Boehner kills internet sales tax bill

[traininthedistance]

If the point of the law is "fairness," it fails, because sellers in cities and counties with higher rates will remain at a disadvantage. And if states must settle on a single tax rate for online sales only, it's frightening to contemplate how high that rate might be.

Even if we can't get to perfectly fair, we should still work for more fair- and I'm not aware of any solid evidence that any hypothetical single rate would be frighteningly high. I find this bit particularly unpersuasive.

I do appreciate the rest of your points here- I'm pretty sure I still disagree, and side with the small local brick-and-mortars who have been at the forefront of this fairness push, but it's been food for thought and I'm actively mulling it over.

As for the objection to sales taxes in general on equity grounds, I agree with BRTD that this is a Real Bad way to advance that cause:

I don't see any problem with requiring such taxes to be paid in either type of sale. If you oppose sales taxes in general, then you should get your state to abolish them, like some don't have any. But having sales taxes apply to only some businesses is completely unfair.

I'm also tempted to get all Slatepichy contrarian, cite the actual Nordic model, and point out that the most egalitarian advanced societies we've seen all don't shy away from taxing consumption at all income levels, because a broad-based tax that funds generous social programs tends to go along with a flatter wealth curve than a smaller but more strictly progressive taxation regime.  That's kind of a tangent, and I'd need more time than I have at the moment to really defend it (and even then I doubt I'd want to go full VAT like they do in Europe)... but I do think the point needs to be entered into the record as a check on the impulse to RAAR SMASH ALL SALES TAXES.

[traininthedistance]

If the point of the law is "fairness," it fails, because sellers in cities and counties with higher rates will remain at a disadvantage. And if states must settle on a single tax rate for online sales only, it's frightening to contemplate how high that rate might be.

Even if we can't get to perfectly fair, we should still work for more fair- and I'm not aware of any solid evidence that any hypothetical single rate would be frighteningly high. I find this bit particularly unpersuasive.

...
I do appreciate the rest of your points here- I'm pretty sure I still disagree, and side with the small local brick-and-mortars who have been at the forefront of this fairness push, but it's been food for thought and I'm actively mulling it over.

What makes you think the retailers who are pushing this are "small and local?" A quick look at the groups that have lobbied in favor of this shows that clearly isn't the case. And as Nix point out previously, Amazon is hardly a "local brick-and-mortar."

Well, this has been an issue since well before Amazon did their PR-motivated about face- and while it sucks that it required the support of big boxes to get moving, I can guarantee you that all the actual mom-and-pops that I had noticed taking a stand (and, being the kind of person who shops at independent bookstores, I can guarantee you I noticed it) were in favor of something like this.  That Wiki focuses exclusively on other, bigger supporters is unfortunate.

[traininthedistance]

Well, this has been an issue since well before Amazon did their PR-motivated about face- and while it sucks that it required the support of big boxes to get moving, I can guarantee you that all the actual mom-and-pops that I had noticed taking a stand (and, being the kind of person who shops at independent bookstores, I can guarantee you I noticed it) were in favor of something like this. That Wiki focuses exclusively on other, bigger supporters is unfortunate.

The Wiki entry focuses on them because they're the ones pouring cash into this effort. I'm sure there are plenty of small businesses who support this too, but those who are leading the charge at the forefront of this are corporate lobbyist fronts attempting to maximize their profits at the expense of consumers and their competitors. This bill really represents the worst of all worlds: Corporate rent-seeking, higher costs for consumers, more hassle for businesses, and concern trolling about "protecting small businesses" (I'm referring to politicians, not you) when this bill is backed by moneyed interests whose clear intent in supporting it is to crack down on small online businesses (see: Amazon).

Y'know, I might actually agree more than I disagree with this.  But the proper solution to the problems you raise is to a) enact serious campaign finance reform/contribution limits, so that the next time the minnows can get heard when it's still just the minnows, before the big folks opportunistically jump in, and b) find ways to streamline regulation and/or increase investment into the sorts of offices and services that would let small proprietors navigate the system better.  I mean, yeah, I actually agree that large piles of regulations often tend to hurt smaller enterprises disproportionately, since they can shell out less time and money to navigate those thickets.  I have more empathy for that POV than I perhaps let on sometimes (perhaps you get an inkling whenever I rail against restrictive zoning as I sometimes do).  I just don't think that looking the other way while unintended and unfair loopholes get reamed is at all a productive way to fix that issue.

What makes you think the retailers who are pushing this are "small and local?" A quick look at the groups that have lobbied in favor of this shows that clearly isn't the case. And as Nix point out previously, Amazon is hardly a "local brick-and-mortar."

Because of its localized distribution centers Amazon has reached the point where it has, or soon will have, to collect State sales taxes in most states. (In some cases Amazon negotiated a temporary moratorium as a condition of locating a distribution center in a particular State.) When it comes to the big e-commerce sites, they're in the same boat as brick-and-mortar in that they have to collect sales taxes.  Changing the rules would mainly affect smaller e-commerce sites with few if any physical sites beyond their HQ.

True; it's probably fairer to say that Amazon's shift on this issue is not simply PR but also coincided with their decision to pursue this strategy (which conveniently can also claim to be pursued in the pursuit of faster shipping times).

...

ETA: I'm surprised that nobody has mentioned the practice of showrooming yet.