The ultimate thread! (possible NSFW) (#28)

[gladly]

Originally Posted by NaterGator

South Park, for all it's slapstick crude humor can hide a fairly intelligent and complicated message behind the facade of idiocy.

the Mormon episode was interesting and informative...

[gladly]

Originally Posted by semlin

i might be wrong, but my argument is not absurd.

i don't know us federal/state tax law but i assume it is much like federal tax law in canada and really this is kind of a conflict of laws question anyway.

first off, remember the basis of jurisdiction to tax the sale of goods does not have to be the seller being physically domiciled in the state. sales tax is levied on the buyer, not the seller. as a matter of convenience, the seller is dragooned into collecting and remitting the tax for the state by legislation, but the buyer is the one paying it and the buyer's domicile is the key.

so if the goods are delivered in florida to a florida resident, then florida can choose to levy sales tax on the buyer, regardless of where the company that sells them is based. the fact title to the goods is taken in florida would be sufficient for florida to tax them. what they can't do is force a company outside the state to collect the tax for them.

but, if buyers evade the law by failing to voluntarily pay their taxes, then the state of florida can conduct an investigation and can bring charges and they can subpoena the records of sellers to prove that buyers are evading the law. generally speaking courts in another jurisdiction will assist a state investigating criminal activity by giving effect to a subpoena or letters rogatory or some other form of compulsion.

so if you are a florida prosecuter and you go to wisconsin with a florida subpoena and say to a wisconsin court "people in florida are evading the law and a company residing in wisconsin has the records which will prove it" there is a chance a wisconsin court will assist by issuing a subpoena.

florida can also go further and actually take jurisdiction over the seller and require the seller to collect and remit sales tax if they can find any basis for taking jurisdiction over the seller that would allow them to say they are domiciled in the state. That includes any kind of business operation in the state by the seller. that is why i brought up amazon as an example. they are stuck collecting sales tax for any state where they have offices regardless of whether the goods in a particular transaction are actually delivered from a warehouse in a different state.

incidentally, i would have thought of you as readily grasping this as a member of the bar of the great state of texas which has done more than anyone else to successfully extended the concept of state jurisdiction over subject matter outside that state based on a very tenuous notion of concepts like domicile. your plaintiff's bar association colleagues have done much to facilitate the bringing of big fat jury claims in texas courts on matters with a very tenuous connection to texas

Hm. I have a point about this subject, but I am unclear on what the rules are here, I know that when I was in NS, we didn't charge our Provincial sales tax on orders being shipped outside

but I don't recall how taxes work on something that we sell from here to someone from NS for instance...

[InsanityIsBorn]

Originally Posted by gladly

the Mormon episode was interesting and informative...

Very.


JOHN SMITH.



dum dum dum dum dum dum dum dum



Judy SMITH

Smart smart smart smart smart




lol

[InsanityIsBorn]

ok.... I gotta go to bed


night Gladman!

[gladly]

Originally Posted by InsanityIsBorn

.is that wierd....

yes

but you are in tut...

so it is all okay

[gladly]

Originally Posted by InsanityIsBorn

ok.... I gotta go to bed


night Gladman!

dude, you're going to miss my glorious breakthrough to realtime

[dieseldog]

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.

[gladly]

and I'm there!

I really need to TUT from work more, to save me this late night ketchup

[dieseldog]

Originally Posted by InsanityIsBorn

*TECH POLL*

Which would TUT say I should do to lift my '88 62??

should I do a 4inch new leafs(Alcans, OME, etc), with 1-2 inch longer shackles? A bit less lift, more money, less time.

OR

Should I do a SOA. More lift, less money, more time.


What says TUT?

I am not a big fan of SOA mods. But that's just me.

[dieseldog]

Originally Posted by InsanityIsBorn

*TECH POLL*

Which would TUT say I should do to lift my '88 62??

should I do a 4inch new leafs(Alcans, OME, etc), with 1-2 inch longer shackles? A bit less lift, more money, less time.

OR

Should I do a SOA. More lift, less money, more time.


What says TUT?

Originally Posted by gladly

the "less money" part of that equation can fluctuate depending on how thorough a job you do, IMHO, the lift springs are the better option. but a properly done soa can be good

There are far greater problems with axle wrap on an SOA rig than with stock or just lifted with springs.

[InsanityIsBorn]

Originally Posted by gladly

dude, you're going to miss my glorious breakthrough to realtime

Originally Posted by gladly

and I'm there!

I really need to TUT from work more, to save me this late night ketchup

its cool, it took me a few minutes for everything else...

nice!!

you want a cookie?

[InsanityIsBorn]

Originally Posted by dieseldog

I am not a big fan of SOA mods. But that's just me.

Originally Posted by dieseldog

There are far greater problems with axle wrap on an SOA rig than with stock or just lifted with springs.

I like them more or less, as much as I like other styles of lifts...


I was gonna do a holy shit I forgot what its called.....goes from frame to axle.... oh well....


maybe anti-wrap bar? iirc I was gonna do one a dems...

[dieseldog]

Originally Posted by gladly

who the fuck is he?

who do you think is the voice of Chef on South Park? Who do you think sang the theme song to the Shaft movies?

[InsanityIsBorn]

well i will see more answers in the morning


night TUT.


lol second time tonight and it only took me another half hour to GTFO of here....

[dieseldog]

Originally Posted by InsanityIsBorn

I like them more or less, as much as I like other styles of lifts...


I was gonna do a holy shit I forgot what its called.....goes from frame to axle.... oh well....


maybe anti-wrap bar? iirc I was gonna do one a dems...

you talking about spring reversal? Moving the shackles to the "inside" rather than towards the bumpers?

[gladly]

Originally Posted by dieseldog

you talking about spring reversal? Moving the shackles to the "inside" rather than towards the bumpers?

I think he is talking about an anti wrap bar setup

[gladly]

I'm out
laterz

[dieseldog]

damn, my ass is dragging. Coming back to nights after a week of daytime frolic is tough . . .

[dieseldog]

I'm pretty sure that today will spell the end of this TUT.