General Discussion Undecided where to post - do it here. |
Reply to Thread New Thread |
![]() |
#21 |
|
I don't believe in any taxes and I don't order online . . . but this is my opinion: |
![]() |
![]() |
#23 |
|
They'll just decree the need for a new web 2.0 architecture where purchases can be properly tracked. It will cost $200 billion, however, it is expected it will bring in $600 billion in revenue over the next 10 years. |
![]() |
![]() |
#24 |
|
There's a huge difference. In general, the idea is that we have to pay taxes to the state when we do business because the state facilitates it through creating an environment to make it possible. As the playing field gets tilted, their will be fewer and fewer brick-and-mortar stores. Think how many people go to these stores to see the actual products, then purchase them online. |
![]() |
![]() |
#25 |
|
I mean exactly that - those of us who are foreign to D.C. and its territories are tax exempt. Regardless, do you think the personal impact on you is the determinant to what is fair? |
![]() |
![]() |
#26 |
|
Are you a collectivist?? |
![]() |
![]() |
#27 |
|
Most of the things you have listed are beneficial to the customer, but a burden for the employer. So the reward of the brick-and-mortar store, for jumping through all these hoops, is that it gets put at a price disadvantage to its internet counterparts. Why is that fair? |
![]() |
![]() |
#28 |
|
I think it's sad that the brick and mortar shops are petitioning to impose the online retailers with taxes rather than fight to lower their own taxes. It's like a shackled slave seeing a free man, and instead of yearning for his own shackles to come off so he can be free, he yearns for the free man to be shackled so it's "fair". And you're correct. Even if the government were to be revenue neutral, the impact of taxing online sales should be to lower the existing rate. If the politicians weren't so revenue-greedy, they could propose this and it would appear as a win-win situation, as they would be able to claim a lowering of the existing rate. |
![]() |
![]() |
#29 |
|
Yes, that's a fair point. But they probably understand the futility of trying to get the government to lower taxes |
![]() |
![]() |
#30 |
|
Just as almost every credit card company operates out of Delaware state because of it's unique credit laws, this will simply encourage online retailers to move into the states that have no sales tax...Won't it?
It'll raise the question of whether you are liable for sales tax based on the state of the sale, or the state of the recipient. Either way, it's a huge headache. I don't see why the government is entitled to anymore tax. What work have they done SPECIFICALLY to enable online retail? Online retail exists because of infrastructure we have already paid for, for OTHER purposes. Sure, online retail utilizes roads, but we already paid for those roads via tax & debt....Why should we have to pay again? Why should the government get a fraction of every transaction? Why am I not provided with a receipt for how this money is spent? There are too many questions with no readily apparent answers. |
![]() |
![]() |
#31 |
|
I think it's sad that the brick and mortar shops are petitioning to impose the online retailers with taxes rather than fight to lower their own taxes. It's like a shackled slave seeing a free man, and instead of yearning for his own shackles to come off so he can be free, he yearns for the free man to be shackled so it's "fair". They are crying wolves. |
![]() |
![]() |
#32 |
|
Just as almost every credit card company operates out of Delaware state because of it's unique credit laws, this will simply encourage online retailers to move into the states that have no sales tax...Won't it? Why should the government get a fraction of every transaction? And another question is : WHY should VISA/Mastercard get a 2% cut of every VISA/Mastercard transaction? For the privilege to pass bytes from one computer to the other? |
![]() |
![]() |
#33 |
|
|
![]() |
![]() |
#34 |
|
|
![]() |
![]() |
#35 |
|
well, seller has no choice in this. if you are selling online, you are paying 2-3% per transaction cut to the banksters, period. |
![]() |
![]() |
#36 |
|
I've paid and received several cheques for online transactions. I would therefore advise an asterisk in lieu of a period. ![]() but if merchant is a real business and not a one-man show they'd have to still record that transaction. If you guys think that tax is small potatoes, let me give you an example: Let's take a small one-man show, a guy makes $3000/mo on his website. Assuming 20% profit margin, that's $15000/mo in sales. If the feds inact the tax, assuming average 6% that would be additional $900 expense. So this guy's take home is now $2100/mo . He just went from $15/hour to $10.50. |
![]() |
Reply to Thread New Thread |
Currently Active Users Viewing This Thread: 29 (0 members and 29 guests) | |
|