Brick and mortar stores say they collect sales tax and online doesn't so it
isn't fair. Online has to ship their product to the consumer which costs
about the same as sales tax. So they have always been fair. The problem is we
continue to try and find more and more ways to tax people. Look at your cell
Mr. Anderson's article for one, addressed the fairness of collecting sales
tax uniformly on retail sales whether internet based (which has been a cheater)
or bricks and mortar based (which has been a losing fair player.) He also
mentioned the pending election question which would increase the tax on fuel,
give some of that to roads, some to education while removing some road monies
burden from the general fund.Otherly focused comments may be of
concern, but maybe not germane.My comments were supportive of the
uniform sales tax and then related to the gas tax.Transportation of all
sorts uses the roads. Fuel consumption and vehicle registration is much
proportional to road utilization. For that reason, I am in favor of using fuel
and vehicle related revenues to support transportation related expenditures, tit
for tat. I do not like making profit centers out of certain service categories
to fund unrelated services. Thus the General fund serves to assess general
taxes with some degree of fairness to cover general expenditures (noting that
all taxes, including business taxes, are ultimately born by the citizenry.) We can discuss how to establish a broad and fair tax system.
Mr. Anderson is not familiar with the economics of much of the internet.The plain fact is that there are likely millions of tons of saleable
merchandise on the internet, just in America, that can't move because
it's not worth the added price to ship it. Everything gets shipped; the
buyer pays the shipping charge. inevitably. This tax will just
further limit the amount of saleable merchandise due to that add-on. This will
hurt and make life more difficult for the smaller seller and buyer.
Why does suddenly roads and highways need to be a "user funded" item and
things like education, corrections, health, tourism and a host of others are
worthy of being funded by the General Fund? Why have you singled out
transportation and not, say for example, education? I think the
General Fund needs to be used for everything and not create a burden in the form
of fees on "users" instead. Who doesn't need roads? Do you make
you own clothing and furniture, grow you own food, have your own EMT and Police
services? Of course everyone needs roads.
Here's my question to Mr. Anderson: If taxes are a matter of fairness, is
it fair for large businesses to be given tax breaks while their owners and the
owners of banks call upon the Legislature to tax the small person even more
while the wealthy get tax breaks...is that "fair?"
Comments to date surprise me.Mr. Anderson has summarized the inequity of
the internet avoidance of the sales tax burden on local retail outlets. A 7%
+/- price advantage of the internet over local retail has been unfair and is
much responsible for the demise of brick and mortar businesses across the
country.Years ago, legislator Lorin Pace wrote a little tome on the
benefit of having a broad and balanced tax program for the state. His insight
would be yet beneficial and is replicated in part by Mr. Anderson. Education is
the largest consumer of state tax revenue, a hungry mouth to feed.
Transportation is also a large hungry mouth. But both of them contribute
mightily to the "general welfare" of the state and region.I
wish that roads could be made to "stand on their own feet" with related
fuel taxes and fees as a unitized source of income and expense. I wish that
education could be primarily income tax based on a graduated basis so that those
who "have more" would "pay more" as they "benefit" more
from the general level of education.I am accepting of a property
tax, only wish it could be modified to a general "asset" tax to level
out the concept of tax on wealth.
The greatest cause for the failure of the USA is the failure of the founding
fathers to carry through on the words of the Declaration of Independence.
Specifically the notion of equal justice for all.IMO, the
Constitution provides for rules and laws the protect business (Masters) and
little or none protection for consumers (slaves).A business may
incorporate under the laws of any state regardless of where they do business and
pay taxes only to that state.An individual is forced to allegiance
to a single state, county, town, city, and neighborhood, according to his
residence. His life activities, style, taxes, vote, and very existence is
controlled by his residency. Businesses may vote for their
employees and themselves, plus use the voting power of their money. employees vote only for themselves as individuals or as influenced and
directed by advertising from businessmen.
Congress needs to pass a law that sales taxes are to be collected and paid to
the taxing district in which the business resides. After all, it can be argued
that there is no sale until the money is received by the business.It's a simple and easy solution to implement and would put all business
within the same taxing district on the same footing.
Solution: Eliminate all taxes and each state can then either borrow or print
whatever money it needs just like the Federal Government does (Utahs trade
partner China, I am sure, would love to lend the State of Utah a few trillion
dollars now and then)!
Scott Anderson is shining example of what is wrong with most Utah
Republicans--they are RINO's! This is a guy who endorsed Jim Matheson over
Mia Love and is now trying to tell us how taxes are good! Give me a break!
When a new tax is proposed they always say it is for education. But that never
seems to be where it goes. It’s all a ball and shell game. If more money
goes to education from sales tax, then they pull other money away from
education, and put it somewhere else,like for a new prison,or coal port in
It looks like the Court forgot to read the Constitution - again. Article I,
Section 10, Clause 2 prohibits any State from levying an import tax or an export
tax without consent of Congress. All money collected must be given to the
Federal Government, i.e., sales tax cannot be collected except within the State
where a business has presence. If a State wants a tax placed on goods shipped
from another State, then Congress must approve that taxation AND the taxes
levied must be turned over to the U.S. Treasury.
Large sellers like Amazon already collect and remit. For sellers with buildings
full of accounting staff, it's doable.But the hodge podge of
laws the various states, counties and cities totals something like 12,000 taxing
districts. No small business can handle the paperwork, licenses, keep up with
constant changes and potential audits for any mistakes for this regulation crazy
quilt. There is no affordable solution to this issue at this time, no "app
for that" as some have cavalierly suggested . Unless congress steps in and
creates some kind of minimum standards, states will bludgeon other states'
small businesses out of existence via penalties, fees and audits. Considering
the amount of small and home based business in Utah, I would hope that the state
legislature sets aside some money to protect and defend Utah's own online
businesses from abuse and potential obliteration by other states, and that Utah
will refrain from doing irreparable harm to small businesses in other states in
a quest for the big pot of gold.