Supreme Court Tax Ruling Could Have Consequences For Oregon Businesses

Remigio Civitarese
Giugno 23, 2018

That's because lawmakers in Olympia have already moved to expand online sales-tax collections in bits and pieces.

He also called it a "Great victory for consumers and retailers", though consumers will ultimately be paying more and businesses weren't uniformly cheering the decision.

Castro said she was "quite content" with the court's decision, calling it a "huge win for our small businesses who really struggled to compete". Online sellers that haven't been charging sales tax on goods shipped to every state range from jewelry website Blue Nile to pet products site to clothing retailer L.L. Bean. "They'll need to pay multinational corporations a pretty penny to comply with an endless web of new tax jurisdictions".

"The internet's prevalence and power have changed the dynamics of the national economy", Justice Anthony Kennedy wrote in the majority opinion.

"Each year the physical presence rule becomes further removed from economic reality and results in significant revenue losses to the States", he wrote in an opinion joined by Justices Clarence Thomas, Ruth Bader Ginsburg, Samuel Alito and Neil Gorsuch. South Dakota Attorney General Marty Jackley said South Dakota businesses will now have tax fairness and a level playing field.

In addition to being a win for states, the ruling is also a win for large retailers, who argued the physical presence rule was unfair.

Sellers that have a physical presence in only a single state or a few states have been able to avoid charging sales taxes when they shipped to addresses outside those states.

The Department of Commerce says e-commerce makes up less than 10 percent of overall retail sales.

"If you look at the implosion of big-box stores, if you look at the explosion of online purchasing, these major life-changing market trends ... have a profound effect on the state's tax policy", he said.

President TrumpDonald John TrumpFamily immigration detention centers could be at capacity within days: report Trump likely to meet with Putin in July: report DOJ requests military lawyers to help prosecute immigration crimes: report MORE praised a Supreme Court ruling on Thursday that allows states to require out-of-state online retailers to collect sales taxes.

Chief Justice John Roberts dissented, along with Justices Stephen Breyer, Sonia Sotomayor and Elena Kagan, saying US lawmakers should take up the issue.

"Then small business will be forced to carry the financial burden of other states' taxes".

"Quill established two different sets of rules governing the collection of sales taxes that left traditional retailers badly disadvantaged against their online peers".

South Dakota wanted out-of-state retailers to begin collecting the tax and sued several of them:, electronics retailer Newegg and home goods company Wayfair. "CCIA has serious concerns about the future implications for e-commerce if governments are empowered to tax those who reside beyond their borders". Lawmakers in the state, which has no income tax, passed a law created to directly challenge the physical presence rule. North Dakota, many companies didn't have to collect sales taxes. One vitalizing effect of the Internet has been connecting small, even "micro" businesses to potential buyers across the Nation.

The court this morning upheld a 2016 South Dakota law that requires online merchants with more than $100,000 in annual sales to state residents or 200 transactions with state residents to collect sales tax. "Today's decision is welcomed by Main Street grocers, as it helps assure a more level playing field between Main Street brick-and-mortar and out-of-state e-commerce merchants", unusual said.

Altre relazioniGrafFiotech

Discuti questo articolo

Segui i nostri GIORNALE