Add your comments
DLS Archives
May 2013
| Sun | Mon | Tue | Wed | Thu | Fri | Sat |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | |||
| 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | 9 | 10 | 11 |
| 12 | 13 | 14 | 15 | 16 | 17 | 18 |
| 19 | 20 | 21 | 22 | 23 | 24 | 25 |
| 26 | 27 | 28 | 29 | 30 | 31 | |
Essential Windows Apps | Do Not Track | Microsoft Office | SayNow | LibreOffice | Zeam Android Launcher | Dead Space iPhone | Firefox 4 Mobile | Firefox 4 Release | PlayStation iPhone App | Excel Tips | Android Launcher | Google One Pass | Dead Space | Google Cloud Print | Songbird for Android | NBA Jam | Internet Explorer 9 | Windows 7 Connector for Mac | Office Mac 2011 | IE9 RC






Reader Comments (Page 1 of 1)
(Unverified)Apr 13th 2008 11:24PM
That's exactly correct. The law holds that sales tax must be collected if there is a physical presence within a state. NY will fail, miserably, with this if they attempt it. Why? Not only do they not have jurisdiction, they'll be hit with attempting to interfere with inter-state trade. That issue was resolved more than 230 years ago when the Articles of Confederation were replaced with the Constitution. One huge reason for this, and the eternal problem of any kind of non-point-of-sale...sale is the huge number of independent taxing authorities, each of whom can make its own taxation rules. There are many tens of thousands of independent taxing authorities. The classic argument for a national sales tax is the claim trade would increase because there would be one set of taxation rules. The counter argument, of course, is the lack of Constitutional authority for a Federal sales tax. No local or state government is going to willingly allow the Federal government to remove its ability to levy taxes on its own residents. This is similar to the way some states try to tax their residents for driving over state lines to buy cigarettes, liquor, etc. Those attempts never withstand legal challenge.