MBP 2018 15 - 2.2 or 2.6?

[deeddawg]

I know Texas wasn't included in that. I know there were more too.

Interesting. I've not seen any prior indication that the SCOTUS decision was specific to certain states and excluded others. Could you point me to that info?

Or perhaps you're thinking of which states do or don't already have laws on the books in anticipation of the SCOTUS decision? Seems Texas is definitely looking at enacting such laws in the next legislative session - https://www.expressnews.com/busines...ot-ready-to-tax-online-purchases-13197850.php

 

[IdentityCrisis]

Interesting. I've not seen any prior indication that the SCOTUS decision was specific to certain states and excluded others. Could you point me to that info?

Or perhaps you're thinking of which states do or don't already have laws on the books in anticipation of the SCOTUS decision? Seems Texas is definitely looking at enacting such laws in the next legislative session - https://www.expressnews.com/busines...ot-ready-to-tax-online-purchases-13197850.php

Texas originally said they weren't going to do it, but now they are carefully looking into it. They "don't have to do it". It's up to the states to make that decision.

https://www.avalara.com/us/en/blog/...gon-texas-looks-to-tax-remote-sales-2019.html

More details on it.

https://www.pewtrusts.org/research-...ng-out-on-online-sales-taxes-for-the-holidays

 

[deeddawg]

Texas originally said they weren't going to do it, but now they are carefully looking into it. They "don't have to do it". It's up to the states to make that decision.

Right, that's what I thought. Your prior post made it sound like the SCOTUS decision only applied to some states and not others. Note - the decision is that states may require out of state sellers to collect & remit sales taxes even if they have no in-state business presence. States don't have to enact such legislation.

 

[IdentityCrisis]

Right, that's what I thought. Your prior post made it sound like the SCOTUS decision only applied to some states and not others. Note - the decision is that states may require out of state sellers to collect & remit sales taxes even if they have no in-state business presence. States don't have to enact such legislation.

Technically yes, if the states want to do it they can. They don't need too and not required too. That is why I said some states are not included in it so far.

 

[deeddawg]

I said some states are not included in it so far.

That's still kind of misleading. All states are included.

South Dakota v. Wayfair removed the prohibition against states enacting laws requiring out-of-state sellers to collect and remit sales tax. Applies to all states; they're now free to do so if they choose.

I'm just being specific here since it's easy for someone to misunderstand your meaning.

 

[IdentityCrisis]

That's still kind of misleading. All states are included.

South Dakota v. Wayfair removed the prohibition against states enacting laws requiring out-of-state sellers to collect and remit sales tax. All states are free to do so if they choose.

I'm just being specific here since it's easy for someone to misunderstand your meaning.

Let me try this again. Not all the states are going to do it or have to do it. That is why not all the states are doing it. Again, some states are not included in doing the tax thing so far. It is up to the state.

That is what I've been saying all along.

 

[deeddawg]

That is what I've been saying all along.

While that is what you meant, it is not what you conveyed with "that [the SCOTUS decision] is only for certain states. Not all states were included in that [the SCOTUS decision]."

We've hashed this out enough though. Any readers should be plenty clear by now.