States Can Require Internet Tax Collection, Supreme Court Rules • Hacker News Board

Re: States Can Require Internet Tax Collection, Supreme Court Rules

#361

Post by forapurpose » Thu, Jun 21, 2018, 7:21 PM UTC

jedberg wrote: post #348

forapurpose wrote: post #339

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> The business isn't paying the tax I despise Norquist, but I believe the words above are not true in a consequential sense. The law may say 'the state taxes the consumer', but who is meaningfully affected? The business handles the mechanics of collecting and paying the tax. And whose pocket the tax really comes out of depends on the elasticity of demand, IIRC my economics. That is, it depends on how much the busines…

The sales tax is collected after the transaction, so price elasticity has nothing to do with it. What you wrote applies to other things like an increase in rent or property tax, which has to be built into the cost of the product. But it doesn’t apply to sales tax.

I'm not sure what you mean - would you explain? To the degree demand is inelastic, the seller will pass on the cost of the tax to the buyer. The buyer knows what the final bill will be, regardless of when the government collects the tax.

(Also, when I buy things in U.S. states with sales tax, the tax is on the bill and even if it's not part of the advertised price, I expect it and it's part of my purchase decision. People regularly cross state lines to avoid sales tax.)

Re: States Can Require Internet Tax Collection, Supreme Court Rules

#362

Post by jonknee » Thu, Jun 21, 2018, 7:22 PM UTC

NeonVice wrote: post #242

jonknee wrote: post #208

Earlier quoted context omitted.

In general you would identify the product type from a list of a lot of product types and then let your sales tax calculator as a service provider sort out what needs taxed and at what rate.

What if each state has a different set of product types? IMO, the federal government's responsibility to regulate interstate commerce should include creating a standard of product categories. States can then tax those categories at whatever level they see fit.

That shouldn't matter too much, identify with the most granular option there is one time for each product and then let the tax provider figure out what falls into each bucket for each state. Also, UPC codes should help automate it for large swaths of products. If I buy a Sony lens cap from B&H or Amazon or Random Joe's Camera Shop it would have the same UPC and can be automatically classified by any number of tax vendors.

Re: States Can Require Internet Tax Collection, Supreme Court Rules

#363

Post by monetus » Thu, Jun 21, 2018, 7:23 PM UTC

DoctorOetker wrote: post #301

waffle_ss wrote: post #282

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Nonsense. Your accountant isn't even liable if you're audited by the IRS. They're not gonna give a crap you used some rando SaaS

Which is why the sales tax calculation algorithm should published and cryptographically signed by each state: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=17367669

I wonder if a single member of congress knows what the words 'cryptographically signed' means...

Re: States Can Require Internet Tax Collection, Supreme Court Rules

#364

Post by jakejohnson » Thu, Jun 21, 2018, 7:23 PM UTC

tzs wrote: post #346

zzzmarcus wrote: post #317

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Avalara's pricing is here: https://www.avalara.com/trustfile/en/pricing.html

That looks like their tax filing product for ecommerce. The prices look pretty good, actually, at least compared to other others. A single filing seems to be about the same price as the others, but they have good discounts if you are filing in a lot of states which looks like Avalara might be a winner if you are dealing with many states. I don't see any pricing for their services for their services for determining ho…

Correct, that pricing is specific to TrustFile for reporting and filing. They have a separate product called AvaTax [1] for calculating sales tax. If you decide to speak with a sales rep for an all-inclusive package, be mindful of setup fees, cancellation fees, and annual contracts.

[1] https://www.avalara.com/us/en/products/sales-and-use-tax/ava...

Re: States Can Require Internet Tax Collection, Supreme Court Rules

#365

Post by delinka » Thu, Jun 21, 2018, 7:23 PM UTC

koboll wrote: post #283

redbeard0x0a wrote: post #236

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The taxation is on the person living in that state. Most states require that a person buys something and doesn't pay sales tax, they are supposed to self-report and pay the tax. (Most people don't).

>The taxation is on the person living in that state. Right, and before this decision, it was that person's responsibility to remit. Now it is the business's. So the burden of remittance has shifted to the disenfranchised party.

"...the burden of remittance has shifted..."

And the party paying the tax has not shifted. The party paying the tax votes on representation.

Re: States Can Require Internet Tax Collection, Supreme Court Rules

#366

Post by jonknee » Thu, Jun 21, 2018, 7:26 PM UTC

reaperducer wrote: post #266

jonknee wrote: post #204

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Or you could just outsource it to companies like TaxJar that specialize in this and pay a few bucks to have to all done automatically. After this ruling I expect more and more platforms will have this sort of thing built in. One or two more fields to fill out for your products, but otherwise completely automated.

a few bucks Please be more specific. Also, remember that every single one of those bucks will be passed on to the customer in higher prices.

https://www.taxjar.com/pricing/

Considering you are already required to do it for where you are located it's just a little more work to automate it for all locations.

Re: States Can Require Internet Tax Collection, Supreme Court Rules

#367

Post by nemo44x » Thu, Jun 21, 2018, 7:26 PM UTC

mlindner wrote: post #356

myrandomcomment wrote: post #335

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Read the story... "...South Dakota, whose law requires retailers with more than $100,000 in sales or 200 transactions annually in the state to pay a 4.5 percent tax on purchases" "..Kennedy’s majority opinion strongly suggested the measure was constitutional, in part because it has the $100,000 threshold and doesn’t try to impose retroactive taxation." A clear bar is set for what is covered here and what is a burden.

$100,000 in sales is a very low bar. That's equivalent to a business with a single employee, the owner, and they're probably not making a livable wage yet.

I think that's the point. It's supplemental income for someone - not a real business.

Re: States Can Require Internet Tax Collection, Supreme Court Rules

#368

Post by delinka » Thu, Jun 21, 2018, 7:29 PM UTC

msbarnett wrote: post #340

jatsign wrote: post #315

Earlier quoted context omitted.

True, but there probably aren't many lawyers who can answer the question either.

> True, but there probably aren't many lawyers who can answer the question either. Strange take. On the contrary, there is an entire industry of lawyers who specialize in the ability to answer precisely this kind of question.

Or are at least willing to indemnify you based on their answer should their answer prove incorrect.

Re: States Can Require Internet Tax Collection, Supreme Court Rules

#369

Post by hnburnsy » Thu, Jun 21, 2018, 7:31 PM UTC

Anyone ever feel like a vendor is collecting sales tax, but never remitting it to the taxing authority. I remember Vonage was collecting a city\state telecommunication services tax for where I lived but only the city (not the state) actually levied the tax.

Re: States Can Require Internet Tax Collection, Supreme Court Rules

#370

Post by lovich » Thu, Jun 21, 2018, 7:32 PM UTC

CodeWriter23 wrote: post #359

delinka wrote: post #347

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Apple has asked me several times in the past for online purchases. I enter a ZIP code, they do some lookup and ask me to choose the county I live in from a list of three. I choose, and based on that they calculate tax.

That’s great until one has customers living in Los Angeles City vs. Los Angeles County. The city charges its own sales and use tax, I believe it’s an additional 0.25%. And then factor in “Enterprise Zones” where even different portions of cities have different tax rates.

There buildings where the taxes change depending on where in the building you are in.

The level of complexity surrounding taxes is amazing