Recap: eBay Fair Tax Policy, Dunkin Donuts Free Cold Brew & More

 

  • Did you know Disney World had an airport?? by Wandering Aramean. I did not know this, I doubt it’ll be making a come back, but interesting little facts for Disney fans.
  • M&T Bank is removing the monthly fee on the EZ Choice checking account, change went into effect on April 12th, 2018.

Deals expiring at the end of today (view the full deal calendar here):

Deals expiring at the end of tomorrow:

Subscribe
Notify of
guest

17 Comments
newest
oldest most voted

Jason Smith
Jason Smith (@guest_591886)
May 8, 2018 11:54

Jeff Bezos of Amazon is the biggest hypocrite on this… back in 2010 he was totally against online sales tax but once Amazon opened all their warehouses and had to start collecting tax in most states, now he wants to force everyone to collect internet sales tax. What a hypocrite.

zalmy
zalmy (@guest_591962)
May 8, 2018 14:41

True, but that doesn’t make him a hypocrite. He’s consistent- He cares only about his bottom line, as most people do.

Mark
Mark (@guest_591773)
May 8, 2018 08:09

You can’t be serious about the taxes. It’s not ebay who will be paying the taxes. It is your readers who may do some reselling on the side who will have to become the tax collector for state and local taxes. It would be awful!

Celia
Celia (@guest_591779)
May 8, 2018 08:21

I agree. Stuff like this would stop people from listing on eBay at all. And how will they determine what should be taxed? If I sell a used laptop on eBay, why should it be subject to tax when it’s already been taxed when I bought it.

Aahz
Aahz (@guest_591810)
May 8, 2018 09:45

I’m anti-tax in general, and specifically anti-internet sales tax (sadly agreeing with eBay on this issue), but you do realize that used goods sold locally are still subject to state and local sales tax, right?

Unless you’re in Alaska, Delaware, Montana, New Hampshire or Oregon, if you buy a used laptop from a computer store (or even a non-charity thrift store) you’ll be charged sales tax. States that demand sales tax even do so of those selling used goods at flea markets!

C Doc Fan
C Doc Fan (@guest_591877)
May 8, 2018 11:34

In most of these instances, these items are being taxed because they are a profit making business selling things they previously made, bought, or acquired. – This goes for the majority of persons at flea markets as well. Very few states require sales tax when a non-business person has a yard sale or sales a personal item on craigslist. – The only exception I can think of are items with titles, like cars. Many states want a sales or use tax even when buying from an individual.

The issue with Ebay is you have a pretty good portion of businesses as well as individuals selling there. Self-reporting whether you are a business is about the only thing they can do for small volume sellers because they have no way of knowing where the items come from.

Snorlax
Snorlax (@guest_591907)
May 8, 2018 12:37

Yep, tax gets charged every time something changes hands. I’m certain people have noticed they were paying taxes when they bought a used car from a dealer.

Joe S
Joe S (@guest_591783)
May 8, 2018 08:47

I’m going to admit that I have done 0 research other than reading that link and can’t really comment beacuse it doesn’t say much. What counts as an “internet business”? Would the proposed taxes affect whatever business entity is behind doctorofcredit.com?

J
J (@guest_591790)
May 8, 2018 08:56

No sales tax. Ideally people shouldn’t subsidize other people’s entitlement.

Nun
Nun (@guest_591798)
May 8, 2018 09:13

eBay sellers shouldn’t be collecting or paying out of state taxes at all (Commerce Clause). It would also open up a way for states to penalize each other with taxes over whatever issue they want and create conflicts. Besides that the overhead of keeping up with tax laws across the country is ridiculous. This issue has been discussed for 200+ years. Small states/colonies in the northeast tried in the past to tax good entering or passing through. Just because we have a faster way of delivering goods today doesn’t change the arguments on this. Just MHO.

Ann
Ann (@guest_591995)
May 8, 2018 16:27

This. The reason large businesses like Amazon and Walmart have to collect taxes in every state is they are using physical facilities owned by their business in every state, depending on the government services in that state which are funded by sales tax. An eBay seller selling out of their home only has a facility in that one state, and those of them who are registered businesses rather than small personal sellers are already collecting sales tax automatically through eBay if selling an item to someone who also lives in that same state. You’ll see a note about this on the shipping info tab of listings from business sellers who charge sales tax. I always check for that when considering a purchase that says it ships from my state.

Mark
Mark (@guest_591861)
May 8, 2018 11:14

I think the status quo is fine. It is perfectly fair and settled.

If something HAS to be done, then there shoild be a tax free allowance that is uniform by state. Say that its $100. (for illustrative pirpose) All purchases up to $100 are tax free. If you order over $100 then u pay sales tax. That way small quantities are exempt. If you are selling high ticket items like computers and other things, you probably can spring for the tax software.

Jason Smith
Jason Smith (@guest_591884)
May 8, 2018 11:51

I sell 4 or 5 computers per year, doesn’t mean I can afford the tax software.

Snorlax
Snorlax (@guest_591927)
May 8, 2018 13:10

You misunderstand.

High purchase price doesn’t, by necessity, mean high profit margin. If I sell a $100 item at 60% profit margin I made more money than if I sold a $1,000 item at 5% profit margin. If I sell low cost high profit at volume I’m not, by definition, less profitable than if I sold high cost specialty items a few items a year.

You’ve got the concept of loss leaders as well…

Snorlax
Snorlax (@guest_591902)
May 8, 2018 12:30

This is a complicated issue and I have a lot to say about it! Quill Corp. v. North Dakota established that companies require a physical presence in the state to require business to collect sales tax on out of state purchases. As a result, states have defined “physical presence” rather comically broadly in statutes to attempt to compel Internet sellers to collect and report sales tax. I think Massachusetts even tries to claim that cookies on resident’s computer constitutes a physical presence. Residents are technically required to pay use taxes on taxable items purchased outside the state. In reality, it largely operates on the honor system and pretty much nobody pays. Requiring individuals to pay use tax is really dumb because it requires people to keep really good records of all the crap they buy and be innately familiar with tax laws, which are always changing. For example, are tampons taxed in your jurisdiction? Toilet paper? Bottled water? Streaming services like Netflix? Digital downloads? Shipping services? I bet you don’t know the answers to those questions and neither do I. At the same time, requiring small business to collect sales tax for the entire USA is entirely unreasonable. Last estimate I heard there are an estimated 12,000 taxing jurisdictions in the United States, If I have a business with a few thousand dollars a year in sales (and I do), requiring me to register with all the taxing jurisdictions and collect sales tax that complies with all of them is literally impossible. Only the big players, the Amazons, the Walmarts, the Best Buys, have the ability to do that. I pay taxes on my revenue and I collect sales tax when I sell to other Connecticut residents, and I don’t have a problem doing that, it’s not actually even difficult. I have a big problem collecting sales tax in some Podunk town in Nebraska that has a special tax on socks but not during the first week of September. This specifically is what eBay is against. There are going to be major changes in this area real soon, in fact, there already are: The Supreme Court, in Direct Marketing Association v. Brohl, recently upheld a Colorado law that required certain sellers to report purchases of Colorado residents to the state and inform purchaser that they are required to pay use tax to Colorado. They actually are also currently considering overturning the Quell ruling I mentioned earlier, which is a quarter of a century old at this point. They recently heard arguments in the case, which is South Dakota v. Wayfair. They will make a ruling in the upcoming weeks, so stay tuned!! Considering their ruling in Direct Marketing Association v. Brohl, I think they might actually overturn Quell. Congress has the ability to fix this issue for the states; the Quill ruling specifically said that since Congress has the ability to regulate interstate commerce, so they can pass legislation facilitating the collection of sales tax involving cross state purchases. They… Read more »

Jason Smith
Jason Smith (@guest_591998)
May 8, 2018 16:29

I don’t think they will overturn quill, and I think the comparison to Direct Marketing Association v. Brohl is apples to oranges. In Direct Marketing Association v. Brohl, the court upheld the ruling of the lower court, while in this case they would be overturning 25 years of precedent if they overturn quill. Secondly, from the questioning of the judges, it seemed like many judges were skeptical of requiring the forcing of companies to collect out of state tax (very different from the Direct Marketing Association v. Brohl case which was a 9 – 0 decision). And thirdly, in Direct Marketing Association v. Brohl, the law only required you to report to the customer that they have to pay taxes and report to the state what sales you have, there is nothing in the interstate commerce clause that says you shouldn’t do that. That is very different that forcing people to pay the tax which violates the interstate commerce clause.