GlockTalk.com
Home Forums Classifieds Blogs Today's Posts Search Social Groups



  
SIGN-UP
Notices

Glock Talk
Welcome To The Glock Talk Forums.
Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
Old 05-09-2013, 22:02   #251
Jgriggs
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Oct 2012
Location: Washington State
Posts: 111
Quote:
Originally Posted by HollowHead View Post
No, it's addressing your evasion. HH
Is it possible to evade something that is neither required or expected?

If something that was previously not required, is now required couldn't that be said to be a new requirement?

Suppose a person lives in Oregon? Would this then be a new requirement for those people?
Jgriggs is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-09-2013, 22:07   #252
HarlDane
Senior Member
 
HarlDane's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2005
Location: San Joaquin Valley
Posts: 6,951
Quote:
Originally Posted by Jgriggs View Post
Is it possible to evade something that is neither required or expected?

If something that was previously not required, is now required couldn't that be said to be a new requirement?

Suppose a person lives in Oregon? Would this then be a new requirement for those people?
The requirement to pay sales tax on internet purchases has always been there for those that live in locations with sales taxes, it was just easy to avoid.

Oregon has no sales tax and wouldn't be affected by this legislation.
__________________
-HarlDane-
"Son of the San Joaquin"
The mediocre mind is incapable of understanding the man who refuses to bow blindly to conventional prejudices and chooses instead to express his opinions courageously and honestly. A. Einstein

Last edited by HarlDane; 05-09-2013 at 22:09..
HarlDane is online now   Reply With Quote
Old 05-09-2013, 22:28   #253
swoh
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2013
Posts: 178
Quote:
Originally Posted by Detectorist View Post
This thread just confirms what I've known for a long time...folks on here, and in general, will use every excuse under the sun to avoid paying more taxes..they prefer that others pay more...

As I've said before, most of us are net consumers of tax money and services, hence, we don't really pay our fair share..
What is our fair share and do you have facts substantiating that most do not pay it, or is this "feeling" that originated in the dark parts of your nether regions?
swoh is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-09-2013, 22:41   #254
Detectorist
Senior Member
 
Detectorist's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2008
Location: Robertsville, MO
Posts: 7,568
Quote:
Originally Posted by swoh View Post
What is our fair share and do you have facts substantiating that most do not pay it, or is this "feeling" that originated in the dark parts of your nether regions?
Who do you think pay most of our taxes? The rich do. The top 3%-4%.

If you're not rich, especially if you have children in public school, you are by far a net consumer of tax services.
__________________
NASM-Certified Personal Trainer

The single biggest problem in communication is the illusion that it has taken place”. George Bernard Shaw
Detectorist is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-09-2013, 23:01   #255
swoh
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2013
Posts: 178
Quote:
Originally Posted by Detectorist View Post
Who do you think pay most of our taxes? The rich do. The top 3%-4%.

If you're not rich, especially if you have children in public school, you are by far a net consumer of tax services.

I have no children in public schools. The wealthy do pay most income taxes, but I'd say that the balance is probably less with regard to property taxes and sales taxes (which are regressive taxes), especially since the wealthy tend to congregate in wealthy enclaves where their property tax dollars go toward their own children. My fuel purchases pay for road upkeep, which isn't much count considering how poorly kept the roads are. Truth is I see many low-value services provided that don't provide me with the value I expect for what I have paid.
swoh is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-10-2013, 09:18   #256
HarlDane
Senior Member
 
HarlDane's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2005
Location: San Joaquin Valley
Posts: 6,951
Quote:
Originally Posted by swoh View Post
I have no children in public schools. The wealthy do pay most income taxes, but I'd say that the balance is probably less with regard to property taxes and sales taxes (which are regressive taxes), especially since the wealthy tend to congregate in wealthy enclaves where their property tax dollars go toward their own children. My fuel purchases pay for road upkeep, which isn't much count considering how poorly kept the roads are. Truth is I see many low-value services provided that don't provide me with the value I expect for what I have paid.
Generally when the discussion of who pays their "fair share" comes up, it's not so much about the value we all receive from the services our taxes pay for, but rather each persons share of total government spending each year. In other words, a family of four that isn't paying at least $45,000 a year in federal taxes isn't picking up their share of federal spending.
__________________
-HarlDane-
"Son of the San Joaquin"
The mediocre mind is incapable of understanding the man who refuses to bow blindly to conventional prejudices and chooses instead to express his opinions courageously and honestly. A. Einstein
HarlDane is online now   Reply With Quote
Old 05-10-2013, 09:41   #257
JimIsland
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2011
Location: Charleston,SC
Posts: 983
Quote:
Originally Posted by Detectorist View Post
I'm guessing Internet retail net margins are much higher than 5%. The ones I know are doing about 20%-35%.
Yikes...what are they selling? I am higher than 5% but 20% is a pipe dream for me. Sure would be nice though!!
JimIsland is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-10-2013, 14:17   #258
Patriot15
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jan 2013
Posts: 6
Man I generally thought people who own guns were in the group against bigger government(taxes included). I guess not what a shame to some of you.
Patriot15 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-10-2013, 15:00   #259
DanaT
Pharaoh
 
DanaT's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2005
Location: CO & Baden –Württemberg
Posts: 15,827
Blog Entries: 1
Quote:
Originally Posted by void * View Post
S
And, I write code for a living. "There will be software" is not a magic bullet, it's-all-gonna-be-hunky-dory thing. That software will more than likely not be free and I can tell you - I might take a deal where I'd maintain such software for *one* state. But 50? Keeping that *correctly* updated is going to be a *nightmare*.
Take where I live, CO.

The state has a sales tax. each county can have a sales tax. each city/town can have a sales tax. And then there are "enterprise zone" sales taxes. You cant even look it up by zip code. Where I live 3 towns, 1 city, and incorporated areas share the same zip code. Add to that the zip code is split into two counties.

A person in CO can literally pay a different sales tax across the street. As an example, on big purchases in CO it not where the item is purchased but where it is delivered (technically all items are in this category). Where I live, sales tax is about 3.5%. Most of the big cities in Denver are between 8.5% and 9.5%. So, on a $1000 purchase, if I have it delivered to my house, I can save $50. Out of pure spite, I prefer to pay a nominal delivery fee and have the sales go to the town I live in rather than pay a higher tax that another city gets.
__________________
Quote:
Twice a week? 14 times a month?
Quote:
2x4=8, not 14.
Many of the truths that we cling to depend on our point of view.
DanaT is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-10-2013, 16:04   #260
newgene
Senior Member
 
newgene's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2009
Location: Mississippi
Posts: 660
We had an online comic book business about 10 years ago. It was just me and my wife in our spare time, but we could have hit a million a year even back then, if we had a couple people helping us. Online businesses are typically low margin. So, your sales are very high before you really start to see a good profit.

Also, passing laws set on today's dollar figures are bad for future business. 10 years from now, a million will be worth a little over half of that in today's dollars. It's just another tax coming that will hurt business.

Last edited by newgene; 05-10-2013 at 16:06..
newgene is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-11-2013, 10:32   #261
void *
Dereference Me!
 
void *'s Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2003
Location: #define NULL ((void *)0)
Posts: 10,239
Quote:
Originally Posted by HarlDane View Post
It's certainly a burden to deal with multiple tax jurisdictions, but B&M retailers deal with the problem all the time. If the burden is too much for certain retailers, they should limit the scope of their business to what they can realistically handle, not use the government to give them an advantage other businesses can't get.
And as I noted, the B&M retailers that have to deal with multiple tax jurisdictions do so because they are physically operating in those multiple tax jurisdictions.

You open up a single B&M store in one tax jurisdiction, you are not magically subject to every single sales tax law in every state. You don't collect California sales tax for someone from California if your single store is in Idaho. If someone calls you up and orders something from your B&M store in Idaho, do you, as a B&M retailer, have to collect sales tax for whatever state they are calling from?

The answer is ... no.

Yet you want online business to automatically have that burden, no matter their size, simply because they are online, even if they have only one office and only one warehouse?

Quote:
If their not subject to the laws of the other States, what would compel them to pay?
The federal law we are arguing about, duh. The point is, the online retailer is not subject to the law of every single state. The individual consumers ordering from that retailer are the ones who are subject to the state laws of the state they live in.

Quote:
I'm also don't find the "physical presence" argument to have much weight. There have been huge paradigm shifts in how business is done. Online retailers have a presence in every location they ship to.
If you make a website, (edit: and do not live in California), and someone from California views your website, are you subject to California's gun regulations? If you send that person a postcard, are you subject to California's gun regulations? After all, according to you, you now have a "presence" in California, right?

If you run a business online, and your warehouse is in Idaho, and you never leave Idaho, why should you be subject to California law merely for shipping something to California?

The guy in California, who you are shipping to, is subject to California law, not you, the online retailer. This is, again, not about fairness - it is about the state who wants to get the money putting the burden of collecting that money on someone who doesn't even live in or operate in that state. If they want to collect that money, they should enforce the law themselves and collect the sales tax from the people who should be paying it - not ask someone from another state to enforce it.

Quote:
Even if you don't believe in forcing any business to collect sales tax
Nothing I've said states that. The point here is, why should state A have any authority to *demand* that someone who is not subject to state A's jurisdiction do something according to State A's laws?

The "fairness" argument is not valid, it is just a rationalization spoken from the point of view of B&M retailers, ignoring "fairness" from the perspective of the online retailer.

What's really going on is this:

The states want to get their money, and they are asking the federal government to put the burden of collecting that money on individuals and businesses that do not even live or operate in that state, because that is easier on the state than the state doing what it should do: collect sales taxes from the people that are actually subject to those sales taxes.
__________________
"The human mind is seldom satisfied, and is not justifiable by any natural process whatsoever, as regards geometry, our universe differs only slightly from a long-term, bi-directional, single trait selection experiment." -- Maxwell/Einstein/Johansson

Last edited by void *; 05-11-2013 at 10:50..
void * is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-11-2013, 10:40   #262
swoh
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2013
Posts: 178
Quote:
Originally Posted by HarlDane View Post
Generally when the discussion of who pays their "fair share" comes up, it's not so much about the value we all receive from the services our taxes pay for, but rather each persons share of total government spending each year. In other words, a family of four that isn't paying at least $45,000 a year in federal taxes isn't picking up their share of federal spending.
And most Federal spending goes toward interest payments on the debt, defense, and entitlement programs. Like I said, I'm not seeing any net inflow into my pocket
swoh is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-11-2013, 10:43   #263
swoh
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2013
Posts: 178
Quote:
Originally Posted by Patriot15 View Post
Man I generally thought people who own guns were in the group against bigger government(taxes included). I guess not what a shame to some of you.
Some live in Fascist states and can't rise above their programming.
swoh is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-11-2013, 10:45   #264
HarlDane
Senior Member
 
HarlDane's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2005
Location: San Joaquin Valley
Posts: 6,951
Quote:
Originally Posted by swoh View Post
And most Federal spending goes toward interest payments on the debt, defense, and entitlement programs. Like I said, I'm not seeing any net inflow into my pocket
I agree with you, I was just clarifying what was meant by "fair share".
__________________
-HarlDane-
"Son of the San Joaquin"
The mediocre mind is incapable of understanding the man who refuses to bow blindly to conventional prejudices and chooses instead to express his opinions courageously and honestly. A. Einstein
HarlDane is online now   Reply With Quote
Old 05-11-2013, 19:11   #265
deckard2000
Member
 
Join Date: Dec 2008
Location: Park City, UT
Posts: 38
The state and local governments and their employees need more of your money. Afterall, they have to make up for the shortfall in tax collections because the S & L government employees don't pay S & L taxes on their pensions.
__________________
GOA Life Member
JPFO Annual Member
deckard2000 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-11-2013, 19:23   #266
Restless28
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jun 2008
Location: Solsbury Hill
Posts: 16,259
Quote:
Originally Posted by deckard2000 View Post
The state and local governments and their employees need more of your money. Afterall, they have to make up for the shortfall in tax collections because the S & L government employees don't pay S & L taxes on their pensions.
The old classic "blame the firefighters and cops" argument. Nice.
Restless28 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-11-2013, 19:41   #267
DanaT
Pharaoh
 
DanaT's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2005
Location: CO & Baden –Württemberg
Posts: 15,827
Blog Entries: 1
Quote:
Originally Posted by Restless28 View Post
The old classic "blame the firefighters and cops" argument. Nice.
There are many many more state and local govt employees than those two categories. Many are very well paid for what they do (read paid more than private industry). My wife used to do an admin job for a local govt. Made more than private industry. Also paid no Social Security taxes on wages; they were exempt from those taxes.
__________________
Quote:
Twice a week? 14 times a month?
Quote:
2x4=8, not 14.
Many of the truths that we cling to depend on our point of view.
DanaT is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-12-2013, 13:10   #268
Fox
Varmit Control
 
Fox's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2001
Location: USA
Posts: 8,168
Blog Entries: 1
This bill is DOA when it gets to the Republican controlled House.
Fox is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-13-2013, 02:40   #269
Peace Warrior
CLM Number 221
Am Yisrael Chai
 
Peace Warrior's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2007
Location: With the other 7,999,999
Posts: 26,172
Blog Entries: 2
Quote:
Originally Posted by Joshhtn View Post
Not yet, but that's the goal, and it's not far off... Besides, how long until they cut that million in half? ...
RELAX dewd... I mean after all, what could go wrong with a governmental bureaucracy going after businesses for sales taxes "ONLY" on sales that are 1,000,000 dollars or over???


The ignorance of those supporting this is laughably incredible.
__________________
“After a shooting spree, they always want to take the guns away from the people who didn't do it.” - William S. Burroughs
"Nothing we're gonna do is going to fundamentally alter or eliminate the possibility of another mass shooting or guarantee that [our gun ban legislation] will bring gun deaths down..." - VPOTUS Joe Biden
"Love 'Em All!!! Let Jehovah sort 'em out." - The Holy Bible
"You gonna pull those pistols or whistle Dixie?" - Josey Wales

Last edited by Peace Warrior; 05-13-2013 at 02:40..
Peace Warrior is offline   Reply With Quote
Reply

Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump




All times are GMT -6. The time now is 01:10.



Homepage
FAQ
Forums
Calendar
Advertise
Gallery
GT Wiki
GT Blogs
Social Groups
Classifieds


Users Currently Online: 777
202 Members
575 Guests

Most users ever online: 2,244
Nov 11, 2013 at 11:42