|
An E-Fairness FAQ
January 22, 2008
What is "e-fairness"?
Sales tax laws in the 45 states that collect sales tax stipulate that when
a company has a physical presence in the state (called "nexus")
-- through a retail store, warehouse, office, or sales agent -- the company
must collect and remit sales tax on purchases made by customers in those states.
However, some online retailers with affiliates (who act as both an office and
sales agent) in these states are not collecting sales tax, while their in-state
competitors are. This creates an uneven playing field because many in-state
customers will take advantage of tax-free, online shopping. As a result, in-state
retailers lose business and the states lose much-needed tax revenue. Enforcing
the sales tax law by requiring out-of-state online retailers with nexus to collect
sales tax would bring about "e-fairness."
How can these online retailers get away with not collecting tax on purchases
made in states where they have affiliations?
The relative newness of the Internet as a shopping medium and the rise of affiliate
marketing has in some ways clouded the issue. Many online retailers will point
to a 1992 Supreme Court judgment, Quill Corp. v. North Dakota, to justify
why they are not collecting sales tax in states where they have affiliates.
The Quill decision does underscore the need for "nexus"
-- that without nexus it would be too burdensome for a company to collect sales
tax in every state due to the complexity of various state and local sales tax
systems. However, Quill -- which was written before the advent of online
affiliates -- does not change the meaning of nexus. A company has nexus
in a state through a retail store, warehouse, office, or sales agent. Though
the definition of nexus varies slightly from state to state, on balance, ABA
believes an affiliate in a state constitutes nexus since the affiliate clearly
acts as an office and/or sales agent for the company.
What is the Streamlined Sales Tax Project?
The Streamlined Sales Tax Project (SSTP) is an effort created by state governments,
with input from local governments and the private sector, to simplify and modernize
sales and use tax collection and administration, making it much easier for online
retailers to collect sales tax. Retailer participation in SSTP is voluntary,
but as of this past summer, some 1,000 businesses in the 21 participating states
have agreed to collect sales tax on remote sales. A brief summary of the project
can be downloaded at http://www.streamlinedsalestax.org/execsum0105.pdf.
So what is the "Streamlined Sales and Use Tax Agreement"?
The Streamlined Sales and Use Tax Agreement (SSUTA) is the official agreement
made by states that are participating in SSTP. ABA supports SSUTA.
If participation in SSUTA is voluntary, why would companies that don't want
to collect and remit sales tax do so?
It's true that many companies will not voluntarily participate in SSUTA and
will continue doing business as usual. Toward that end, the Sales Tax Fairness
and Simplification Act is federal legislation that would permit states that
become voluntary members of SSTP to require remote sellers to collect
and remit sales and use taxes under SSUTA. Sen. Michael Enzi (R-WY) introduced
this bill into the Senate in late May 2007. Rep. William J. Delahunt (D-MA)
introduced similar legislation into the U.S. House of Representatives in August
2007. The legislation has not yet been passed.
Does ABA believe the federal government needs to pass the Sales Tax Fairness
and Simplification Act in order to collect sales tax?
No. It is the association's strong belief that online sellers with affiliates
in states already have an obligation to collect sales tax under existing sales
tax law. The key is both to educate legislators on this issue and for in-state
business owners to make known their belief that existing tax laws should be
enforced.
Isn't this call for online sales tax very unpopular with consumers?
It's hard to imagine taxes ever being popular, but it is important to remember
that this is not a new tax. And the reality is that when states allow
out-of-state businesses to pirate away dollars that normally would have been
spent in-state, they are doing nothing less than helping to encumber their state's
own economy. In the end, the state's citizens end up the big losers. Uncollected
sales tax revenue translates into a funding shortfall for such essential services
as schools and first responders. It is conceivable that some states and local
jurisdictions will try to make up for that lost revenue by increasing property
or school taxes, or both. The bottom line is that states will need to get the
money from somewhere. Given the choice between another drastic property tax
increase, or having online retailers follow the law and collect sales tax, most
consumers would choose the latter.
What can booksellers do to help?
Write your governor and ask that he or she equitably enforce existing
tax laws by requiring out-of-state retailers with nexus in our state to collect
sales tax. To make things easier, ABA has created a template that booksellers
can adapt and send. It can be found here .In addition, booksellers should urge
their members of Congress to support the bills introduced by Sen. Enzi and Rep.
Delahunt.
For more information, visit www.bookweb.org/advocacy/salestax
or contact ABA Public Policy Liaison David Grogan at (914) 373-6662 or via e-mail
at dave@bookweb.org.
Topics: Sales Tax Initiative,
Printer friendly version
Email this article to a friend
ABA Booksellers: Discuss this article online
|