U.S. CitiesCity-Data Forum Index
Covid-19 Information Page
Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Economics > Business
 [Register]
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
View detailed profile (Advanced) or search
site with Google Custom Search

Search Forums  (Advanced)
Reply Start New Thread
 
Old 07-03-2018, 09:35 PM
 
2,640 posts, read 1,009,363 times
Reputation: 6654

Advertisements

Quote:
Originally Posted by artillery77 View Post
The California BOE is merciless. They use the full power of their guilty until proven innocent money grabs. We've had to stop paying vendors because the BOE is after them and wants all money going to them. One auditor even claimed he knew our vendor wasn't the target, but he knew the owner was the brother of their true target.

As for the ruling, yes, you can now get economic nexus. Avalera (which just went public) will basically become the only option for the big companies. The smaller ones have a couple of choices, but it's not something small businesses can foreseeably comply with on their own. All of the home rule states will have this as well. For example, selling true SaaS is not taxable in Illinois, but Chicago has made their own special tax for it. Colorado doesn't tax this, but 70+ home rule special tax jurisdictions do.

It makes sense, as it is an unfair to local providers, but the lack of consistency means across the nation is a real impediment to interstate commerce.

It's not just interstate either. Now foreign sellers will have to register as well.

The States are broke, the towns are broke....and they've just found a whole new money pit.
I would love to see a court case where the tax authority in a state, say CA, contacts a small merchant in Texas, one with zero nexus in CA, and demands they remit the sales taxes due for CA customers. I think the Texas merchant would be within their rights to demand that CA pay the full costs of the work needed to account for and pay those sales taxes. CA has no legal standing in any TX court, and to get standing it would require a heck of a lot of filings and legal fees -- who will pay for that?

This SCOTUS ruling is screwed up because it is the customers who owe the taxes to the states they live in, not the merchants with no nexus! States trying to collect from sellers with no nexus are going to find it a rough road.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message

 
Old 07-04-2018, 07:04 AM
 
Location: Silicon Valley
4,917 posts, read 2,204,485 times
Reputation: 7954
Quote:
Originally Posted by TimAZ View Post
I would love to see a court case where the tax authority in a state, say CA, contacts a small merchant in Texas, one with zero nexus in CA, and demands they remit the sales taxes due for CA customers. I think the Texas merchant would be within their rights to demand that CA pay the full costs of the work needed to account for and pay those sales taxes. CA has no legal standing in any TX court, and to get standing it would require a heck of a lot of filings and legal fees -- who will pay for that?

This SCOTUS ruling is screwed up because it is the customers who owe the taxes to the states they live in, not the merchants with no nexus! States trying to collect from sellers with no nexus are going to find it a rough road.
Au contraire good sir, that's easy for them to win. They will contact the California customers and say vendor XYZ is not in compliance and needs to pay their sales tax. You are ordered (carrying the full weight of the law) to remit any money owed to this vendor to the State instead. Non-compliance punishable by fines and/or jail time.

The Texas supplier then has a choice. Obey, or forever lose the effective ability to do business in California or with any company that has real nexus in California, not to mention sales already made where there's outstanding receivables. That will continue to happen until a ludicrously high "estimated" amount is paid off. These guys are no joke. The mafia got bigger, tougher and decided to take jobs from the State here in California. They want their payoff money and they don't care if they destroy any business in the meantime. You will run out of cash before any ruling is made, they know it and they use that.

So be politically neutral to liberal, and do your best to comply. You don't want attention from these guys.

Of course, you realize the SCOTUS ruling is brought by very red state South Dakota.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 07-04-2018, 07:16 AM
 
2,640 posts, read 1,009,363 times
Reputation: 6654
Quote:
Originally Posted by artillery77 View Post
Au contraire good sir, that's easy for them to win. They will contact the California customers and say vendor XYZ is not in compliance and needs to pay their sales tax. You are ordered (carrying the full weight of the law) to remit any money owed to this vendor to the State instead. Non-compliance punishable by fines and/or jail time.

The Texas supplier then has a choice. Obey, or forever lose the effective ability to do business in California or with any company that has real nexus in California, not to mention sales already made where there's outstanding receivables. That will continue to happen until a ludicrously high "estimated" amount is paid off. These guys are no joke. The mafia got bigger, tougher and decided to take jobs from the State here in California. They want their payoff money and they don't care if they destroy any business in the meantime. You will run out of cash before any ruling is made, they know it and they use that.

So be politically neutral to liberal, and do your best to comply. You don't want attention from these guys.

Of course, you realize the SCOTUS ruling is brought by very red state South Dakota.
Please explain how the state of California can ban a Texas company from shipping goods to customers in CA. I fully understand that the sales tax authority in most states makes the Gestapo look like Girl Scouts, but legally they are able to enforce their drama only within their state.

Now what they can do is lean on the California customers to pay the taxes due, and that makes sense.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 07-04-2018, 07:45 AM
 
Location: Silicon Valley
4,917 posts, read 2,204,485 times
Reputation: 7954
Quote:
Originally Posted by TimAZ View Post
Please explain how the state of California can ban a Texas company from shipping goods to customers in CA. I fully understand that the sales tax authority in most states makes the Gestapo look like Girl Scouts, but legally they are able to enforce their drama only within their state.

Now what they can do is lean on the California customers to pay the taxes due, and that makes sense.
You're right, it's not a ban. It's an inability to collect money from customers in California.

So long as you're willing to provide goods/services to California customers with the State getting the proceeds, then I stand corrected, you're not banned, you'll just not get any money.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 07-04-2018, 08:27 AM
 
2,640 posts, read 1,009,363 times
Reputation: 6654
Quote:
Originally Posted by artillery77 View Post
You're right, it's not a ban. It's an inability to collect money from customers in California.

So long as you're willing to provide goods/services to California customers with the State getting the proceeds, then I stand corrected, you're not banned, you'll just not get any money.
What you suggest they might do is blatantly unconstitutional. No state can interfere with lawful interstate commerce or do anything to impede it.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 07-04-2018, 07:50 PM
 
Location: Silicon Valley
4,917 posts, read 2,204,485 times
Reputation: 7954
Quote:
Originally Posted by TimAZ View Post
What you suggest they might do is blatantly unconstitutional. No state can interfere with lawful interstate commerce or do anything to impede it.
Yeah....what you gonna do about it tough guy? What they're doing is perfectly legal...they make the laws, they enforce them, the are judge and jury. You can look it up. It's not a matter of finding non-compliance, the audits act on the assumption that you are not compliant unless you can prove your innocence. You want to end an investigation....then every transaction you haven't proven out is deemed wrong and the penalties and interest go from there or it's extrapolated across some assumption they have.

Now, nobody is running around weeping liberal hearts for small businesses....you fight your own battle on this. If you get targeted and you run, they will cut off your balls. If I don't send your money to them when they demand it, then they go for my balls.

And that is why small business owners crash their planes into BOE offices. They weren't insane to begin with, but they were at the end.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.

Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.


Reply
Please update this thread with any new information or opinions. This open thread is still read by thousands of people, so we encourage all additional points of view.

Quick Reply
Message:

Over $104,000 in prizes was already given out to active posters on our forum and additional giveaways are planned!

Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Economics > Business
Follow City-Data.com founder on our Forum or

All times are GMT -6.

¬© 2005-2020, Advameg, Inc. · Please obey Forum Rules · Terms of Use and Privacy Policy · Bug Bounty

City-Data.com - Contact Us - Archive 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 26, 27, 28, 29, 30, 31, 32, 33, 34, 35, 36, 37 - Top