The Republic of CA Latest Rip Off

[jainen]

>>"Level the playing field" -- balderdash.<<

Don't worry, Catherine. This one is doomed to be declared unconstitutional. Liberals and conservatives will agree. I don't know which is which, but one side will say Congress can't butt in to state taxation. The other side will say only Congress can tax inter-state commerce.

[Jack from Ohio]

>>"Level the playing field" -- balderdash.<<

Don't worry, Catherine. This one is doomed to be declared unconstitutional. Liberals and conservatives will agree. I don't know which is which, but one side will say Congress can't butt in to state taxation. The other side will say only Congress can tax inter-state commerce.

The lack of the states enforcing "use tax" laws is the source of the "uneven playing field." The laws have been on the books for decades. Of course our society has totally accepted the idea of not paying tax of any kind (whether owed or not) if you can get away with it.

I stand in favor of the law.

However, it has a snowball's chance in hell of passing the House.

[BulldogTom]

I believe what the states (especially my screwed up beautiful money hungry totalitarian state of CA) want is the ability to get more businesses under their tax umbrella. If you are paying sales tax in a state, they can now audit your books (ever been through a CA sales tax audit? there is no such thing as a no-change audit here - they always get a payment when they come to audit). In addition, by paying the sales tax, you are admitting that you are doing business in the state. That opens you up to additional regulations. And when they audit your books, and they find out who is purchasing those items, they can use that data to go audit the purchaser. It is a money grab on the part of the states. It won't stop at sales tax.

Tom

Hollister, CA

[Catherine]

I understand that, as part of the bill, each state that wants to be included must provide a single contact point for the businesses to report the sales tax to.

Also, companies doing less than $1 Million are exempt from the rule.

Thirdly: Use tax laws have been on the books for a majority of the states since 1937. Paying sales (use) tax on items purchased in another state has been the law for 35 years. This is just a way to enforce the laws already in place. I agree with the bill requiring collection of the sales tax. I also agree with the mandate to have a single contact point in each state, or the state is not part of the program.

Camel's nose under the edge of the tent.

First they exempt businesses under $X. Then they lower it, then they lower it some more. The principle established, they make the net tighter and tighter. Remember the income tax was never supposed to apply to the vast majority of income earners! And the details WILL be a nightmare; taxable, not taxable, include/exclude shipping... weird rules such as one we have here in MA where clothing is exempt from sales tax up to $175 per item; but it's only the amount over $175 for one item that is taxable.

At least my state has done an absolutely ABYSMAL job of publicizing the existence of the Use Tax -- or that it is tax fraud _not_ to report it. Every year I have to explain to people what it is and what they have to track -- they get sent a pdf of a blurb from the state. They would be better off publicizing the use tax statutes.

And I have a strong objection to the entire assumption here. WHY must "leveling the playing field" _always_ be a prelude to HIGHER taxes? Why not a prelude to cutting spending?

Even the liberals AGREE that slashing sales tax increases sales and stimulates the economy -- else they would NOT institute the "sales tax holiday" weekends and crow triumphantly about the increased sales and the boom it meant for state businesses. Hoist on their own petard.

[Guest Taxed]

>>Camel's nose under the edge of the tent.<<

That has been the Conservative's manta all along! They would rather see a return of the wild wild west days!

Without income tax or sales tax how would you pay for Govt. services?

What Govt. services do you want to cut?

Guess who screams the loudest the moment Govt. fails to take any action due to lack of resources? (Watch Foxnews for the answer)

[kcjenkins]

And again I'd remind you that it was started as a "USE" tax, based on the logic that the businesses were 'using public resources', i,e, roads, police, fire protection, etc, to profit in their business, and the buyers were also 'using' those resources. So why, if you are in GA and you buy a printer, say, from a company in MA, which has no business locations in GA, should you pay for the use of those MA resources?

[kcjenkins]

>>Camel's nose under the edge of the tent.<<

That has been the Conservative's manta all along! They would rather see a return of the wild wild west days!

Without income tax or sales tax how would you pay for Govt. services?

What Govt. services do you want to cut?

Actually, I don't want to return to the wild west, just to a more reasonable level.

Without income tax, we'd return to user fees, etc, which let the person benefiting from a government service pay for it. Not that odd an idea, to me.

Sales tax, or more properly Use tax, would still apply, but only to those sales where the business actually uses the services.

Finally, you'd have a fit if I listed all the government services that I would happily see cut. But just for a start, I'd get rid of the Education Dept completely, as they spend a ton of money without improving a single school, based on the results that are published every year. Heck, they can not even run the DC schools decently, those they totally control and they are the worst in the nation. There are lots of others that while serving some purpose, need to be trimmed back a great deal. EPA did a great job at the beginning, so now we have some of the cleanest air and water in the world. But today, having worked themselves out of a real job, they are trying to do things like regulating dust on farms, rainwater, and which rodents should be protected from what, etc. Cut them way back, and they might be worth their salaries, maybe. Then there are the areas where two, three, or even more govt agencies regulate the same thing. Don't get me started on the ways we could save there................

[Guest Taxed]

If we had to run the Govt of a country like ours with just user fees and no taxes, can you imagine how much you would have to pay to get say a driver's license, or a fishing license etc. When you call 911 for emergency, you got to pull out your credit card and pay for services before cops show up! There is no way on God's green earth any country can run a Govt solely based on user fees!

Regarding sales tax In the example you gave above, a buyer in GA who buys a printer from MA should pay sales tax because to be fair all consumers of that product should pay the tax not just one subset of buyers. We have interstate commerce. One subset of buyers should not have a tax advantage over another based on where they live!

For your example to hold true a GA buyer should only buy from a GA retailer and pay the GA sales tax. We would be building "chinese walls" around each state.

That is why I like a National Sales Tax rate that is uniform. I think if you think long and hard you will see that it will eliminate a lot of redundancy and inefficiency. We can discuss how the tax colleced is eventually distributed to the states.

Finally you and I may not agree on what the Dept of Education does, but I sure don't want my children to be at the bottom of the heap of all industrialized countries. I am sure you are well aware that kids in Korea, China, Japan are beating American kids in math and science. What are they doing right?

[joanmcq]

The GA buyer would not be paying MA sales tax. She would be paying GA sales tax, the same way as if buying it from a store that had a footprint in GA, but the purchaser chose to buy over the Internet.

[BulldogTom]

Finally you and I may not agree on what the Dept of Education does, but I sure don't want my children to be at the bottom of the heap of all industrialized countries. I am sure you are well aware that kids in Korea, China, Japan are beating American kids in math and science. What are they doing right?

They don't have liberal teachers unions that suck up all the public funding with no accountability.

Tom

Hollister, CA

[mrichman333]

I can think of a lot of non-essential services. Lets start with the billions we send to other countries.

[Guest Taxed]

I agree, we need to seriously look at all the foreign aid we give given the fact that infrastructure in our own country is crumbling due to lack of funding. Cold war is over, we can not be buying friends anymore!

[jklcpa]

Finally you and I may not agree on what the Dept of Education does, but I sure don't want my children to be at the bottom of the heap of all industrialized countries. I am sure you are well aware that kids in Korea, China, Japan are beating American kids in math and science. What are they doing right?

They don't have liberal teachers unions that suck up all the public funding with no accountability.

Tom

Hollister, CA

Those countries also have *very* different cultures than ours, and that does make a difference.

[BulldogTom]

Those countries also have *very* different cultures than ours, and that does make a difference.

Sure they do. They are not lazy, and we are. They work hard, we take handouts. They understand if you don't do well in school they will kick you out. We understand that if teachers don't apply themselves and we don't have to either, you will still graduate. They understand that not having an education means you will starve in the street. We understand that government will hand out a better standard of living than 80% of the world if we just stand in line. And they don't have teachers unions.

I think Greece is the only country in the world more spoiled than we are.

Tom

Hollister, CA

[kcjenkins]

http://www.recordnet.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=%2F20130511%2FA_NEWS%2F305110315

A comprehensive environmental review of Gov. Jerry Brown's twin tunnels project was released Friday.

And if any electronic document can make a "thud" when it hits your computer, this one did.

The review is 20,210 pages long. It will offer the most specific details yet about the project, how it will be built and how it will impact Delta residents.

This is insane. Doesn't he know the state is already bankrupt? So he wants to convert from 8,000 acres at the low end to 100,000 acres at the high end, of valuable farmland into 'wetlands', using water that is already is serious shortage? And no one is locking him up in an asylum? They are planning to help him do this? Is the entire state government on drugs?

[jainen]

>>Doesn't he know the state is already bankrupt? <<

No, he doesn't know that, and neither do you. You must be thinking of how it was under the other political party, which drove the state tens of billions of dollars into the red..

Now California has a BALANCED budget, the result of two years of fine leadership marked by massive spending cuts against modest tax increases approved in advance by the general population. Governor Brown is working internationally managing one of the five largest economies in the world.

[kcjenkins]

Don't understand your post? Since 1992 both CA senators have been Dems. In 2002, California Democrats won all eight statewide offices, and this feat was repeated again in 2010. And the Dems maintained their 34-19 edge in the 53-member U.S. House delegation, as well as controlling the State house and senate. While there have been a few GOP governors, mainly because Gray Davis was so bad, I can't see any time in the last 20+ years that the Dems have not been in control of CA?

As for the Balanced budget, that is somewhat questionable. I applaud Brown for trying to balance it, something no Republican could have ever gotten through the Dem controlled legislature, but there are a lot of assumptions built into it that even liberals in CA question. http://www.vcstar.com/news/2013/mar/05/walters-california-budget-isnt-as-sound-as-brown/?opinion=1

http://washingtonexaminer.com/conn-carroll-the-california-spending-rush/article/2522514

http://www.sfgate.com/opinion/editorials/article/Jerry-Brown-s-balancing-act-bucks-status-quo-4184782.php

[joanmcq]

KC, CA requires a supermajority to raise taxes. So until this year, the Dems have not been in full control of all houses & the governorship. Much like the federal House Republicans, the republican minority has been stonewalling any true reform for years. The only was we've gotten tax increases through has been to vote them in through initiatives. Of course the initiative process is another issue unto itself.