ADVERTISEMENT

Quill goes down

Crazyhole

Crazyhole

Todd's Tiki Bar
Jun 4, 2004
23,824
9,586
113
SCOTUS revisited Quill v ND and reversed course. Interstate commerce can now be taxed at the state level. Not sure how I feel about it but I tend to disagree, with that said all of the right leaning justices affirmed it.

Not too concerned about the big operators like wayfair or amazon but the little guy selling handmade stuff online now has to collect taxes and remit them to any state they sell to. That seems like an undue burden.
 
Well if the conservatives voted for it, then it was obviously correct. But like a good citizen, I declared my online purchases on my taxes anyway.*
 
  • Like
Reactions: Knight_Classes_begin_7pm
"These issues are not before the court in the instant case; but their potential to arise in some later case cannot justify retaining this artificial, anachronistic rule that deprives states of vast revenues from major businesses,” Justice Kennedy wrote.

I really don't like this wording being part of a SCOTUS ruling. That kind of thinking should be left to congress in drafting laws, not from the judical trying to interpret the constitution.
 
Crazyhole said:
SCOTUS revisited Quill v ND and reversed course. Interstate commerce can now be taxed at the state level. Not sure how I feel about it but I tend to disagree, with that said all of the right leaning justices affirmed it.

Not too concerned about the big operators like wayfair or amazon but the little guy selling handmade stuff online now has to collect taxes and remit them to any state they sell to. That seems like an undue burden.
Click to expand...
There will be plenty of popup services that will help small businesses meet this burden. A few questions though (which may be answered already but I wouldn't know because I haven't studied this at all):

What is the state of the purchaser providing in exchange for the taxation? Generating revenue for the government should never be a justification for taxation. Surely the seller isn't using most of the government services covered by the sales tax. So, is the interstate sales tax going to be less than the local sales taxes?

Also, why wouldn't you collect a tax for both the originator's state and the recipient's state? Why would it only be one or the other? If it is one, should it be the state of the seller who regulates the commerce (or the federal government) rather than the buyer?

Why would you not enforce a tax from every state the good passes through in transition to cover the infrastructure costs in each state?
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1ofTheseKnights
sk8knight said:
There will be plenty of popup services that will help small businesses meet this burden. A few questions though (which may be answered already but I wouldn't know because I haven't studied this at all):

What is the state of the purchaser providing in exchange for the taxation? Generating revenue for the government should never be a justification for taxation. Surely the seller isn't using most of the government services covered by the sales tax. So, is the interstate sales tax going to be less than the local sales taxes?

Also, why wouldn't you collect a tax for both the originator's state and the recipient's state? Why would it only be one or the other? If it is one, should it be the state of the seller who regulates the commerce (or the federal government) rather than the buyer?

Why would you not enforce a tax from every state the good passes through in transition to cover the infrastructure costs in each state?
Click to expand...


Great post, and all of these issues are a good reason why this should have been legislated through congress.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
ADVERTISEMENT

Latest posts

ADVERTISEMENT
Top Bottom
Back