There are significant problems and unintended consequences that will arise from this money grab by those who govern and wish to redistribute wealth. In 1992 the Supreme Court ruled in the Quill case that a merchant is not required to collect sales tax unless the merchant has a tax nexus (physical presence) in that state. A tax nexus would include a retail store, office, or warehouse. Some issues that arise:
• It's difficult to monitor. How does a state track all of the millions of transactions going through the Internet every day and decide which are by companies with a presence in the state?
• The more aggressive the state gets in pursuing this issue, the more likely it is that they will lose businesses. A business in northern California, for instance, could just pick up and move to Oregon, which has no state sales tax. Multiply that one business by thousands and you can see that the state's hoped-for revenue increase might vanish quickly.
• Customers can avoid paying sales taxes by using a forwarding service. For example, a company in Oregon forwards purchases (no state sales tax in Oregon) to help customers avoid high sales taxes on Internet transactions.

This nationwide push in state capitols to slap online sales taxes on out-of-state retailers—a simple tax grab disguised as a matter of high-minded principle. Affected businesses are all but guaranteed to sue in federal court. Online retailers, would have to calculate and apply sales taxes across the entire nation—and roughly 10,000 jurisdictions have such taxes. Apparently that’s a small price to pay for the state lawmakers who hope to benefit from the resulting revenue windfall.

Complying with this convoluted system would necessarily raise costs for consumers and stifle competition. While software exists to help ease this burden, the trade association True Simplification of Taxation estimates it will cost businesses between $80,000 and $290,000 to implement, with further annual maintenance costs of between $57,500 and $260,000. That’s a pittance for major online retailers, but a fortune for smaller companies and startups. Some companies—especially smaller firms—may even stop selling in states where the burdens are worst.

Let's call out this coordinated campaign for what it truly is: a thinly veiled attempt by politicians to dig even deeper into their constituents’ pockets.

There are significant problems and unintended consequences that will arise from this money grab by those who govern and wish to redistribute wealth. In 1992 the Supreme Court ruled in the Quill case that a merchant is not required to collect sales tax unless the merchant has a tax nexus (physical presence) in that state. A tax nexus would include a retail store, office, or warehouse. Some issues that arise:
• It's difficult to monitor. How does a state track all of the millions of transactions going through the Internet every day and decide which are by companies with a presence in the state?
• The more aggressive the state gets in pursuing this issue, the more likely it is that they will lose businesses. A business in northern California, for instance, could just pick up and move to Oregon, which has no state sales tax. Multiply that one business by thousands and you can see that the state's hoped-for revenue increase might vanish quickly.
• Customers can avoid paying sales taxes by using a forwarding service. For example, a company in Oregon forwards purchases (no state sales tax in Oregon) to help customers avoid high sales taxes on Internet transactions.

This nationwide push in state capitols to slap online sales taxes on out-of-state retailers—a simple tax grab disguised as a matter of high-minded principle. Affected businesses are all but guaranteed to sue in federal court. Online retailers, would have to calculate and apply sales taxes across the entire nation—and roughly 10,000 jurisdictions have such taxes. Apparently that’s a small price to pay for the state lawmakers who hope to benefit from the resulting revenue windfall.

Complying with this convoluted system would necessarily raise costs for consumers and stifle competition. While software exists to help ease this burden, the trade association True Simplification of Taxation estimates it will cost businesses between $80,000 and $290,000 to implement, with further annual maintenance costs of between $57,500 and $260,000. That’s a pittance for major online retailers, but a fortune for smaller companies and startups. Some companies—especially smaller firms—may even stop selling in states where the burdens are worst.

Let's call out this coordinated campaign for what it truly is: a thinly veiled attempt by politicians to dig even deeper into their constituents’ pockets.

Again, the "no tax on internet purchases" thing was specifically made to help those companies. As we see retailers dropping like flies, it's obvious that the "poor little baby internet fledgeling businesses" no longer need that separate rule.

Amazon has been charging sales tax to many customers for a while now - in fact, the state of California demanded they do just that and an agreement was struck a few years back.

As for dealing with the complexities of all the thousands of (ridiculous) local jurisdictions - there are towns where one side of Main Street has one tax and the other side differs despite being in the same zip code - there has grown a bevy of companies whose sole business is providing commercial customers with those tax tables, like Vertex (https://www.vertexinc.com/) - so it can be done. And as for the monitoring thereof, when an accountant audits the books these thing will be found. Of course, anyone can cheat - talk to the investors who lost hundreds of millions in Theranos - but then that's a legal situation, isn't it?

I'm no fan of taxation (we've got way too much gub'mint already - that needs to be cut back!) either, but this does level the playing field to some extent.

I see someone mentioned Ebay, While there are companies and corporation advertising products for sale, many of the items are from people like you and I just trying to move unwanted or items no longer needed. These are and should be non-taxable as they are personal items purchased with dollars that have already been taxed. Then there is Craig's list and even here on UHH we offer our used items to others for sums of $$. It will not be long, if this stands, before they find a way to tax personal sales. I can see it now, you are having a yards sale and a lady offer you 50 cents for an item and you will have to calculate some sort of tax for big brother. Of course this is an imaginary trade but I think you get the picture. I will not have to worry about it for now as I live in New Hampshire and we do not have a sales or income tax, plus I am old...

The Supreme Court Ruled 5-4 today that States that have Sales Tax, can force you to pay Sales Tax on online purchases. Some States already have this requirement. Colorado is one. Actually, you should already be paying this, when you file you State Income Tax. Sometimes guessing. States had been complaining that online purchases were robbing them of billions of dollars in tax revenues. Now, the Supreme Court has taken action in behalf of the States. More information: https://www.usatoday.com/story/news/politics/2018/06/21/supreme-court-allows-sales-taxes-online-purchases/699556002/

There are significant problems and unintended consequences that will arise from this money grab by those who govern and wish to redistribute wealth. In 1992 the Supreme Court ruled in the Quill case that a merchant is not required to collect sales tax unless the merchant has a tax nexus (physical presence) in that state. A tax nexus would include a retail store, office, or warehouse. Some issues that arise:
• It's difficult to monitor. How does a state track all of the millions of transactions going through the Internet every day and decide which are by companies with a presence in the state?
• The more aggressive the state gets in pursuing this issue, the more likely it is that they will lose businesses. A business in northern California, for instance, could just pick up and move to Oregon, which has no state sales tax. Multiply that one business by thousands and you can see that the state's hoped-for revenue increase might vanish quickly.
• Customers can avoid paying sales taxes by using a forwarding service. For example, a company in Oregon forwards purchases (no state sales tax in Oregon) to help customers avoid high sales taxes on Internet transactions.

This nationwide push in state capitols to slap online sales taxes on out-of-state retailers—a simple tax grab disguised as a matter of high-minded principle. Affected businesses are all but guaranteed to sue in federal court. Online retailers, would have to calculate and apply sales taxes across the entire nation—and roughly 10,000 jurisdictions have such taxes. Apparently that’s a small price to pay for the state lawmakers who hope to benefit from the resulting revenue windfall.

Complying with this convoluted system would necessarily raise costs for consumers and stifle competition. While software exists to help ease this burden, the trade association True Simplification of Taxation estimates it will cost businesses between $80,000 and $290,000 to implement, with further annual maintenance costs of between $57,500 and $260,000. That’s a pittance for major online retailers, but a fortune for smaller companies and startups. Some companies—especially smaller firms—may even stop selling in states where the burdens are worst.

Let's call out this coordinated campaign for what it truly is: a thinly veiled attempt by politicians to dig even deeper into their constituents’ pockets.