Let's level the business playing field

Return To Article
Add a comment
  • RedShirt USS Enterprise, UT
    March 15, 2013 12:52 p.m.

    To "Ultra Bob" so you want a liberal fascist government. You want the government to provide for everybody AND control business without owning them.

  • Ultra Bob Cottonwood Heights, UT
    March 14, 2013 7:48 p.m.

    If you really want to level the business playing ground, require all like commodities to be sold at the same price no matter which retailer. Or limit the rate of return to the same for all investors. How about including the worker/consumer a level playing ground? Same wages per hour for everyone.

  • Ultra Bob Cottonwood Heights, UT
    March 14, 2013 7:37 p.m.

    When private commercial interests own and control the government the term “level the business playing field” means “eliminate price competition”. If you support the movement to eliminate price competition, vote republican.

  • All American Herriman, UT
    March 14, 2013 6:54 p.m.

    Let's look at it from another point of view. Online-only retailers have a "base" in some state - let's say, Utah. Purchasers located in Utah, where the online-only retailer has a base, pay sales taxes for the items they buy. Purchasers who don't live in Utah do not. Conversely, a purchaser in Utah doesn't pay sales tax to the online-only retailer whose base is in, say, New York. But New Yorkers DO pay sales tax to that NY online retailer. I would say the playing field is level when everyone pays sales taxes to the online retailers who have a base in their state. Oh, you say, but there are more online-only retailers in NY than Utah so they get more sales taxes. That may be, but who's counting. Anyone?

    And another thing, most retailers (in any state) have an online presence and sell their items online as well as their brick & mortar store. So are the B&M retailers ready to collect sales taxes from out-of-state purchasers?

  • procuradorfiscal Tooele, UT
    March 14, 2013 6:03 p.m.

    Re: "Competition, in essence, creates an environment in which competition is eliminated."

    That's why it's so important to prevent government unethically placing its heavy thumb on the scale in favor of locals, relatives, buddies, or business cronies.

    As SB226 does.

  • RedShirt USS Enterprise, UT
    March 14, 2013 12:18 p.m.

    This is a bad idea. All it will accomplish is it will stop small online retailers from selling things to people from Utah.

    If they are so concerned about enforcing the Utah law that says you have to pay sales taxes on items you purchased out of state for use in state, they need to set up a customs shop at the Post Office, UPS, and Fed Ex.

  • Kent C. DeForrest Provo, UT
    March 14, 2013 10:03 a.m.

    I do disagree with one statement Mr. Hymas made: "In fact, retailers of all sizes thrive on competition — as long as that competition is fair." This is one of the great myths perpetuated by free-market devotees, that competition creates greater economic freedom. In reality, competition produces what has been called economic Darwinism, or what Spencer identified as "survival of the fittest." Competition, in essence, creates an environment in which competition is eliminated.

    Competition produces winners and losers. The winners get stronger; the losers disappear. All too soon, power is aggregated in the hands of a few or even one competitor. For this reason, collusion and the common business practice of seeking government protection are the strategies companies pursue in order to ensure their survival. No businessman really believes in the "free" market.

  • Kent C. DeForrest Provo, UT
    March 14, 2013 9:52 a.m.

    I agree with Mr. Hymas. I also calculate and pay Utah's use tax for my online purchases. I'm curious, though, about how many of my fellow Utahns do the same. It would be interesting to see the statistics on that one.

  • JoeBlow Far East USA, SC
    March 14, 2013 6:32 a.m.

    Mr Hymas,

    Are you suggesting that the good people of Utah are not paying the sales tax on out of state purchases as required by law?

  • procuradorfiscal Tooele, UT
    March 14, 2013 5:32 a.m.

    Re: "SB226 has the support of the Utah retailers large and small . . . ."

    Which virtually assures its passage. Even though the overwhelming majority of voters oppose it.

    So, Utah legislators, who do you really work for?