US Supreme court decision on online sales tax

Started 4 months ago | Discussions
pacnwhobbyist Contributing Member • Posts: 636
US Supreme court decision on online sales tax
2

Was afraid this day would come. Means in the near future, stores like B&H and Adorama will be required to charge state sales tax to whichever state they are shipping to.

Me personally, it will not stop me from shopping online from them or any other reputable camera dealer. Sure it sucks that it’s not tax free, but I would rather deal with them vs. Amazon who oftentimes will pass off camera equipment as new when it was clearly anything but.

 pacnwhobbyist's gear list:pacnwhobbyist's gear list
Nikon D3500 Nikon AF-S DX Nikkor 55-200mm f/4-5.6G VR II
yodermk Senior Member • Posts: 1,311
Re: US Supreme court decision on online sales tax
1

Yeah mixed feelings. Obviously I have loved this loophole. More taxes always sucks.

But I don't think you can argue that the situation now is fair.  I never even consider buying big ticket camera items from local stores, and that sucks.  If this will make it so they can compete again, that would be a good thing.

If states would just lower sales tax rates across the board to compensate, it could be a win-win.  But I think we all know that won't happen.

An alternative option for me is to buy the big dollar stuff when I'm visiting my family in Oregon, which has no tax.

-- hide signature --

If it's a *Single* Lens Reflex, why do I need so many lenses?

 yodermk's gear list:yodermk's gear list
Canon EOS 80D Canon EOS 5D Mark IV Canon TS-E 24mm f/3.5L II Canon EF 35mm F2 IS USM Carl Zeiss Makro-Planar T* 50mm F2 +12 more
Michael Fryd
Michael Fryd Veteran Member • Posts: 8,806
Re: US Supreme court decision on online sales tax
6

pacnwhobbyist wrote:

Was afraid this day would come. Means in the near future, stores like B&H and Adorama will be required to charge state sales tax to whichever state they are shipping to.

Me personally, it will not stop me from shopping online from them or any other reputable camera dealer. Sure it sucks that it’s not tax free, but I would rather deal with them vs. Amazon who oftentimes will pass off camera equipment as new when it was clearly anything but.

Buyers are already required to pay sales tax on these purchases.  The change is that the stores will now start collecting the tax on behalf of the state.

Currently, the law requires buyers to self report and pay the tax.  Most consumers are not aware of these "use tax" laws, and fail to pay.   It's very difficult for states to enforce these laws.

This decision won't increase taxes, it will simply increase compliance with existing taxes.

 Michael Fryd's gear list:Michael Fryd's gear list
Nikon Coolpix AW130 Canon EOS D60 Canon EOS 5D Mark IV Canon EOS Rebel SL2 Canon EOS 7D Mark II +15 more
Michael Fryd
Michael Fryd Veteran Member • Posts: 8,806
Re: US Supreme court decision on online sales tax
13

yodermk wrote:

Yeah mixed feelings. Obviously I have loved this loophole. More taxes always sucks.

But I don't think you can argue that the situation now is fair. I never even consider buying big ticket camera items from local stores, and that sucks. If this will make it so they can compete again, that would be a good thing.

If states would just lower sales tax rates across the board to compensate, it could be a win-win. But I think we all know that won't happen.

An alternative option for me is to buy the big dollar stuff when I'm visiting my family in Oregon, which has no tax.

What state do you live in?   I'm willing to bet that under current law, if you buy in Oregon (no sales tax), and then bring the item home to your state, you are required to report the purchase and pay "use tax".

You're not being subjected to any new taxes, simply better enforcement of existing taxes.

 Michael Fryd's gear list:Michael Fryd's gear list
Nikon Coolpix AW130 Canon EOS D60 Canon EOS 5D Mark IV Canon EOS Rebel SL2 Canon EOS 7D Mark II +15 more
scrup Regular Member • Posts: 173
Re: US Supreme court decision on online sales tax
3

This will hurt the small sellers from small states.

Now they have to either reduce their profit margin to compete or fudge their books tax time.

The big winner here is Amazon.

 scrup's gear list:scrup's gear list
Canon EOS M Canon EOS M3 Canon EF-M 11-22mm f/4-5.6 IS STM Canon EF-M 22mm f/2 STM Canon EF-S 55-250mm f/4-5.6 IS STM +1 more
nofumble Senior Member • Posts: 2,093
Re: US Supreme court decision on online sales tax
1

Michael Fryd wrote:

yodermk wrote:

Yeah mixed feelings. Obviously I have loved this loophole. More taxes always sucks.

But I don't think you can argue that the situation now is fair. I never even consider buying big ticket camera items from local stores, and that sucks. If this will make it so they can compete again, that would be a good thing.

If states would just lower sales tax rates across the board to compensate, it could be a win-win. But I think we all know that won't happen.

An alternative option for me is to buy the big dollar stuff when I'm visiting my family in Oregon, which has no tax.

What state do you live in? I'm willing to bet that under current law, if you buy in Oregon (no sales tax), and then bring the item home to your state, you are required to report the purchase and pay "use tax".

You're not being subjected to any new taxes, simply better enforcement of existing taxes.

If they don't ask, don't tell.

nathantw Senior Member • Posts: 1,718
Re: US Supreme court decision on online sales tax
3

scrup wrote:

This will hurt the small sellers from small states.

Now they have to either reduce their profit margin to compete or fudge their books tax time.

The big winner here is Amazon.

I don't understand how Amazon is the winner here? They already collect sales tax on top of shipping charges. This ruling isn't exclusive (or shouldn't be if it is) to B&H. It's inclusive of all online purchases in the United States.

-- hide signature --

http://www.flickr.com/photos/nathantw/
https://nathantwong.wordpress.com/
Always have a camera with you and make sure you use it.

Tom_N Forum Pro • Posts: 14,082
Re: US Supreme court decision on online sales tax

pacnwhobbyist wrote:

Sure it sucks that it’s not tax free

It wasn't tax free before.  Although you can debate the Constitutionality of "use tax", the previous setup was that if the out-of-state seller did not collect the tax (e.g. because the law did not require them to act as your state's collection agent), you had to pay that tax to your state directly.

As far as the tax man is concerned, it is ALWAYS "pay me now or pay me later".

yodermk Senior Member • Posts: 1,311
Re: US Supreme court decision on online sales tax
1

nofumble wrote:

Michael Fryd wrote:

yodermk wrote:

Yeah mixed feelings. Obviously I have loved this loophole. More taxes always sucks.

But I don't think you can argue that the situation now is fair. I never even consider buying big ticket camera items from local stores, and that sucks. If this will make it so they can compete again, that would be a good thing.

If states would just lower sales tax rates across the board to compensate, it could be a win-win. But I think we all know that won't happen.

An alternative option for me is to buy the big dollar stuff when I'm visiting my family in Oregon, which has no tax.

What state do you live in? I'm willing to bet that under current law, if you buy in Oregon (no sales tax), and then bring the item home to your state, you are required to report the purchase and pay "use tax".

You're not being subjected to any new taxes, simply better enforcement of existing taxes.

If they don't ask, don't tell.

Yeah. On states with income taxes, they do usually ask with a "use tax" line item. I suppose technically, leaving that blank would be committing perjury. But even then, I don't think anyone anywhere does it.

My state does not have an income tax so I am never asked about it and never have to make any declaration.  I looked it up and there is a form to report it.  But if anyone ever does it I'd be pretty surprised.

-- hide signature --

If it's a *Single* Lens Reflex, why do I need so many lenses?

 yodermk's gear list:yodermk's gear list
Canon EOS 80D Canon EOS 5D Mark IV Canon TS-E 24mm f/3.5L II Canon EF 35mm F2 IS USM Carl Zeiss Makro-Planar T* 50mm F2 +12 more
Tom_N Forum Pro • Posts: 14,082
Re: US Supreme court decision on online sales tax
1

nathantw wrote:

scrup wrote:

The big winner here is Amazon.

I don't understand how Amazon is the winner here? They already collect sales tax on top of shipping charges.

I think that's the point.  Among people who are either unaware of "use tax", or intent on skirting it, the fact that Amazon (and a few other online retailers) collect sales tax places them at a slight competitive disadvantage vs. other online retailers who don't.

Once all online retailers are forced to collect taxes for all States, Amazon's disadvantage goes away – not because shopping there gets "cheaper", but because shopping in every other place will get "more expensive".

scrup Regular Member • Posts: 173
Re: US Supreme court decision on online sales tax
2

nathantw wrote:

scrup wrote:

This will hurt the small sellers from small states.

Now they have to either reduce their profit margin to compete or fudge their books tax time.

The big winner here is Amazon.

I don't understand how Amazon is the winner here? They already collect sales tax on top of shipping charges. This ruling isn't exclusive (or shouldn't be if it is) to B&H. It's inclusive of all online purchases in the United States.

30% of my purchases are with interstate SMB stores. They don't charge tax so i buy off them. There is no reason to shop with them now, I will just shop locally if i'm going to get charged the same.

Amazon will get the rest of the pie now.

 scrup's gear list:scrup's gear list
Canon EOS M Canon EOS M3 Canon EF-M 11-22mm f/4-5.6 IS STM Canon EF-M 22mm f/2 STM Canon EF-S 55-250mm f/4-5.6 IS STM +1 more
nathantw Senior Member • Posts: 1,718
Re: US Supreme court decision on online sales tax

Tom_N wrote:

As far as the tax man is concerned, it is ALWAYS "pay me now or pay me later".

Or pay me now and pay me later.

-- hide signature --

http://www.flickr.com/photos/nathantw/
https://nathantwong.wordpress.com/
Always have a camera with you and make sure you use it.

dsjtecserv Veteran Member • Posts: 3,692
Re: US Supreme court decision on online sales tax
1

yodermk wrote:

nofumble wrote:

Michael Fryd wrote:

yodermk wrote:

Yeah mixed feelings. Obviously I have loved this loophole. More taxes always sucks.

But I don't think you can argue that the situation now is fair. I never even consider buying big ticket camera items from local stores, and that sucks. If this will make it so they can compete again, that would be a good thing.

If states would just lower sales tax rates across the board to compensate, it could be a win-win. But I think we all know that won't happen.

An alternative option for me is to buy the big dollar stuff when I'm visiting my family in Oregon, which has no tax.

What state do you live in? I'm willing to bet that under current law, if you buy in Oregon (no sales tax), and then bring the item home to your state, you are required to report the purchase and pay "use tax".

You're not being subjected to any new taxes, simply better enforcement of existing taxes.

If they don't ask, don't tell.

Yeah. On states with income taxes, they do usually ask with a "use tax" line item. I suppose technically, leaving that blank would be committing perjury. But even then, I don't think anyone anywhere does it.

I do. Right here in Virginia.

My state does not have an income tax so I am never asked about it and never have to make any declaration. I looked it up and there is a form to report it. But if anyone ever does it I'd be pretty surprised.

Dave

 dsjtecserv's gear list:dsjtecserv's gear list
Canon EOS 5DS R Canon EF 24-105mm f/4L IS USM Canon EF 17-40mm f/4.0L USM Canon EF 100mm f/2.8L Macro IS USM Canon EF 70-200mm F4L IS USM +4 more
FingerPainter Senior Member • Posts: 6,585
Re: US Supreme court decision on online sales tax
9

yodermk wrote:

More taxes always sucks.

Yeah. Always.

The only thing that wouldn't suck would be no taxes at all. Because places with no roads, no garbage collection, no law enforcement (no laws for that matter) and with the masses running around uneducated are the funnest places of all!

But I don't think you can argue that the situation now is fair. I never even consider buying big ticket camera items from local stores, and that sucks. If this will make it so they can compete again, that would be a good thing.

Yes. I see this as a big potential bonus. The unfair playing field between mail-order and local shops WRT tax collection has contributed to the serious erosion of the number of B&M stores in the US. Of course the tax collection difference isn't the only price disadvantage local retailers face, so this ruling won't be a miracle cure.

I hate judging the feel and responsiveness of a camera by looking at pictures of it. I'm willing to pay a premium to get served in a store that has knowledgeable staff, and products I can try. I don't engage in showrooming.  I like that I can collect the product I buy where I bought it rather than having to arrange to be home to get a secure delivery, or have to drive to a different place to pick up a shipment from a depot.

Corkcampbell
Corkcampbell Forum Pro • Posts: 18,069
For those who want more on this, a thread was started earlier in the News and Rumor forum. (nt)
-- hide signature --

"Knowledge is good." Emil Faber

 Corkcampbell's gear list:Corkcampbell's gear list
Sigma DP2 Merrill Sony Cyber-shot DSC-RX10 Sony RX100 III Panasonic Lumix DMC-GH3 Olympus E-M5 II +5 more
RedFox88 Forum Pro • Posts: 28,452
Re: US Supreme court decision on online sales tax

pacnwhobbyist wrote:

Was afraid this day would come. Means in the near future, stores like B&H and Adorama will be required to charge state sales tax to whichever state they are shipping to.

Me personally, it will not stop me from shopping online from them or any other reputable camera dealer. Sure it sucks that it’s not tax free, but I would rather deal with them vs. Amazon who oftentimes will pass off camera equipment as new

I read more complaints on here about B&H doing that instead of Amazon!

when it was clearly anything but.

RedFox88 Forum Pro • Posts: 28,452
Re: US Supreme court decision on online sales tax

yodermk wrote:

Yeah mixed feelings. Obviously I have loved this loophole. More taxes always sucks.

But I don't think you can argue that the situation now is fair. I never even consider buying big ticket camera items from local stores, and that sucks. If this will make it so they can compete again, that would be a good thing.

If states would just lower sales tax rates across the board to compensate, it could be a win-win.

Um no, not gonna happen

But I think we all know that won't happen.

An alternative option for me is to buy the big dollar stuff when I'm visiting my family in Oregon, which has no tax.

-- hide signature --

If it's a *Single* Lens Reflex, why do I need so many lenses?

dougjgreen1 Veteran Member • Posts: 4,068
Last year, I reported owing $1.17 in Use Tax

Michael Fryd wrote:

yodermk wrote:

Yeah mixed feelings. Obviously I have loved this loophole. More taxes always sucks.

But I don't think you can argue that the situation now is fair. I never even consider buying big ticket camera items from local stores, and that sucks. If this will make it so they can compete again, that would be a good thing.

If states would just lower sales tax rates across the board to compensate, it could be a win-win. But I think we all know that won't happen.

An alternative option for me is to buy the big dollar stuff when I'm visiting my family in Oregon, which has no tax.

What state do you live in? I'm willing to bet that under current law, if you buy in Oregon (no sales tax), and then bring the item home to your state, you are required to report the purchase and pay "use tax".

You're not being subjected to any new taxes, simply better enforcement of existing taxes.

I've heard that California was considering flagging for audit any return that didn't declare a use tax, or left it blank.   So I didn't.   I gave the State of California an extra $1.17 for their trouble.

 dougjgreen1's gear list:dougjgreen1's gear list
Olympus Stylus XZ-10 Nikon 1 V2 Olympus E-M1 Olympus E-PL7 Olympus PEN E-P5 +17 more
TN Args
TN Args Veteran Member • Posts: 6,606
Re: US Supreme court decision on online sales tax
1

nofumble wrote:

Michael Fryd wrote:

yodermk wrote:

Yeah mixed feelings. Obviously I have loved this loophole. More taxes always sucks.

But I don't think you can argue that the situation now is fair. I never even consider buying big ticket camera items from local stores, and that sucks. If this will make it so they can compete again, that would be a good thing.

If states would just lower sales tax rates across the board to compensate, it could be a win-win. But I think we all know that won't happen.

An alternative option for me is to buy the big dollar stuff when I'm visiting my family in Oregon, which has no tax.

What state do you live in? I'm willing to bet that under current law, if you buy in Oregon (no sales tax), and then bring the item home to your state, you are required to report the purchase and pay "use tax".

You're not being subjected to any new taxes, simply better enforcement of existing taxes.

If they don't ask, don't tell.

Just wait until they audit you, then BAM! 

 TN Args's gear list:TN Args's gear list
Sigma dp0 Quattro Panasonic Lumix DMC-GX7 Olympus E-M5 II Panasonic Leica Summilux DG 25mm F1.4 Olympus M.Zuiko Digital ED 9-18mm F4.0-5.6 +7 more
nathantw Senior Member • Posts: 1,718
Re: US Supreme court decision on online sales tax

TN Args wrote:

nofumble wrote:

Michael Fryd wrote:

yodermk wrote:

Yeah mixed feelings. Obviously I have loved this loophole. More taxes always sucks.

But I don't think you can argue that the situation now is fair. I never even consider buying big ticket camera items from local stores, and that sucks. If this will make it so they can compete again, that would be a good thing.

If states would just lower sales tax rates across the board to compensate, it could be a win-win. But I think we all know that won't happen.

An alternative option for me is to buy the big dollar stuff when I'm visiting my family in Oregon, which has no tax.

What state do you live in? I'm willing to bet that under current law, if you buy in Oregon (no sales tax), and then bring the item home to your state, you are required to report the purchase and pay "use tax".

You're not being subjected to any new taxes, simply better enforcement of existing taxes.

If they don't ask, don't tell.

Just wait until they audit you, then BAM!

For me the past couple years my big purchases have come on EPray, so no sales tax regardless.

-- hide signature --

http://www.flickr.com/photos/nathantw/
https://nathantwong.wordpress.com/
Always have a camera with you and make sure you use it.

Keyboard shortcuts:
FForum MMy threads