TexasCHLforum.com

Wouldn't it be simpler for states to change their sales tax laws and require the seller to collect the tax at the sales location, no matter where the buyer lives? After all, if I buy a sandwich on a road trip through another state, I pay sales tax even though I don't live there. Why should the internet be different? Tax the sale at the seller's location.

sunny beach wrote:Wouldn't it be simpler for states to change their sales tax laws and require the seller to collect the tax at the sales location, no matter where the buyer lives? After all, if I buy a sandwich on a road trip through another state, I pay sales tax even though I don't live there. Why should the internet be different? Tax the sale at the seller's location.

Now that one actually IS "taxation without representation". So if I buy something from a seller in CA, the seller collects sales tax from me at THEIR rate (which I have no control over setting, THEN gives it to that state? No thanks.

If I'm traveling through there, that's another issue. In fact, there are a LOT of taxes that states add just to ding on travelers.

OldCannon wrote:

sunny beach wrote:Wouldn't it be simpler for states to change their sales tax laws and require the seller to collect the tax at the sales location, no matter where the buyer lives? After all, if I buy a sandwich on a road trip through another state, I pay sales tax even though I don't live there. Why should the internet be different? Tax the sale at the seller's location.

Now that one actually IS "taxation without representation". So if I buy something from a seller in CA, the seller collects sales tax from me at THEIR rate (which I have no control over setting, THEN gives it to that state? No thanks.

If I'm traveling through there, that's another issue. In fact, there are a LOT of taxes that states add just to ding on travelers.

How is the traveling scenario any less "taxation without representation" than sunny's proposal?

OldCannon wrote:

sunny beach wrote:Wouldn't it be simpler for states to change their sales tax laws and require the seller to collect the tax at the sales location, no matter where the buyer lives? After all, if I buy a sandwich on a road trip through another state, I pay sales tax even though I don't live there. Why should the internet be different? Tax the sale at the seller's location.

Now that one actually IS "taxation without representation". So if I buy something from a seller in CA, the seller collects sales tax from me at THEIR rate (which I have no control over setting, THEN gives it to that state? No thanks.

If I'm traveling through there, that's another issue. In fact, there are a LOT of taxes that states add just to ding on travelers.

I would actually prefer the system Sunny proposed. If a customer is shopping online and they find an item they want, they can pay the state sales tax for where the sale happened, at the vendor's address. States like Montana would find themselves full of companies that sell from their state with no sales tax, while California would see product fleeing to lower sales tax states.

As a customer, I would have the ability to shop around. See something I like and I can either buy it from the guy in California and pay ~15%, buy it from the guy in Texas and pay 8%, or buy it from the guy in Montana and pay 0%. The shipping from Texas would be much less than that from Montana, so it could go etiher way (but CA is right out.)

As a state it makes sense to charge for sales that happen inside your borders. If someone from New Mexico drives across the state line to Texline, buys a TV, and carries it back to NM, Texas gets the sales tax. If he buys it online from a a store in Texline and they deliver it to his house, the sales tax is supposed to go to NM, but that just seems odd to me.

OldCannon wrote:If I'm traveling through there, that's another issue. In fact, there are a LOT of taxes that states add just to ding on travelers.

It's commonplace to increase hotel/motel taxes, because the people who pay them often don't live in that state/city and have no voice in whether the taxes should be raised. We should discourage any tax that is levied against someone who has voice in government. Isn't that what our revolution was about?

baldeagle wrote:

OldCannon wrote:If I'm traveling through there, that's another issue. In fact, there are a LOT of taxes that states add just to ding on travelers.

It's commonplace to increase hotel/motel taxes, because the people who pay them often don't live in that state/city and have no voice in whether the taxes should be raised. We should discourage any tax that is levied against someone who has voice in government. Isn't that what our revolution was about?

No.

A more accurate analogy would be that California begins taxing you a "residence rate tax" at your home in Texas, and that you are required by force of law to pay it.