know they will replace it for free?  Of course the time and gas and frustration is on you.  It’s all part of the New World Order that says “Now everyone can afford cheap plastic Chinese crap that breaks when you get it home.”  That’s a good thing, right?  Trickle down to China. 

Edited to add:  Sorry for getting off topic Bert.  I’ll get back in line.