Supreme Court rules on internet sales & Sales tax collection

[Keith Hankins]

Well on top of the news earlier this week on tarrifs on tools, now comes the news that internet providers that had been exempt in most cases from having to collect sales tax, now they are subject to collection.Great news for the brick and mortar stores, and to states, but bad for your wallet.I know I personally have tried to always tried to support local stores and yes that meant paying sales tax.https://www.usatoday.com/story/news/...ses/699556002/

[Dave Zellers]

This was inevitable. As was pointed out in the ruling, the economy has changed dramatically.

But the point in the dissent was that this should be handled by the legislative branch not the judicial which I agree with completely.

[David Kumm]

The point missed by most media is that consumers were always liable for the sales tax even if not collected at the source. Almost every state imposes a use tax equivelent to the sales tax on goods brought into the state where sales tax was not collected. Unfortunately we all know how well the honor system works- particularly in taxation. While I agree that this may be a legislative issue, lets not lose track of the fact that the ruling is compensating for all of our bad behavior and would not be necessary if we were more honest. Dave

[Jacob Mac]

Probably going to be a real boon to woodcraft.

[Jim Becker]

The point missed by most media is that consumers were always liable for the sales tax even if not collected at the source.

This is absolutely true.

[Alex Zeller]

Unfortunately this is going to hit small internet businesses pretty hard. South Dakota set a limit of $100k in sales or 200 transactions. That's not really that high of a limit. A large state like New York could put a small company out of business by simply tying them up in court. The legal fees could doom a smaller company. Just trying to figure out if an item is tax exempt (like most foods and clothing in Vermont) in each state will be a challenge. I'm betting we will see a company that provides a service where companies pay a monthly fee and in return they are always up to date on the latest tax rate for a given product.

[Ray Newman]

Dave Zellers in post #2 is 'dead-nuts on'.

[David Kumm]

About half of the states have adopted a uniform sales tax law to deal with the confusion and I suspect the ruling will hasten the others to join in. As an accountant I understand the hassle of dealing with the complexity but the internet has opened new markets so this is now part of the trade off. The seller must do what the buyer didn't. Dave

[Dave Zellers]

Check's in the mail, Ray

[John Jenkins4]

But the point in the dissent was that this should be handled by the legislative branch not the judicial which I agree with completely.

Right, but legislative solutions these days are like unicorns.

[johnny means]

302 forever!

[Jim Becker]

One effect to small businesses is that more, if not most, will have to utilize "accounting as a service" and hosted e-commerce solution arrangements if they are doing online business across state lines so that required sales tax collection and remittance is handled properly. Doing it in-house will be a tough row to hoe!

[Aaron Rosenthal]

This is nothing new to me.
My pal bought a motorcycle from Ontario (a smaller province to the east of the left coast) and even though all the federal and provincial taxes had been paid there, he has to repay them here in order to register the ' bike.
If I buy something from out of province, the vendor charges me the appropriate local taxes, which they have to send to my provincial government.
The only time I "win" is if I buy something off the Internet in the USA and have it shipped to a mail drop in the US close by to me, I go and get it, and declare it, the customs person will probably say "have a nice day".
Every jurisdiction is hungry for money because everyone wants the "free" government services.

[Keith Hankins]

Unfortunately this is going to hit small internet businesses pretty hard. South Dakota set a limit of $100k in sales or 200 transactions. That's not really that high of a limit. A large state like New York could put a small company out of business by simply tying them up in court. The legal fees could doom a smaller company. Just trying to figure out if an item is tax exempt (like most foods and clothing in Vermont) in each state will be a challenge. I'm betting we will see a company that provides a service where companies pay a monthly fee and in return they are always up to date on the latest tax rate for a given product.

The winner will be the software company that writes the software to account for it, and will probably collect an send on to the states for a fee....as a service to the store owner. ….this will be passed along in cost to you the consumer....

I heard my daddy say only two things are certain, death..and TAXES. Cheers.

[Jim Becker]

Solftware solutions like QuickBooks Online already have the ability to deal with all the sales tax jurisdictions for the US. The conundrum is going to be making the collection and remittance/reporting for all the potential jurisdictions that one might be selling into with online sales. If a small business needs to do the remittance/reporting individually, it's going to be a nightmare. There's going to need to be some kind of "clearing house" than handles this for it to work, or sales taxes are going to have to change from state/municipality to federal to insure things don't change to total insanity...