Senate bill jeopardizes tax-free online shopping

Return To Article
Add a comment
  • JWB Kaysville, UT
    April 23, 2013 8:23 a.m.

    Since Woodrow Wilson and the IRS system started, the federal government has looked at ways to get more and more money, from wherever they could get it. They charge fees, surcharges, and taxes and even made agreements with states to be partners and give the states, counties and cities a fraction of the extra taxes they charged in the 1970s. They want to make it appear as we are getting something in return from the omnipotent government in Washington, D.C., no matter which party is in control due to an ever growing bureaucracy. If we didn't have a bureaucracy to spend that extra money we made a reason to form another agency, department and such to pay high salaries and give people jobs to manage and justify the expenditures.

    Government jobs build potential votes depending on the time and season. With the furloughs happening and the inconvenience and lack of salary coming in, that builds a political campaign for the parties way prior to the next election at who is at fault. Elections are about campaigning and building a necessity. Money speaks and especially when it is a lack of money. Banks, auto manufacturers spoke - got money.

  • george of the jungle goshen, UT
    April 23, 2013 5:43 a.m.

    Once some thing is taxed it will always be taxed and will be tax increased for ever. Your value of your house went down in UT. your taxes went up.

  • lost in DC West Jordan, UT
    April 22, 2013 9:14 p.m.

    No, you misunderstood.

    if the state is no longer losing that money, it will not have to raise it somewhere else.

  • Prodicus Provo, UT
    April 22, 2013 4:13 p.m.


    Right now, people are technically supposed to be paying sales taxes on these transactions. The out-of-state store doesn't collect the tax- you're supposed to account for all your out-of-state purchases yourself and submit it with your personal yearly state taxes. Nobody does. That's a nightmarish paperwork burden for individual consumers and a tremendously inefficient way to collect taxes, so the remote sales tax is simply ignored.

    The current situation is a historical anachronism. Maybe it was workable back around the WWI era when remote sales were mostly through the Sears, Roebuck & Co. catalog. Not today.

    It puts businesses with a local presence at an artificial disadvantage. It reduces states' ability to raise revenue efficiently, to the tune of about $60 billion in lost sales tax per year. States make up part of that by finding other ways of raising revenue that are more onerous and burdensome for taxpayers. To some extent states may not make that up, and when the states can't provide services due to reduced revenue, that contributes to the concentration of power in the federal government and to the federal deficit.

    This change is fifty years overdue.

  • Evets Eagle Mountain, UT
    April 22, 2013 3:55 p.m.

    Lost in DC:
    Do you really think that if the state gains $30 million in revenue they would reduce taxes? No, They would find something else to spend it on. Our problems is not from not enough taxes...It is from too much spending. This bill is being pushed by WalMart and believe it or not Amazon (they are selling the software for businesses to be able to put this tax plan together).

    This is just another grab at how to tax us more. It is going to cost businesses money to administer this complicated plan which by the way we pay for in increased prices.

  • David Centerville, UT
    April 22, 2013 3:49 p.m.

    I would agree to tax on-line sales, but with increased revenue perhaps government could offset the taxes by lowering taxes for businesses that have been paying them all along.

  • lost in DC West Jordan, UT
    April 22, 2013 3:21 p.m.

    If the state loses, say, $30 million in revenues from lost sales tax revenues, it will raise taxes elsewhere to make up th difference.

    If I shop at the local store and my neighbor buys all his merchandise on line (and does not voluntarily pay the Utah use tax), state revenues are reduced. The state then raises other taxes that I pay, so my overall taxes go up because online sales are not taxed.

    To keep the tax burden on all of us more evenly distributed, I'm all for taxing on-line purchases.