[srplus]

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

By Job I think he's got it... it is about the round about way to force compliance with our laws by going outside the box as semlin implies about Texas.

[Jman]

Originally Posted by srplus

Fred thinks the issue is a legal one and I am certain of the facts where the legality of what is being done doesn't mean a flip. Florida is trying to collect every tax dollar they can get their hands on. They will go to all ends to do that.

Fred is arguing from the side of legality and Supreme Court cases. While I on the other hand am getting ready to get on my float plane while trying to explain to him that Florida is not trying to legally compel anyone to be its tax collection agent. However, thru strong arm tactics and legal maneuvering they have been able to force 'voluntary' compliance to something that companies may not be legally compelled to comply with. It has them by the balls and they have become Sales Tax Collection Agents of the State of Florida.

That is all.

It's a shakedown, plain and simple. I get that part. Wouldn't be the first time the State of Florida did something questionable.

But to be clear, sales tax is levied on the seller, not the buyer. Who pays to the state? The seller. It is up to the seller whether or not they want to collect it explicitly from the buyer. For example, some vendors with walk in customers--coffee shops, etc.--might list their sales prices, then charge the tax amount, so a $1.00 item costs $1.0X when you finally pay for it. Others list their prices, and just send a check for X% of sales to the state. One explicitly collects from customers, the other implicitly, but in each case, it is the SELLER that pays the money to the state.

But I get Florida's angle. Do they have Cubans in state government? They're pretty familiar with mob tactics, I've heard.

[grrlscout89FJ62]

Originally Posted by Bogo

So where do they put hermaphrodites now?

I think they call being born with physical elements of both sexes "intersexed" now -- at least in humans.

[Mars]

Originally Posted by srplus

Fred thinks the issue is a legal one and I am certain of the facts where the legality of what is being done doesn't mean a flip. Florida is trying to collect every tax dollar they can get their hands on. They will go to all ends to do that.

Fred is arguing from the side of legality and Supreme Court cases. While I on the other hand am getting ready to get on my float plane while trying to explain to him that Florida is not trying to legally compel anyone to be its tax collection agent. However, thru strong arm tactics and legal maneuvering they have been able to force 'voluntary' compliance to something that companies may not be legally compelled to comply with. It has them by the balls and they have become Sales Tax Collection Agents of the State of Florida.

That is all.

Post exceeds reading limit. Please summarize the summary.

:flaminog:

[sisukid1975]

Originally Posted by srplus

NO. I completely get the implications of the office in Florida... What you seem to be missing is the fact that Florida has been able to circumvent the law.

I also live about 10 blocks from the state capitol and keep up with what is going on around here. I am not saying and never have said (unless I mistakenly gave an impression) that the Great State of Florida was legally compelling out of state companies to be their agent to collect sales tax for it. And since I never said anything about Wisconsin policy or law, all of that mumbo jumbo does not apply to this case that is:

Rather the opposite and what I started the [RANT] about....

The State of Florida will either get you to drain your monetary resources with your payments to your lawyer or in the case of you shredding everything they send, will send some of its attorneys to your great state to seek and obtain a local subpoena that will be enforceable... that subpoena will be to get you to provide them with information against tax cheats in Florida. Of course with this subpoena they will send their auditors to insure that the subpoena is completely complied with and your staff will be tied up for months. With all of the brow beating and confrontation MOST large businesses that sell products to residents of Florida look at the bottom line and decide it will cost X dollars to keep screwing with this or we can just put the sales tax compilation field in the order form and mail a check. They are doing it because they know that the subpoenas will be never ending.

I can guarantee that the State of Florida will not be wasting its resources on Supreme Court Cases on this... I can also guarantee that if you are a large company selling large ticket items to Floridians (and shipping them to Florida) that you can count on my great state messing with you until you figure out the math. That is of course unless you want to hire your attorney and pay him to end up in the US Supreme Court to defend your rights and get them to cease and desist. The first area you will have a problem is that they are not trying to legally compel you to comply... however, it might cost you one hell of a lot dollars out of pocket if you voluntarily comply and become their agent.

I doubt your soon to be ex-employer will be affected by this so you can rest easily.

Sorry. I'm just not buying it. Is there somewhere else other than your post where I can read about the State of Florida compelling (or bullying) large companies to pay out-of-jurisdiction taxes in violation of the letter of, or the spirit of, Bellas Hass and the 14th Amendment?

If so, I predict it won't be long before the state of FL will be soon relieved of some of it's unlimited resources when we're looking at "Big Fortune 500 Mail order company V. Florida."

[srplus]

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.

BTW, in the State of Florida it is required to pay taxes on all merchandise ordered from anywhere in the Universe if delivery of the item purchased is in the State of Florida. If you buy something in Wisconsin and have it shipped to somewhere in Georgia the State of Florida would have to prove in court (if they wanted to prosecute for failure to pay tax) that beyond a reasonable doubt you did that to evade paying the tax that was legally due.

The original thing that I was ranting about was the whole system sucks and a friend got caught in the net because of a sales person (who was attempting to up his commission rate by getting ppl - attorneys and CPA's included - who know better to spend what they would have spent on the legal tax on a larger sale to get bigger commissions). He is reaping the benefits now of some of the power of Florida in insuring that its sales tax laws are complied with. They don't give a shit about what is legal in other states or even what the Supreme Court has decided. They just want the money. They are devious and will do anything to collect it. They also know how to turn the thumbscrews to get companies to voluntarily become their agents and do their job for them.

[Ullr]

So many words.

[Jman]

Panel Seeks To Snag Millions in Lost Taxes | TheLedger.com

http://www.wilsoncreekwinery.com/_Im...rm_Florida.pdf

[Ullr]

Check it out, I found a hostel in a small town near 4 resorts (Valle Nevado, La Parva, El Colorado and Los Farrelones) that is 300 feet from a t-bar. And it has a bar. I'm thinking thats the way to go for the first week.

5 resorts in one trip to Chile.

[grrlscout89FJ62]

Originally Posted by Mickldo

[ more useful stuff ]

Thanks again for your expertise, Mick!

Sounds like I have a lot of work and/or spending in my future.

[surfpig]

What's with all these words?

[Cube Dweller]

iz in a meeting.

[surfpig]

Originally Posted by Jman

Holy shit. Water's flowing fast. We must be getting near the falls or something. . . .

It's the light at the end of the tunnel!

[Cube Dweller]

tea kettling sales tax is like, alot of words and stuff. but I will add when calculating CA income tax using TurboTax, there is a question if you've purchased any items from out of state, and if so, how much....

[surfpig]

ONE BALL JAY!

[82-SOA-60]

Originally Posted by rachel1027

And I am worth $1056/hr in bed as well

PeeWee says, How you doin?

[srplus]

Originally Posted by Ullr

Dude, switch to decaf.

I'm just sayin...

Send longer emails.

[Hugh Heifer]

I have been attempting to log on to my work computer all morning. 2 and a half hours now.

[srplus]

Originally Posted by Jman

It's a shakedown, plain and simple. I get that part. Wouldn't be the first time the State of Florida did something questionable.

But to be clear, sales tax is levied on the seller, not the buyer. Who pays to the state? The seller. It is up to the seller whether or not they want to collect it explicitly from the buyer. For example, some vendors with walk in customers--coffee shops, etc.--might list their sales prices, then charge the tax amount, so a $1.00 item costs $1.0X when you finally pay for it. Others list their prices, and just send a check for X% of sales to the state. One explicitly collects from customers, the other implicitly, but in each case, it is the SELLER that pays the money to the state.

But I get Florida's angle. Do they have Cubans in state government? They're pretty familiar with mob tactics, I've heard.

You are wrong as far as Florida is concerned but may be correct about New York or New Jersey... I will consult with DD.

[RANT]Here sales tax is due on the sale of taxable goods or services as defined by our state laws or constitution. That sales is required to be paid by the person buying the merchandise or service. The person making the sale becomes an agent of the state to collect the sales tax and accepts the payment of the tax from the buyer and remits the tax collected to the state.

It is the person making the purchase that must pay the tax on the merchandise or sale by payment of tax to an agent or by submitting a voucher and paying themselves if the vendor is not an agent for sales tax collection.


The laws covering what is taxed and how it is taxed and all the things surrounding the issues are as clouded and skrewed up as the lawyers we have elected have been able to make them. As a Florida Sales Tax Agent who must file a monthly report I can attest to this.

I can also speak to the expense of dealing with the attorneys for the state and the auditors since businesses like mine were targeted to insure compliance. There is nothing like having three state auditors in your office going over every receipt for a screw or pop rivet for almost a month to get this to sink in. One of the rules about sales tax is IN Florida... is that if I use one screw in making a repair or even a paper towel to clean off a face of a sign with Windex then the entire labor bill is taxable... So on a $400 repair would net the state .075% of my labor or $30. So I buy a lot of screws personally, pay the sales tax on them upon the sale, do not include them in my inventory and give them to my customers. Then no materials are used in the repair and no sales tax is due.

Switching from cawfee to water. [/RANT]

BTW - If I preface my post with [RANT]
and end my post with the [/RANT] - there is more than a 50% chance I will continue to teakettle if given the impetus.

[srplus]

Originally Posted by Mars

Post exceeds reading limit. Please summarize the summary.

:flaminog:

Fred is arguing something that has no relevance to the RW and what is going on for the sake of teakettling.

I am teakettling for the sake of teakettling.

[82-SOA-60]

Funk it. Ketchup can wait this morning.

[srplus]

Originally Posted by sisukid1975

Sorry. I'm just not buying it. Is there somewhere else other than your post where I can read about the State of Florida compelling (or bullying) large companies to pay out-of-jurisdiction taxes in violation of the letter of, or the spirit of, Bellas Hass and the 14th Amendment?

If so, I predict it won't be long before the state of FL will be soon relieved of some of it's unlimited resources when we're looking at "Big Fortune 500 Mail order company V. Florida."

Fred: Since all of this compliance is 'Voluntary' and once they have become an agent to collect the sales tax for the state the point is moot.

And I do not think Rivera has broken the story on FOX yet.

[srplus]

Originally Posted by 82-SOA-60

Funk it. Ketchup can wait this morning.

Skip the long posts!

[grrlscout89FJ62]

quick TECH question -- what should I use to clean my breathers? Carb cleaner? Dawn?

[semlin]

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.

fair enough, but as i said, i may be wrong, but my point was that my position is not absurd. sales tax in pretty much all commonwealth jurisdictions works the way I described it. it is the reason I have to pay provincial sales tax on every item I import into canada regardless of where i actually bought it and actually took delivery.

i'm very surprised to hear your state taxing jurisdiction is limited to taxing the seller. it is surprising that you can't tax a state resident on purchasing an item delivered and consumed within the state simply because the buyer happens to reside elsewhere, but I accept that I do not know.

[InsanityIsBorn]

Originally Posted by surfpig

ONE BALL JAY!

w00t!

[srplus]

Originally Posted by semlin

fair enough, but as i said, i may be wrong, but my point was that my position is not absurd. sales tax in pretty much all commonwealth jurisdictions works the way I described it. it is the reason I have to pay provincial sales tax on every item I import into canada regardless of where i actually bought it and actually took delivery.

i'm very surprised to hear your state taxing jurisdiction is limited to taxing the seller. it is surprising that you can't tax a state resident on purchasing an item delivered and consumed within the state simply because the buyer happens to reside elsewhere, but I accept that I do not know.

You missed my last post on how this works in Florida... the buyer owes the tax. If the state can get the seller to be its agent no matter how, they are happy.

In Florida AND FOR SURE - the buyer owes the tax. Period. And, the state will go to all ends to insure that it is paid to them.

[semlin]

Originally Posted by Cube Dweller

I want you baaaaaaack....uh uh uh, uh uh uh, I want you baaayaaaack. I want you, she said....

missed this the first time around in the k frenzy

[surfpig]

Well...

[surfpig]

Might be around later, I'm goin' hiking!