Several Democrats just presented a bill to extend sales-tax to the internet. They call it the "Main Street Fairness Act." While the internet sales tax argument is incredibly old, I believe the odds of it actually passing are getting better. In 2001, Bush extended a "temporary" ban on internet taxation for 2 years (originally passed in 1998). At the time it was believed that taxing internet sales would hinder the growth of the WWW as well as it's economic potential, especially during the holiday seasons. In 2007, a moratorium was passed again to suspend all internet taxes for 7 years-- however, as this was before the "Great Recession," many states are looking to expanding taxation to the internet now. It is considered a "Fairness" Act because it is intended to level the playing field between online retailers and brick-and-mortar stores.
I'm still thinking this through, so consider this my official "knee-jerk" reaction.
(Because even I have those moments... often. ^^") I don't think this is really quite that big of a deal, but for the sake of argument, let's act like it is. Personally, I feel like I should be opposed to the idea of this (seemingly regressive) taxation bill. I'm concerned that it may have a too much of negative effect on the population and sales than it would have a positive effect on the government, even if it is just a small (and relatively simple) sales tax. Many people already can't afford basic (already taxed) things (due to high levels of unemployment, increasing costs, etc.), especially in states that are already heavily taxed (like California, which is the highest in country at 8.25% minimum, & can get to over 10.75% with local taxes). I'm assuming it was meant to be "fair" to small business owners and brick-and-mortar retailers that already have state sales taxes, and in that aspect I suppose it succeeds. And I'm sure it could actually bring in millions of much needed revenue. But I still have to wonder, why is this the "next step" instead of something bigger and more effective? Why this instead of proper financial reform? Bringing more resources into a broken system doesn't really help anyone...Why are we still wasting money on stupid crap? I would much rather prefer that we cut "defense" spending & stop spending billions to kill people (including death row inmates who cost us hundreds of millions, even though life in prison is much cheaper), take out the troops stationed all over the world, end the "war on drugs," and stop letting CEOs pour funds into tax-free offshore bank accounts before we add new taxes on the middle class, especially considering what's going on in Congress. Taxation is necessary, for things like schools and roads and things like that, but instating another regressive tax (after almost all of Congress-- all but 2 people-- voted to suspend it) for the middle class after refusing to extend unemployment just seems like another slap in the face. Many of us shop online to save money (and gas), and find a wider range of items that may not be available in our local communities. Buying goods online can help cut down on impulse buys, because you can see and control exactly how much you're spending before you get to the register. You find what you need at the price you can afford and you get out. Shipping costs a fortune already, and some sites/states do still require some sales tax, so I don't even want to imagine just how much more we're going to have to pay to rectify the mistakes of Wall Street & certain groups within the Federal Government... Besides, which state would get the funds anyway? Say I'm shopping for a new composter on Amazon (since my current method is coming along nicely but maybe I'll want to upgrade to a "real" one). Would my state, get the sales tax, would Amazon's headquarter's state, the manufacturer/warehouse, would it just go to the federal gov't, what? How much would that tax be? Same as the state tax? (Again, which state? They have yet to explain any of this... The bill isn't even online yet... Maybe it's the same way iTunes does taxes? Though there's a distinct difference between a tangible item and a computer data file.)
However, from the government's perspective, I think it does make some sense. E-commerce taxes are lost revenue (assuming one can lose what one never actually had)... I suppose "potential" revenue is a better way to phrase it. Basic way to readjust/refresh any system - take/borrow from where there is a surplus or where you're not currently collecting, put it where it's most needed. Hone your resources. Work from there. I am not against tax-and-spend when it's greatly needed. I am glad to give what I can and should for a good cause. Borrowing from other countries is out - trust me, loans suck, avoid them as much as possible. I'm against regressive taxation -taking resources from the bottom to give to the top, when you can just as easily take from the top. Bottom should be an absolute last resort-- otherwise, you're just contributing to poverty and homelessness instead of solving the problems. Statistically speaking, most of the people who shop online are middle and upper-middle class. This tax to me just seems like they've run out of ideas (and they're going back on a promise. Though why we'd be surprised about that, I don't know. After that jerk of a judge decided to overturn the drilling moratorium, why would any of us be surprised if someone tried to overturn the internet sales tax "ban"? Obama's done a decent job doing what he actually can-- albeit somewhat disappointing still, but there's still time--but the Congress and the Supreme Court are continuing to piss me off... )
I think it's in our best interests to keep taxes where they are (or at least, where they were prior to Obama's tax cuts for the middle class, & Bush's tax cuts for the upper class), or implement a small version of a progressive tax system, and try to limit spending to the essentials - health, food, job creation, schools. If every single person in Congress gave half their campaign money towards fixing one area of the budget deficit or to one of the areas on that list (instead of making idiotic videos featuring a twisted version of Lincoln, and demon sheep...), we could be much better off. Stop wasting what we don't have, focus on what we do have and put it where it's most needed. (-_-" Reason #1 why I'm canceling my vacation and saving that money for loan repayments, food, charities, etc. Have the money now, but it could be put to better use, as much as I want/need a vacation. I'll take a smaller, more local trip instead!)
And really, right now I really can't understand why many people are so angry with the government but not furious that the corporations and the wealthy are allowed to do whatever they want to make and keep as much money as possible, while people are struggling to survive-- especially now that it really hits home with unemployment so high. Yea, the government's (read: Reagan's spiral of) deregulation is a major cause in this, but money talks. It's why corporations chose to outsource and hire undocumented people to fill jobs, it's why many people were tricked into loans and mortgages they never should have even been told to consider, it's why we have all of these problems and lawsuits dealing with bonuses and off-shore accounts and embezzlement. Sure, they go to prison for a few years sometimes, but where is the outrage and moral indignation? I hear a bit from the Coffee Party, and occasionally from other groups... I can't be the only one over here pissed off that 10% of the world's population "owns" 86% of the world's resources, when 80% of humanity lives on less than $10 a day. Within the US, the top 10% of the richest people own 80%, while the bottom 40% has less than 1% of the resources. (And the "new" face of poverty in the US now also includes some of the "middle class." How sad is that???) Government vs. corporate, I'll take my chances with the group that's more likely to actually spend my money on something useful instead of a new yacht or summer home. Grr...
Anyway, I suspect I'm probably not thinking this through all the way just yet. It's probably a good idea in the end... And I guess it is quite fair for internet stores to be taxed just like brick-&-mortar stores... I think I'm just trying to be irrational & I'm complaining because I don't want to pay more
... Online shopping allows me to stay within very strict spending limits, and I'm really not looking forward to a 7% price increase (even with the way Amazon prices waver)... & I need to get to work on making computers out of sand, as corporatism is wearing me out again (she says, as she types away on her HP laptop with Windows Vista, sipping on a Smirnoff Triple Black with Lime... [sigh] One of these days...)Here's a pretty decent article that outlines some of the pros and cons of taxing e-commerce. Will proceed to Google this topic until I get bored (3-4 more sites I bet...). Will just be going down the Google search results for a while until I see something that's boring and simple enough to share...
Like this. One down. And here... Two down & I'm already bored because I found cute emoticons... ^^" Still finding more cons than pros on this one... If you have constructive and/or kind criticisms, please be my guest. (You can find me at DarkAngelKiely on AIM, Care2, or half the anime forums on the internet :-P) My mind is all over the place lately...
No comments:
Post a Comment