I was lucky to be part of the beta for my SaaS ( https://turnshift.app ) and I must say this new feature simplifies things A LOT. Especially as a EU business owner, I previously had to sync every VAT tax rate possible, use a complex workflow to know if a customer needed to pay taxes or not, link tax rates to customers, and create taxes reports for my accountant. Stripe tax does all of that automatically, based on the…
I think you still need to collect VAT ID on your website and associate it to a stripe customer
I believe the currency conversion charge can be avoided by only charging your customers in your own currency or another currency you have a bank account for. I rarely see a small merchant that takes more than one or at best two currencies. That'd leave you with 20p + 3.9% (international) / 2.4% (European). Compared to Paddle's 5% + $0.50 that could be a good deal depending on how much of your volume happens in Europe…
I believe the currency conversion charge can be avoided by only charging your customers in your own currency or another currency you have a bank account for. It can, but then your customers get hit with varying exchange rates and potentially high conversion fees on their side. This will not make you popular with your international customers, at least the ones who didn't already back out when they saw a foreign curren…
I agree that the convinces of Paddle is hard to beat, especially for sole developer and small companies. Liability shift being indeed very powerful. But I also think the percentages thrown around are too sinistic. If you make ~5 figures a month in revenue it becomes very doable to hold a Euro and USD bank account in addition to your local currency, likely covering a fair amount of your customer base. Suddenly your cost are significantly lower (at the expense of now having to manage multiple accounts)
I believe the currency conversion charge can be avoided by only charging your customers in your own currency or another currency you have a bank account for. It can, but then your customers get hit with varying exchange rates and potentially high conversion fees on their side. This will not make you popular with your international customers, at least the ones who didn't already back out when they saw a foreign curren…
I agree that the convinces of Paddle is hard to beat, especially for sole developer and small companies. Liability shift being indeed very powerful. But I also think the percentages thrown around are too sinistic. If you make ~5 figures a month in revenue it becomes very doable to hold a Euro and USD bank account in addition to your local currency, likely covering a fair amount of your customer base. Suddenly your co…
Sure, you can hold accounts in multiple currencies. However, if you're a sole developer or small business bringing in low-six-figure revenues, you're probably going to want to take much of that revenue out of the company to pay its people on a regular basis. That in turn probably means transferring it to your primary bank account and converting the currency to your primary currency in the process, which will incur a conversion cost again. So holding accounts in several different currencies mostly helps if you expect to both bring in and pay out significant amounts in those same currencies, avoiding a round trip of conversion to and back from your native currency.
Yes. The comment I responded to said "literally all companies", not "literally all large companies".
They're just using the word "literally" in its ever more popular sense in which it does not mean that it really does apply to all companies. For example, according to Oxford dictionary https://www.oxfordlearnersdictionaries.com/definition/englis... "used to emphasize a word or phrase, even if it is not actually true in a literal sense" or Merriam Webster https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/literally "used in a…
The redefinition of "literally" to mean "not literally" is an abomination and should not be tacitly accepted.
Those rules have to be on a funding source that's plausibly related and it has to be non-coercive. I'm struggling to think of a relevant funding source here.
> Those rules have to be on a funding source that's plausibly related and it has to be non-coercive. That seems to not be the case in practice. Highway funding is dependent on states setting a legal drinking age no lower than 21. Those two things are not plausibly related. And it's definitely coercive.
The next great step would be to manage Tax collecting from Stripe Customer Portal. In this wet a website could redirect the user directly to stripe to fill all information for invoicing instead of saving locally, validating and sent them to stripe
Honest question: can somebody enlighten me about Stripe's appeal? I am not an user (until recently they weren't even available in my country) but I used ShareIt (now Digital River) 20 years ago and Avangate (now 2checkout soon Verifone) in the past 15 years and they both: - had a much larger international presence, with localizations and everything - had sales taxes, VATs etc computed from day one - had cart (not sur…
Banking in the US is at least a decade behind the rest of the developed world. Bank to bank transfers, credit cards, etc. etc. are all like banking in Australia in the late 90s.
So for those in the US, Stripe is amazing. For those of us outside the US, it's just like all the other options we've had for 10+ years (as you said)
Yes, to the extent they require it (and you want to stay compliant.) There are companies that can handle the remittance for you; Stripe lists several on their page. Reporting requirements would probably be quarterly or monthly. In practice, almost all US states that have sales tax have a in-state sales threshold amount, usually $100k+ and/or 200 transactions, and at the level of business as per your example, you woul…
Thank you! A bit more clear, but still seems really messy. So if there are limits I assume you collect 150 transactions a year from California, you have to keep the tax collected until you reach 200 and send the tax for all 200? Presumably you can't spend the money on beer and yet you also can't refund the customers either.
I'd say it's more than messy, it's a disaster. There are reasonable solutions to internet+sales tax, but the current situation is not one of them.
If you collect the tax, you need to remit it. The transaction/amount limits are the limit where you should register, collect, and remit. And usually this is a one-way affair; once you're registered, you'll need to keep filing even if you fall below the threshold.
It's kind of hinted at somewhere in Wayfair that this is really kind of about the defaults when Congress declines to speak. Congress has extremely broad powers to regulate interstate commerce which would let them decide if and how states can make sellers in other states collect for them. So far, Congress has declined to weigh in, and so we get the default. For some things the default is that states cannot do them unl…
Although your belief is a common one even at the highest levels, reality is that Art. 1, §8, cl. 2 is not actually as broad a power as is believed and/or imagined. People are reading something into that clause that did not exist when it was written, nor should it exist today. It is a function of the misunderstanding of what "regulate" means as it is and was meant, rather than what today's manipulators or "designing m…
>Although your belief is a common one even at the highest levels, reality is that Art. 1, §8, cl. 2 is not actually as broad a power as is believed and/or imagined.
Ultimately, reality is whatever people alive now determine it to be. The intentions of the original authors of the Constitution are interesting, sure, but only "real" in the sense that they guide the actual decision makers of today.
Those rules have to be on a funding source that's plausibly related and it has to be non-coercive. I'm struggling to think of a relevant funding source here.
> Those rules have to be on a funding source that's plausibly related and it has to be non-coercive. That seems to not be the case in practice. Highway funding is dependent on states setting a legal drinking age no lower than 21. Those two things are not plausibly related. And it's definitely coercive.
The two are completely plausibly related. Drinking age has a direct affect on the amount of drunk driving on roads and therefore the safety of them. The main group behind the push to 21 was Mothers Against Drunk Driving.
In fact, the Supreme Court case about this was where they came up with the rule!
The spending must promote "the general welfare."
The condition must be unambiguous.
The condition should relate "to the federal interest in particular national projects or programs."
The condition imposed on the states must not, in itself, be unconstitutional.
The condition must not be coercive.