On 11/23/11 03:10 pm, Robert Neville wrote:

Years ago, the US Supreme Court ruled that it was unconstitutional for
states to collect sales tax on out of state sales. I wonder what has
changed?


What has changed is your understanding of sales tax, the law, and the
ruling by the courts.

Absolutely nothing has changed - the forced collection of sales tax by one state
against a purchase in another state is still unconstitutional. Quiill vs. ND is
still the legal authority and there have been no rulings by any courts that have
reversed this.

What has changed is that states are atttempting to get around the SCOTUS ruling
by stretching the definition of nexus beyond the breaking point, claiming that
"affiliates" and separate legal entities owned by the parent in that state are
sufficient to create a nexus.

In the case of affiliates, Amazon and others have told the states to pound sand
and stopped paying affiliates in those states. In the case of distribution
centers and separate legal entities (read: software development centers), Amazon
has chosen to negotiate collection terms with those states. Fine as far as it
goes.

The legislation that someone referenced earlier in this thread is an attempt to
create a new national sales tax that would be applied to transactions that are
not currently taxed at by states. And if you think it would stay that way, I
have a bridge I'd like to show you.

But the tax that Michigan, for example, expects people to pay on
out-of-state purchases is not a "Sales Tax" but a "Use Tax," and I
assume that there is a Michigan law that establishes such a tax.

Perce