Quote:
Originally Posted by dieseldog
Regarding the highlighted portion, you are wrong, Simon, as it applies to the United States. Here, the law does not allow a state to levy a tax on a sale unless the sale takes place in the state. The sale takes place where the seller says it does and it would be up to the Florida authorities to prove otherwise. A fishing expedition looking for florida BUYERS is not appropriate; however, a fishing expedition looking for SELLERS with a nexus to florida is another matter entirely. Shipping into florida does not supply the required nexus.
You are trying too hard here, Simon. I'm down with choice of laws and all the rest--no problem; however, the fact of the matter here is that in the United States, no tax is due and owing on interstate sales (if the seller operates in the same state as the buyer lives, then it's not an interstate sale, regardless of where the shipping originates). If the seller has no nexus with the state of the buyer, the buyer cannot be charged with sales tax and the buyer's home state is categorically barred from doing so. Canadian law is completely irrelevant on this point. No one is skirting the law or avoiding their legal obligations here. The only way that the case matters to Florida is when (and if) the seller who claims no nexus with Florida prevaricates and actually does have nexus in that state. In such a case, it would be actionable by the florida authorities and it would be their burden to prove such.
It is risky to try to apply canadian legal thought and practice by extension into united states. This is a settled issue here and the Supreme Court has spoken. It is true that states are often tempted to sabre rattle and try to eek out every dollar they can--even if the case law does not support it. I liken it to the example of taking every legal income tax deduction possible. In so doing, I am not cheating the government, I'm paying the proper tax. If I miss some deductions, then I'm overpaying and it's not likely the government will, of their own accord, be forthcoming with a return of my funds.
|
keep in mind--it's a SALES TAX, and not a BUYERS TAX.
Sellers are not being "dragooned" into collecting taxes. It would make no sense at all to bifurcate the purchase funds from the sales tax funds. The funds are best held in one place--in the hands of the seller--who then submits them to the state authorities (this presumes a case of intrastate purchase). If, on the other hand, a buyer was required to keep track of and send off sales tax funds in the proper amounts to the state authorities on a plethora of purchases throughout the year, there would be chaos.