Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Sales Tax

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

    #16
    No state is gonna turn down money. Even Plano taxed airbnbs because of "the extra money they hadn't counted on coming in".....has nothing to do with extra service or the property tax being paid on it as a non homestead property......I'm sure the hotels pushed it since cities rape their guests in taxes. We stayed in fairview oklahoma and hotel taxes were 25% if I recall. Oilfields have them booked so they went for the money grab.

    Comment


      #17
      Originally posted by SaltwaterSlick View Post
      Yep, for you Abbot-haters, he had nothing to do with that one... It was a Federal thing that began back in the 0-bummer administration and just worked its way through the court system all the way to the SCOTUS... decision was handed down that internet sales were taxable and it officially began Oct. 1... Or might have been Sept 1... don't remember for sure...
      It had nothing to do with Obama, and since the name of the case (South Dakota vs. Wayfair, Inc.) wasn't a clue, it wasn't a "Federal thing" either.
      Not that it matters, but both of Obama's appointees dissented.

      Comment


        #18
        I may stop selling directly out of state if I have to remit to every liv'n state tax authority!!!

        Comment


          #19
          Maybe this will help explain it.

          Gail Cole,Sales and Use Tax,Economic Nexus,Sales and Use Tax,Blog Post,Sales and Use Tax

          Comment


            #20
            Originally posted by Gunnyart View Post
            I may stop selling directly out of state if I have to remit to every liv'n state tax authority!!!
            y
            Not every state, every taxing identity, over 10,000 of them in the U.S. Pushed by large businesses that have the ability to cope with these regulatory burdens.

            Comment


              #21
              It's a great way for internet companies to make extra profit. Charge the sales tax and pocket the money. What's the State of Texas gonna do? Come get it?

              Comment


                #22
                I placed two orders on Oct 7th, one from Vt and one from Mn, that did not have sales tax added???

                Comment


                  #23
                  Sales Tax

                  Originally posted by meltingfeather View Post
                  It had nothing to do with Obama, and since the name of the case (South Dakota vs. Wayfair, Inc.) wasn't a clue, it wasn't a "Federal thing" either.

                  Not that it matters, but both of Obama's appointees dissented.


                  True, wasn’t a federal thing. What I should have said was SCOTUS ruling.


                  The point I was trying to make is that it isn’t unique to Texas.

                  Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
                  Last edited by Clay C; 10-14-2019, 06:46 PM.

                  Comment


                    #24
                    Sales Tax

                    .



                    Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

                    Comment


                      #25
                      I just see this as leveling the playing field. Why would it be OK for one entity to be taxed but not another engaged in the same business with the same customer. As noted above, pointing blind anger at Abbot is not well aimed.

                      Comment


                        #26
                        Originally posted by meltingfeather View Post
                        It had nothing to do with Obama, and since the name of the case (South Dakota vs. Wayfair, Inc.) wasn't a clue, it wasn't a "Federal thing" either.
                        Not that it matters, but both of Obama's appointees dissented.

                        1. it WAS a "federal thing" because it may have started at the state level, but progressed through Federal courts to the SCOTUS which is what I actually said.
                        2. It indeed started when Obama was the president in his administration. I did NOT say Obama had anything to do with it. I said it began when he was president as a timing issue. Had nothing to do with Abbott either.

                        Comment


                          #27
                          Originally posted by SaltwaterSlick View Post
                          1. it WAS a "federal thing" because it may have started at the state level, but progressed through Federal courts to the SCOTUS which is what I actually said.
                          2. It indeed started when Obama was the president in his administration. I did NOT say Obama had anything to do with it. I said it began when he was president as a timing issue. Had nothing to do with Abbott either.
                          A state files a lawsuit and you call it a federal thing because it passed through federal court on the way to SCOTUS. If that works for you, but I’d call it a distortion. No federal entity acted except when bound to after being asked, but hey, you’re entitled to think what you want.
                          By that logic everything that SCOTUS hears is a “federal thing,” which makes the term meaningless because it distinguishes nothing.

                          Comment


                            #28
                            Sales Tax

                            Originally posted by Hunteraudit View Post
                            I just see this as leveling the playing field. Why would it be OK for one entity to be taxed but not another engaged in the same business with the same customer. As noted above, pointing blind anger at Abbot is not well aimed.
                            I agree on both points. It puts Texas businesses at a disadvantage for sales on Texas soil and it’s really just been a dated and laxly enforced loophole. I prefer use tax to income or property tax. Not that it’ll stop the money grab on either of those fronts.

                            Comment


                              #29
                              Originally posted by Clay C View Post

                              The point I was trying to make is that it isn’t unique to Texas.

                              That I agree with.
                              I’m not even wholly opposed.

                              Comment


                                #30
                                Originally posted by meltingfeather View Post
                                That I agree with.
                                I’m not even wholly opposed.
                                I'm ambivalent on the deal. I can't say yes and I can't say no. Well, I might say maybe.

                                Comment

                                Working...
                                X