United States Supreme Court Ruling today regarding out of state sales tax

[ostatedchi]

The Supreme Court’s 5-4 decision Thursday overruled two, decades-old Supreme Court decisions that states said cost them billions of dollars in lost revenue annually. The decisions made it more difficult for states to collect sales tax on certain online purchases, and more than 40 states had asked the high court to overrule them.
The cases the court overturned said that if a business was shipping a customer’s purchase to a state where the business didn’t have a physical presence such as a warehouse or office, the business didn’t have to collect the state’s sales tax. Customers were generally responsible for paying the sales tax to the state themselves if they weren’t charged it, but most didn’t realize they owed it and few paid.

https://apnews.com/332abb7455cb4b60b...-pay-sales-tax


Well, this might be the end of the 'ship it to me out of state' loop hole to avoid local sales tax.

[beshannon]

Originally Posted by ostatedchi

Well, this might be the end of the 'ship it to me out of state' loop hole to avoid local sales tax.

Good as it was never a loophole. You were supposed to report it on your income tax each year.

https://www.rolexforums.com/showthread.php?t=611912

[imperio]

Originally Posted by beshannon

Good as it was never a loophole. You were supposed to report it on your income tax each year.

https://www.rolexforums.com/showthread.php?t=611912

Exactly this.

[ScottyC]

I suppose that that the states need the money. The other option was to raise the state income tax rate. Either way you are gonna pay. I just wonder if this might take a little wind out of the sails of the Gray dealers and leave some stock at your local AD. Maybe?????

[samson66]

Originally Posted by beshannon

Good as it was never a loophole. You were supposed to report it on your income tax each year.

https://www.rolexforums.com/showthread.php?t=611912

Why is this "good" exactly? YOU were more than welcome to report it on your taxes at the end of the year but the rest of us kind of enjoyed buying with no taxes on the front end.

Wonder if this means David and others will have to charge sales tax? This would really hurt his business since to a lot of us the rationale for buying at a premium from David is that after you factor in the sales tax, his price wasn't much different than buying at an AD at home.

[imperio]

Originally Posted by samson66

Why is this "good" exactly? YOU were more than welcome to report it on your taxes at the end of the year but the rest of us kind of enjoyed buying with no taxes on the front end.



Wonder if this means David and others will have to charge sales tax? This would really hurt his business since to a lot of us the rationale for buying at a premium from David is that after you factor in the sales tax, his price wasn't much different than buying at an AD at home.

I suppose it's good because it makes paying due tax a lot easier for the honest ones among us

[Jwin]

Originally Posted by beshannon

Good as it was never a loophole. You were supposed to report it on your income tax each year.

https://www.rolexforums.com/showthread.php?t=611912

You’re also supposed to report money you pay a babysitter or landscaper....

[05carbondrz]

This is going to kill E-commerce which is the main thing fueling the global Economy....Not good.

[jvd99]

Originally Posted by 05carbondrz

This is going to kill E-commerce which is the main thing fueling the global Economy....Not good.

That's quite a broad generalization. Things will probably be just fine. I didn't even know this was on the SC docket, and haven't really looked into the issue, but from a purely common sense standpoint, it makes sense that taxes should be collected on products in the marketplace as a general concept. With e-commerce growing at a rapid pace, it doesn't make sense for state governments not to collect sales tax on e-transactions. Like it or not, no state can survive in perpetuity on dwindling brick and mortar sales taxes. This ruling was inevitable. All of this is coming from a persona that certainly would not be mistaken as a progressive.

[samson66]

Originally Posted by 05carbondrz

This is going to kill E-commerce which is the main thing fueling the global Economy....Not good.

I previously thought this but it sure hasn't seemed to hurt Amazon a whole lot. They've been charging state sales tax for a few years now.

[Likestheshiny]

Most likely, it just means that shipping to middle-man in a state with no tax is the new cheat. Annoying, but certainly worth it for an expensive watch. I suppose the final outcome could be taxes charged per the seller's state, but I'm not too confident that would stand up legally -- high-tax states would immediately contest that on the grounds that it punishes their businesses.

(And if that did hold up, you'd find all online stores suddenly based in Oregon, which would bring us right back to not paying taxes on online purchases.)

*edit*

This is going to kill E-commerce which is the main thing fueling the global Economy....Not good.

Nah, the "Amazon tax" law in California ended up making little difference, and this is just an extension of that. Studies consistently show that tax-level price increases don't actually dissuade consumers.

[_speedmaster_]

Originally Posted by Likestheshiny

Nah, the "Amazon tax" law in California ended up making little difference, and this is just an extension of that. Studies consistently show that tax-level price increases don't actually dissuade consumers.

When you are buying a toaster on Amazon, yea, adding taxes wouldn't dissuade most.

Adding taxes to the purchase price of a Nautilus? I think that would give some people a little pause. Make no mistake, having no sales tax was a huge advantage/draw to online grey dealers.

[tyler1980]

Originally Posted by Likestheshiny

Studies consistently show that tax-level price increases don't actually dissuade consumers.

I agree only because in the US prices are not advertised inclusive of tax. So you never actually see the final price. Almost everywhere else its included in the sticker price. So you cant be dissuaded if you are not actually seeing the actual price until checkout.

[Art 1]

This is wonderful news!!

[singe89]

CA gets more than enough in taxes. Looks like I'll be shipping to Oregon.

[V25V]

Under the ruling Thursday, states can pass laws requiring out-of-state sellers to collect the state’s sales tax from customers and send it to the state. More than a dozen states have already adopted laws like that ahead of the court’s decision, according to state tax policy expert Joseph Crosby.

Looks like it will be up to the state where the dealer is shipping to, to force them to charge the sales tax or not. So this will really hurt small dealers like our TS'ers and they will need to know which states mandate charging sales tax and which do not. That's the way I read this at least

[wiswrist]

I got the impression this was targeted at online businesses. Not a brick and mortar AD shipping from one state to another.

[Jason71]

Originally Posted by rac10000

I got the impression this was targeted at online businesses. Not a brick and mortar AD shipping from one state to another.

It’s targeted at collecting more taxes and revenue. They don’t care who the originating business happens to be.

[samson66]

Originally Posted by Jason71

It’s targeted at collecting more taxes and revenue. They don’t care who the originating business happens to be.

This! All this has to do with is finding still more ways to extract your hard earned money from your pockets - as if these states (mine in particular) don't already rob you blind

Sent from my Samsung Galaxy S7 Edge using Tapatalk

[GoingPlaces]

Originally Posted by rac10000

I got the impression this was targeted at online businesses. Not a brick and mortar AD shipping from one state to another.

"Targeted" perhaps, but overall they are going for more collections period. Ship to states without sales tax will be the only option.

[V25V]

Originally Posted by rac10000

I got the impression this was targeted at online businesses. Not a brick and mortar AD shipping from one state to another.

I agree, looks to be just for online purchases as well. I do not think this may do anything with dealers we do transactions with over the phone, etc.

[GoingPlaces]

Originally Posted by V25V

I agree, looks to be just for online purchases as well. I do not think this may do anything with dealers we do transactions with over the phone, etc.

So if I purchase from an out of state AD over the phone, no tax?

[SubMarine]

Be thankful of the pieces you already own. Fasten your seatbelt -- things will become rockier from here.

[Quailhunter]

I'm in doubt that one state can impose a law on a business in another state.

The technical difficulties associated with this could put small Internet businesses at risk. If a state now can collect taxes on an Internet transaction, why not a city or county? I think this will get very messy.

Taking this further, a buyer could end up paying state, county, and city tax on an Internet purchase. I could see the Federal government imposing a tax (value added tax) to Internet purchases.

[tyler1980]

Originally Posted by Quailhunter

I'm in doubt that one state can impose a law on a business in another state.

You cannot ship alcohol from certain states to another state. Or Tesla cannot directly sell a car from california to a customer in Michigan. It has to go via a local dealership. So states do in fact do this in many situations.

They cant impose a law on out of state business activity, but once that business activity crosses the border then they can.

[tyler1980]

the other interesting effect willl be ticket resellers like stub hub and the like. This ruling gives states more control regarding out of state transactions for products that will be consumed in their state.

A lot of states have laws against selling tickets to events over face value...scalping. Ticket reselling companies get away with it because if they are registered in delaware for example and reselling tickets for events in california then its interstate commerce and the state cant really do anything about it since there is no federal law. Now the ticket platforms may have to monitor the states where customers cannot buy their tickets or the restrictions the individual states have on this activity.

Its only a matter of time until someone uses this to apply it to something else since it clearly gives states control over online transactions for products coming into their state.

[TimeToWatch]

Wow. This is very bad news for greys. This in combination with Rolex restricting supply more now than ever before May spell a slow, painful death for that business model.

[V25V]

Originally Posted by TimeToWatch

Wow. This is very bad news for greys. This in combination with Rolex restricting supply more now than ever before May spell a slow, painful death for that business model.

Meh..... the more I read that article, the more I think this is really intended to apply to online transactions. Most of our transactions with TS'ers do not really go down in the way of a traditional online one, I think they will be OK.

[SkyKing31]

It's GREED

[tyler1980]

Originally Posted by SkyKing31

It's GREED

i still don't see what greed has to do with anything. Sales tax was always "due" the only thing that has changed is who is collecting it. I suspect if the compliance was higher from the buyer competing the tax form with the state then it wouldn't be necessary, but they don't and think its "tax free"... its not. IMO its preventing tax cheating.