BestTime to buy Mac: Tax free holidays in certain states

[SolidGun]

I don't know whether this will help you or not, but if you have been considering new computer or other stuff, you should take advantage of tax-free holidays to make your purchase. This won't be good in every states, but it should certainly help.
http://www.bankrate.com/brm/itax/state/20020729b.asp

 

[jsw]

Leave it good old Massachusetts to have only one day (the rest have at least two, and often much more). Strange, given that New Hampshire has no sales tax - period - and is no more than a hour or so away for most residents here.

Still, any tax-free days are better than none!

 

[Chaszmyr]

Sales tax bugs me, especially for places that have high taxes and stuff in other areas. Unfortunately for us consumers, sales tax probably brings in an insane amount of money for the state.

 

[alanbuilds]

Like posting G5 iMac spec guesses AFTER the Paris Keynote!

I don't know whether this will help you or not, but if you have been considering new computer or other stuff, you should take advantage of tax-free holidays to make your purchase. This won't be good in every states, but it should certainly help.
http://www.bankrate.com/brm/itax/state/20020729b.asp

No sales tax on computers in Vermont, Massachussetts, West Virginia, Georgia, Missouri, North Carolina, and South Carolina! Yippee!!

But the offers have ALL expired for the year --- most were last week!

Kinda late with this post -- it’s sort of like posting G5 iMac spec guesses AFTER the Paris Keynote.(Only Vermont has a second tax-free holiday, [for Halloween?] on Oct. 9-11; however no-sales-tax-EVER/year-round New Hampshire is always just a hop and a skip and a trip to the mall away from anywhere in VT, anyway.)

(By the way, if you've been following the news this week, Republicans in the House and Senate are gung ho to establish a national VAT sales tax on top of State sales taxes, & end income taxes, especially on corporations.

We could then say hello to those enormous, impossible "+VAT" Mac prices quoted by MR members outside the U.S., many of whom now travel to the U.S. to do some Mac shopping . . . Food for thought.)

 

[SolidGun]

I received the e-mail a while back and it was in the JUNK category. I wish I had known it then and posted it here. But there is at least one state that is good for a little longer. And maybe that people purchased thier items a couple of weeks ago in those states can get their money back.

 

[baby duck monge]

forget tax free days...

i would just be happy to have the regular sales tax from those states. here in memphis sales tax is 9.25%

at least it's a bit lower when i am at school in minnesota...

 

[Chip NoVaMac]

Leave it good old Massachusetts to have only one day (the rest have at least two, and often much more). Strange, given that New Hampshire has no sales tax - period - and is no more than a hour or so away for most residents here.

Still, any tax-free days are better than none!

That is strange... Surprising that there are no great traffic jams every weekend to to NH....

 

[Chip NoVaMac]

Sales tax bugs me, especially for places that have high taxes and stuff in other areas. Unfortunately for us consumers, sales tax probably brings in an insane amount of money for the state.

Not wanting to take this thread down roads that will lead to flames, many states have a hard time meeting their budgets (particularly in light of unfunded Federal Mandates).

The problem is that the voters themselves can't seem to agree on what cuts are needed so that taxes provide services that the states should have. In the case of Virginia we fund transit for the elderly. Good on the face of it. yet, many of them have "incomes" that most families could only hope for. Should they get free transit? Or what about parking meters for cars? Does having a Handicap Plate mean that they don't have the income to pay for the meters?

Or should my taxes pay for soccer fields that are used commercially? Or should it be used to provide a Dog Park that I can take advantage of. Police protection funding has been cut over the years in many communities. While crime in some of those have been stable, one only needs to look at the highways, where people do what they damn well please. Only because the police have more pressing issues.

Or should the tax dollars go to those that can no longer afford health insurance? Many public hospitals see people only at the end stages of the illness. Should we not have healthcare, even at state expense that allows those to seek care BEFORE they require more expensive care?

The solution as I see it is to have sales taxes eliminated. Increase the income tax, so that it is more fairly based for all residents. Living in the DC area, I have taken my spending to Dc and MD, not because I save; but since Virginia does not believe that in my choice of partner. Yet a law that allowed workers the choice of a Saturday or Sunday off for their day of worship required a special session to correct.

 

[Chip NoVaMac]

i would just be happy to have the regular sales tax from those states. here in memphis sales tax is 9.25%

at least it's a bit lower when i am at school in minnesota...

But correct me if I am wrong, but you have no state income tax, right?

 

[numark]

But correct me if I am wrong, but you have no state income tax, right?

Right, Tennessee doesn't have any income tax. Lucky people...

On the subject of lucky people, I live in North Carolina. I ordered a DP2.0 G5 last week. But I ordered it 2 days after the sales tax holiday ended So now, I get to see this line on my Apple email invoice:

Sales Tax: $ 171.94

Not fun...

 

[slughead]

Not wanting to take this thread down roads that will lead to flames, many states have a hard time meeting their budgets (particularly in light of unfunded Federal Mandates).

That's because they upped spending during the boom and then blamed the federal government when it died.

The problem is that the voters themselves can't seem to agree on what cuts are needed so that taxes provide services that the states should have. In the case of Virginia we fund transit for the elderly. Good on the face of it. yet, many of them have "incomes" that most families could only hope for. Should they get free transit? Or what about parking meters for cars? Does having a Handicap Plate mean that they don't have the income to pay for the meters?

I agree, the elderly are the richest of all age demographics, and they get the largest amount of social support. I believe in zero social support for anybody, but at least, if we do have socialism, we should do it 'right'.

Or should my taxes pay for soccer fields that are used commercially? Or should it be used to provide a Dog Park that I can take advantage of. Police protection funding has been cut over the years in many communities. While crime in some of those have been stable, one only needs to look at the highways, where people do what they damn well please. Only because the police have more pressing issues.

Uh police funding has gone way up in the past 10 years, the problem, in my mind, is the judicial branch has faced massive cuts in the past 4 years.

We have the more police picking up people and less money put towards finding out if the person is responsible.

Or should the tax dollars go to those that can no longer afford health insurance? Many public hospitals see people only at the end stages of the illness. Should we not have healthcare, even at state expense that allows those to seek care BEFORE they require more expensive care?

Only 15% of Americans are uninsured. Even with insurance rates rising, that number is getting lower with each passing decade I'd assume this means the problem will fix itself.

The solution as I see it is to have sales taxes eliminated. Increase the income tax, so that it is more fairly based for all residents. Living in the DC area, I have taken my spending to Dc and MD, not because I save; but since Virginia does not believe that in my choice of partner. Yet a law that allowed workers the choice of a Saturday or Sunday off for their day of worship required a special session to correct.

I agree, sales tax is regressive, it discourages people from buying things, and it makes baby jesus cry.

However, the current progressive income tax discourages people from earning more money. So the solution should be a flat tax.

I also think states could handle the taxation and take a cut for themselves, thus eliminating the IRS.

 

[Grimace]

However, the current progressive income tax discourages people from earning more money. So the solution should be a flat tax.

that doesn't really make practical sense. "I don't want to get a promotion because I'll pay higher taxes?" Not likely.

If the poorest people in the country pay 6% income tax and the richest people in the country pay 6% income tax - the social classes will become more stratified than they already are.

 

[slughead]

that doesn't really make practical sense. "I don't want to get a promotion because I'll pay higher taxes?" Not likely.

They'd rather get tax-free gifts like company cars and such (which are not taxed).

If the poorest people in the country pay 6% income tax and the richest people in the country pay 6% income tax - the social classes will become more stratified than they already are.

Actually according to 2002 statistics:
top 1% pay 37.42% of all income taxes
top 5% pay 56.47% of all income taxes
top 10% pay 67.33% of all income taxes
top 25% pay 84.01% of all income taxes
top 50% pay 96.09% of all income taxes.

What the bottom 50% of the country (below 36k a year about) is negligible, which is why the flat tax just gives a tax exemption for those people.

 

[numark]

Only 15% of Americans are uninsured. Even with insurance rates rising, that number is getting lower with each passing decade I'd assume this means the problem will fix itself.

The percentage of people that were uninsured actually increased from 1990 to 1999. Since then we've increased the percentage of uninsured people even more.

I agree, sales tax is regressive, it discourages people from buying things, and it makes baby jesus cry.

I guarantee you, if people have money to spend, they'll spend it. They're not going to sit around with their money saying, "Well, the sales tax really bugs me, so I'm not going to do anything with my money." No, they're going to go out and spend that money just as they have for years.

 

[slughead]

The percentage of people that were uninsured actually increased from 1990 to 1999. Since then we've increased the percentage of uninsured people even more.

OK, let's say I was wrong, and the percentage of uninsured people is rising (make sure we're dealing with percentages here, as our population is rising).

If the citizens can't afford health insurance, what makes you think the government can? Liability insurance on prescription drugs and malpractice insurance for doctors has gone up by a factor of 5 from 1990 to 2003. With the government being the most oppressive "HMO" out there (as is the case in Canada, for instance), will those insurance rates go down??

I guarantee you, if people have money to spend, they'll spend it.

Let's take that as a given (which is not always true). You have $30,000 to spend, with an 8% sales tax you can only buy $27,500 worth of goods (8% less).

What would happen to a company's stock if sales went down 8% from a previous year/quarter?

 

[SolidGun]

I guess I should give more consideration as to which state I want to move to for my grad school work. I don't want to pay too much sales tax because I buy a lot more stuff. I go to schoold in ND and love not having internet sales tax there and my home is in MN, so I don't pay clothing tax there. I don't really work full time, so I am not yet concerned with income tax, but certainly I should give more consideration on that issue. However, i would rather pay more tax and be in a good state.

 

[Chip NoVaMac]

That's because they upped spending during the boom and then blamed the federal government when it died.

Only because we as voters allowed for it.

I agree, the elderly are the richest of all age demographics, and they get the largest amount of social support. I believe in zero social support for anybody, but at least, if we do have socialism, we should do it 'right'.

Not always. My Aunt had to "rid" herself of her very meager belongings and savings (less than $3,000 in savings), in order for her to get even "passable" care when she became unable to care for herself, and be sent to the lowest of the low of nursing homes. Her son and daughters, all lost jobs that paid well to companies that reap profits by sending jobs to the Pacific Rim and Mexico. What is left for them. Minimum wage jobs at Foxwood's or the Mohican Sun Casinos. Not near enough to have provided for their mother.

Compare this to the elderly in the DC area that are living in "attended care apartments", that the monthly fee is something that most of us can only hope to afford as a normal rent.

Not that I totally disagree. There are those that can afford to care for themselves in old age. But there are many more that we ignore.

Uh police funding has gone way up in the past 10 years, the problem, in my mind, is the judicial branch has faced massive cuts in the past 4 years.

In many communities this is not the case. Rising inflation and cost of living have eroded the capabilities of the police to do the work that they did 15+ years ago. This is a separate issue from the cost to house the prisoners in our no holds bar mentality. Just look at the threads here that have said that traffic enforcement has gone to the crapper.

We have the more police picking up people and less money put towards finding out if the person is responsible.

In terms of real crime you have a point. But it becomes a situation of the quality of life. If you allow the minor crimes go unpunished, there is a rise in serious crime. There was a study that had a car sit in a "high-crime area". Nothing really happened. No windows broken. No tires ripped off. But once a window was broken, the car was stripped in short order.

We also have gotten used to the idea that our car is broken into, and the "CSI" team will come out and find the "perp". The real world does not operate that way.

Only 15% of Americans are uninsured. Even with insurance rates rising, that number is getting lower with each passing decade I'd assume this means the problem will fix itself.

Actually the number of uninsured is closer to 44 million people. And because of "pro-business" "conservative" members of Congress, we are seeing even more people without "affordable" health insurance.

Just read todays Parade magazine in most papers. Without specifics, it appears that one mother did loose health insurance because of a marriage, even though it appears that both incomes could not provide for her three children.

And with the raising rates many smaller companies are making it harder to be insured. Starbucks as an example is now requiring their employees pay for name brand drugs out of pocket when generics are available. I will say that for a drug that I was under (Floxin, I believe) the generics did not live up to the same effectiveness as the brand name drug.

For some companies they have moved towards a "public hospital" mentality. Meaning that if you are near death, you have benefits. "Wellness" care is fast becoming like the Edsal.

The question I ask, should not every American be able to get the same health benefits as any member of Congress?

That's because they upped spending during the boom and then blamed the federal government when it died.

Only because we as voters allowed for it.

I agree, the elderly are the richest of all age demographics, and they get the largest amount of social support. I believe in zero social support for anybody, but at least, if we do have socialism, we should do it 'right'.

Not always. My Aunt had to "rid" herself of her very meager belongings and savings (less than $3,000 in savings), in order for her to get even "passable" care when she became unable to care for herself, and be sent to the lowest of the low of nursing homes. Her son and daughters, all lost jobs that paid well to companies that reap profits by sending jobs to the Pacific Rim and Mexico. What is left for them. Minimum wage jobs at Foxwood's or the Mohican Sun Casinos. Not near enough to have provided for their mother.

Compare this to the elderly in the DC area that are living in "attended care apartments", that the monthly fee is something that most of us can only hope to afford as a normal rent.

Not that I totally disagree. There are those that can afford to care for themselves in old age. But there are many more that we ignore.

Uh police funding has gone way up in the past 10 years, the problem, in my mind, is the judicial branch has faced massive cuts in the past 4 years.

In many communities this is not the case. Rising inflation and cost of living have eroded the capabilities of the police to do the work that they did 15+ years ago. This is a separate issue from the cost to house the prisoners in our no holds bar mentality. Just look at the threads here that have said that traffic enforcement has gone to the crapper.

We have the more police picking up people and less money put towards finding out if the person is responsible.

In terms of real crime you have a point. But it becomes a situation of the quality of life. If you allow the minor crimes go unpunished, there is a rise in serious crime. There was a study that had a car sit in a "high-crime area". Nothing really happened. No windows broken. No tires ripped off. But once a window was broken, the car was stripped in short order.

We also have gotten used to the idea that our car is broken into, and the "CSI" team will come out and find the "perp". The real world does not operate that way.

Only 15% of Americans are uninsured. Even with insurance rates rising, that number is getting lower with each passing decade I'd assume this means the problem will fix itself.

Actually the number of uninsured is closer to 44 million people. And because of "pro-business" "conservative" members of Congress, we are seeing even more people without "affordable" health insurance.

Just read todays Parade magazine in most papers. Without specifics, it appears that one mother did loose health insurance because of a marriage, even though it appears that both incomes could not provide for her three children.

I agree, sales tax is regressive, it discourages people from buying things, and it makes baby jesus cry.

However, the current progressive income tax discourages people from earning more money. So the solution should be a flat tax.

I also think states could handle the taxation and take a cut for themselves, thus eliminating the IRS. I agree, sales tax is regressive, it discourages people from buying things, and it makes baby jesus cry.

However, the current progressive income tax discourages people from earning more money. So the solution should be a flat tax.

I also think states could handle the taxation and take a cut for themselves, thus eliminating the IRS.

The IRS is needed for national purposes. Defense is the #1 that comes to mind. In many cases having 50+ separate entities does not mean that we might find a cure for Cancer or AIDS.

I don't look at sales takes as being regressive. You have more to spend, the more the government and society as a whole benefits (I am probably in the bottom half in that regards). Not wanting to take more space than I have, I do think that there can be a happy medium for all.

 

[armchainmstenw]

NONE FOR PENNSYLVANIA???! That sucks, and we have 7% sales tax.

 

[Chip NoVaMac]

OK, let's say I was wrong, and the percentage of uninsured people is rising (make sure we're dealing with percentages here, as our population is rising).

If the citizens can't afford health insurance, what makes you think the government can? Liability insurance on prescription drugs and malpractice insurance for doctors has gone up by a factor of 5 from 1990 to 2003. With the government being the most oppressive "HMO" out there (as is the case in Canada, for instance), will those insurance rates go down??



Let's take that as a given (which is not always true). You have $30,000 to spend, with an 8% sales tax you can only buy $27,500 worth of goods (8% less).

What would happen to a company's stock if sales went down 8% from a previous year/quarter?

I was taught many years ago that a society could be judged on how it treats it elderly and the deceased. We are currently failing on both accounts.

 

[SolidGun]

I guess I will quit complaining about 6.5% sales tax and 6% when I am home in Michigan.

 

[Timelessblur]

the problem is some states that have tax free weekend holday are useless for computers because computers cost to much to make them. In Texas there is a list of items that are elgible for tax free and they have to be under a certain dollar ammont. Computer are not on the list and they are over the price cap

 

[baby duck monge]

Right, Tennessee doesn't have any income tax. Lucky people...

that would be sweet except that the local governments take that as an excuse to increase their income taxes, so you end up getting screwed anyway.

 

[echeck]

I find it odd that the farthest western state that provides this is Iowa. What about the rest of us?!

Ah well...sales tax doesn't bother me much, it's a part of life. It could be much worse.

 

[slughead]

Only because we as voters allowed for it.

True, way too little attention is paid to local gov't. Even 'local' news often talks about national things.

I live in phoenix, Joe Arpaio's (head sherif/embarrassment) hit squad just basically took out a city block and the news didn't even try to cover it accurately.

Compare this to the elderly in the DC area that are living in "attended care apartments", that the monthly fee is something that most of us can only hope to afford as a normal rent.

Not that I totally disagree. There are those that can afford to care for themselves in old age. But there are many more that we ignore.

Well, I'm not going to argue that there aren't poor elderly in this country. However, that's partly the fault of social security bleeding them dry and then giving them back a fraction of what they put in. It'll get worse and worse. I think I'm young enough where I'll never see a dime of SS. You know originally, SS' retirement age was 65? guess what the life expectancy was that year? 65

You can find a sob story to prove any point you want. I'm sorry your family went through tough times, and I think we libertarians have the only realistic view of making sure it doesn't happen again

In many communities this is not the case. Rising inflation and cost of living have eroded the capabilities of the police to do the work that they did 15+ years ago. This is a separate issue from the cost to house the prisoners in our no holds bar mentality. Just look at the threads here that have said that traffic enforcement has gone to the crapper.

In many communities, you're right, but as a whole, our country has really started enforcing its laws. The executive has finally caught up with the legislative branch, and now we have the world's highest percent of our population in jail. 3 million adults, and God only knows how many juvies.

In terms of real crime you have a point. But it becomes a situation of the quality of life. If you allow the minor crimes go unpunished, there is a rise in serious crime. There was a study that had a car sit in a "high-crime area". Nothing really happened. No windows broken. No tires ripped off. But once a window was broken, the car was stripped in short order.

If you let innocent people become felons, you can basically say hello to a new member of the sub-class of society. They can't work at a bank, get security clearance, become a doctor, or any other job that requires a lot of trust. If I were in that situation, I'd steal way more than I do now

What's your quality of life when you can't get a decent job because some nappy snaggletoothed governor cut funding to the judicial branch? .. woops another phoenix reference :X

We also have gotten used to the idea that our car is broken into, and the "CSI" team will come out and find the "perp". The real world does not operate that way.

Arg, tell me about it.

Actually the number of uninsured is closer to 44 million people. And because of "pro-business" "conservative" members of Congress, we are seeing even more people without "affordable" health insurance.

Well, as I pointed out before, the tort system is really bad as well, and you can't blame conservatives for that. $1 of every birth control pill goes to liability insurance to feed the lawyers when they see a chance to strike.

Conservatives have done other things but I think I can assume you know about those already

btw John Kerry said that it's 43 million Americans who are uninsured. 43m / 290 m = 14.8%. Always be weary when a politician uses the phrase "millions of Americans" instead of using a percent--they're trying to make the problem sound worse than it is.

Just read todays Parade magazine in most papers. Without specifics, it appears that one mother did loose health insurance because of a marriage, even though it appears that both incomes could not provide for her three children.

And with the raising rates many smaller companies are making it harder to be insured. Starbucks as an example is now requiring their employees pay for name brand drugs out of pocket when generics are available. I will say that for a drug that I was under (Floxin, I believe) the generics did not live up to the same effectiveness as the brand name drug.

The way I work I pay for my own health insurance. It's fairly pricey, but I'd rather pay the extra few dollars out of pocket (the rest I get because my employers don't deduct from my pay) and get some of the best medical care in the world.. but some people don't have a choice.

People complain about HMO's all the time, perhaps unions should strike to remove their corporation's power over their health care--pay the employees the difference and let them do the rest.

The question I ask, should not every American be able to get the same health benefits as any member of Congress?

Well, anyone who works for the federal government gets pretty good benefits.

The IRS is needed for national purposes. Defense is the #1 that comes to mind. In many cases having 50+ separate entities does not mean that we might find a cure for Cancer or AIDS.

I was saying that the states should enforce the federal income tax. That way they could incorporate their own taxes on top of that, and they'd be more likely to audit (and since they're a smaller institution, they'd do it more efficiently). The federal census would determine the rough amount of money, and the states would abide.

I don't look at sales takes as being regressive. You have more to spend, the more the government and society as a whole benefits (I am probably in the bottom half in that regards). Not wanting to take more space than I have, I do think that there can be a happy medium for all.

It looks like you know the word, so I won't insult your intelligence. However, think about it: who spends more of a percentage of their income, rich or poor people? The answer is the poor, because there's a flat cost of living that any American must spend (shelter, clothing, car, gas). So since the poor spend more as a percent of their income, they get taxed more as a percent of their income so the tax is regressive.

It's semantics, really. I don't care if a tax is regressive as long as A. I'm rich, B. The tax isn't high, C. it's not counter-productive. A and C will always be false with sales taxes, because I'm not rich, and sales taxes impede growth.

I was taught many years ago that a society could be judged on how it treats it elderly and the deceased. We are currently failing on both accounts.

I bet the originator of that saying was old when he wrote it and is dead now. Isn't that a conflict of interest?

It's fine for people to give money to the elderly. I just don't feel bad for anyone who actively votes for people to give them more services. People used to just die when they grew older, now they join AARP and lobby for free drugs and free money. I don't dislike the elderly for that, I just don't feel bad when they don't get what they want. I do, however, worry about how much I'm paying into social security that I'll never see again. Plus that whole medicare thing will be insolvent by the time I can see it on the horizon.

*sigh* But such is life, and more importantly, such is socialism

 

[kanker]

OK, let's say I was wrong, and the percentage of uninsured people is rising (make sure we're dealing with percentages here, as our population is rising).

If the citizens can't afford health insurance, what makes you think the government can? Liability insurance on prescription drugs and malpractice insurance for doctors has gone up by a factor of 5 from 1990 to 2003. With the government being the most oppressive "HMO" out there (as is the case in Canada, for instance), will those insurance rates go down??



Let's take that as a given (which is not always true). You have $30,000 to spend, with an 8% sales tax you can only buy $27,500 worth of goods (8% less).

What would happen to a company's stock if sales went down 8% from a previous year/quarter?