Message:

<p>[QUOTE=&quot;-jeffB, post: 2038289, member: 27832&quot;]My biggest concern is that it would impose an unsupportable accounting burden. It&#039;s hard enough to keep track of state, county, and local tax rates within my own state, not to mention tax holidays (although our new legislature has helpfully eliminated those).</p><p><br /></p><p>The proponents of this measure claim that states will need to agree to simplified taxation systems, and that software to compute taxes will be cheap and reliable. I won&#039;t believe either one until I see it. I see a very poor track record of <i>simplifying</i> tax regulations at any level of government. I&#039;m in the software business, and the idea that you could build a <i>cheap</i> software package that will keep up with frequent legislative changes, accurately assign every saleable item to each state&#039;s proper category, and pass the required regulatory testing is just laughable.</p><p><br /></p><p>I agree that there&#039;s an unbalanced playing field right now, and I don&#039;t believe &quot;let the local retailers start doing online business if they want to compete&quot; is a reasonable remedy. I don&#039;t know what the solution is. I like my own state&#039;s &quot;calculated use tax&quot;, which is based on a flat percentage of your taxable income, but I&#039;ll admit that I like that because I probably come out well ahead under it. It does almost nothing to level the playing field; it just protects the state&#039;s revenue stream. (If I decide to pay the flat rate instead of tracking every online purchase, additional online purchases don&#039;t change my tax liability, so there&#039;s still the incentive to &quot;avoid taxes&quot; by buying online.)[/QUOTE]</p><p><br /></p>

Your name or email address:

Do you already have an account?

• No, create an account now.
• Yes, my password is:
• Forgot your password?

Stay logged in