Editorial “Say no to tax hike for online retailers” opines:
“…But online merchants say any savings on sales taxes are offset by delivery charges they pick up…Beyond that, requiring the collection of sales taxes would create a bookkeeping and compliance nightmare…”
“The potential revenue from taxes collected from online sale is substantial. Figures range anywhere from $2.7 billion to $24 billion annually. Little wonder Congress is being pressured by states to act…
“But states don’t necessarily have a revenue problem. They have a spending problem…”
WATCHDOG: Regrettably the editorial is not posted at www.LancasterOnLine.com so we cannot link. Our practice is to only exerpt so much for ethical and legal reasons. Nevertheless,
1) Since when do online merchants provide shipping without charge? When they do, it is a sales inducement, no different than the discount inducements offered by merchants all the time. For example, Amizon.com includes shipping charges at times when there are multiple purchases.
2) Are we to believe that in this day of computers that online merchants wouldn’t be able to readily track sales and make quarterly payments to the proper taxing authorities?
3) Internet is a free ride while local merchants have to pay local, school board, county and sales taxes. Why should they be made to carry that tax load and their behemoth rivals be exempted?
4) That government has a “spending problem” has nothing to do with taxing local merchants while exempting their out of state Internet competitors. The same reasoning could be applied to exempting any special group from taxation. Let’s start with Investor Builders!
