Building entry 'Template Tweeking' failed: Parse error in template 'Individual Entry Archive':
Borders Must Pay Calif. Tax on Web SalesNow watch as one of two things happen:SAN FRANCISCO -- An appellate court ruling against Borders Group Inc. sets a precedent that could enable California to force some major Internet retailers to start paying state sales tax for books, music and other goods sold online to state residents.
Whether California tax collectors use the precedent to go after not only Borders but Barnes & Noble Inc., Amazon.com and other online retailers remains to be seen. But independent booksellers and other "bricks-and-mortar" retailers have been cheering, saying the ruling should remove their Internet competition's unfair advantage.
"There are a lot of online retailers who are watching this intently," said Tom Dressler, a spokesman for the California Attorney General's office. "Clearly online retailing is growing so one would think the potential revenue problem is fairly substantial."
Businesses can avoid paying sales taxes to states where they have no physical presence, according to a 1992 U.S. Supreme Court ruling.
My thinking is that anything sold online should be free from any sort of taxation. Exactly why is it that the government - state or federal - should get a 'slice of the pie' for people putting money back into the economy!? Quite frankly, neither state nor federal deserve to get d!ck out of any sales transaction.
Damn - it's crap like this that makes me consider changing my party affiliation from Republican to Libertarian....but for the moment I won't because I don't agree with the legalize-all-drugs argument. And especially with the Libertarians anti-war stance concerning Iraq.
Anyway...this crap really gives me a bad taste in my mouth when I see taxation for what it appears to be: socialism and that lets-MAKE-everyone-carry-the-load-for-all-those-dumbass-social-projects-that-no-one-really-wants....
Comments on Killling Business - Part II
OOH! a pie to stick a finger into!
Well, if the state constitution allows for it, let it be. If not, then sue and fire the individuals writing the legislation. (Publicly)
|| Posted by Yogimus, June 15, 2005 02:34 PM ||I don't agree with the legalize-all-drugs argument.
You mean I'm actually to the left of you on an issue? (big evil grin)
Mind you, I wouldn't burn a big spliff if they were to legalize pot, but that should be MY decision, not the government's.
I'm not all for legalizing certain drugs (Cocaine comes to mind, as does PCP), but most of the other drugs are only damaging the user. Criminaling stupidity is a hallmark of the nanny state, and I don't want any part of that.
|| Posted by timekeeper, June 16, 2005 10:00 AM ||