I Missed This One...

: y

le

rs

nt

tage.

ds!

ion

by the enormous increase in e-commerce originating from the Far East, wher e the terminal dues do not cover the unit costs of delivery in the destinat ion countries, and the volumes are so big that the losses cannot be compens ated by better terminal dues from other traffic. In 2016, a new remuneratio n system was implemented with a focus on e-commerce,[13] but while the 2016 reform balanced the costs to the delivery services, postage costs for ship pers are still asymmetric. As of 2018, US companies pay more than twice as much to mail an item from a US plant to a US customer than does a manufactu rer in China to mail an item to a US customer.[14][15][16]

UPU, effective October 17, 2019, with the US planning to switch to self-de clared rates.[17]

/

Because we're the country with the largest economy in the world and we are a huge market, stupid.

Your country

Yeah, right. They will just forget about the rich country with the largest economy in the world.

Do you work for MSNBC? CNN? In this case, Trump is spot on. China should not be able to ship their products here, using our USPS that's losing money, at artificially low rates, ones that are a fraction of what it costs US shippers to send something within the USA. Are you just totally stupid or suffering from Trump derangement syndrome, where you have to say everything he does is wrong?

te:

_Union

ed by the enormous increase in e-commerce originating from the Far East, wh ere the terminal dues do not cover the unit costs of delivery in the destin ation countries, and the volumes are so big that the losses cannot be compe nsated by better terminal dues from other traffic. In 2016, a new remunerat ion system was implemented with a focus on e-commerce,[13] but while the 20

16 reform balanced the costs to the delivery services, postage costs for sh ippers are still asymmetric. As of 2018, US companies pay more than twice a s much to mail an item from a US plant to a US customer than does a manufac turer in China to mail an item to a US customer.[14][15][16]

he UPU, effective October 17, 2019, with the US planning to switch to self- declared rates.[17]

comparison is end to end rates. Do you really expect the Chinese or anyone else to raise their rates for shipping to match what US customers pay?

ally

h

n with.

Again, your facts are not right. It's not "Chinese rates". The US Governm ent is setting the rates.

as we pay auto workers in the US!

Neither is anyone else. You don't read what I write.

de the US, we are passing on extra costs to US buyers with little improveme nt in the competitiveness of US products. Do you really expect to see flas h drives or USB cables or anything else that is typically sold from foreign markets to be sole more here? We lost the manufacturing battle a long tim e ago. We ain't winning that war.

You don't understand the facts. The numbers quoted are the TOTAL costs, bo th US and Chinese. Why should we have any say in what the Chinese charge f or their end of the service? Their costs are undoubtedly lower than ours, so it makes perfect sense they don't have to charge as much as we do. We a re setting the fees we charge the Chinese government for delivery of Chines e mail in the US and are raising those fees to be more representative of ou r costs.

You are misinterpreting the facts and seem to be so outraged you won't list en to what you are being told.

--

  Rick C. 

  --+ Get 1,000 miles of free Supercharging 
  --+ Tesla referral code - https://ts.la/richard11209

:

ing about the topic of the post. So I'm getting even with a few posters he re who do that often.

Supreme Court ruled that a company selling $100,000 worth of goods or 200 sales must collect sales tax for the jurisdiction of the buyer even if they have no physical presence there. That sucks!

h Dakota, which is not common. The physical-presence rule of Quill was sta ted in the opinion to be "unsound and incorrect". This was based on such s ound legal arguments such as the revenue of such untaxed sales being much h igher than previously and implying that states and local governments would be insolvent without these taxes. I've always felt practical aspects of ev ery day life should dominate when interpreting the Constitution... not!

will be available from outside the country (can you say China?) since this ruling now provides an even greater advantage to buying overseas which is still not taxed through the sellers. Until Trump creates a universal, all country import tax.

I suggest a reading comprehension class. You just keep asking that. And then I clearly answer a point you raised and you ask what point I was addressing.

What you believe doesn't matter. It is exactly what's going on. Do you not understand that Chinese vendors are selling items on Ebay for $1 with free shipping through USPS, while it costs a US vendor way more than that just for shipping?

In any event, China has to pay the USPS a bunch of money every year for t he mail we deliver.

s are all wrong.

ROFL. An obvious paradox.

Fees were added to the treaty in 1969. Prior to that this was free. These fees were often not as high as charged to US customers. However, this is regular mail with no tracking. People want tracking now so the USPS has cr eated a service called "ePacket" which includes tracking. This has a bette r result for the USPS. Also, rates have increased 13% every year from 2014 to 2017. The article in the Washington Post says, "the USPS actually make s an operating profit on this kind of international mail".

And yet the Chinese vendors are selling things for $1, with free shipping from China through the USPS, while a US company has to pay more than that just for shipping.

hange in Washington.

The cost is China is screwing US businesses, competing unfairly.

ge.

!

That's exactly how it works, I have the items showing up in my mail box. Good grief.

?

Where did that attempt at diversion to the wilderness come from? If you're talking about China, what is actually going on is the Chinese govt allows companies over there to flagrantly violate patents, to illegally copy things, counterfeit things. They demand companies take on China as joint partners to open factories there, then steal the companies technology. All that is wrong and yes, I expect the US govt to do something about it and Trump is right on all the above.

That is a civil matter. The US government has taken actions to get the Chi nese government to do more to enforce patents, trademarks and copyright.

BS. The Chinese have been screwing us for a long time. Trump is the first one that has actually called them out for what they are doing and trying to do something about it. I think he went about it in the wrong way, but on the fundamental problems outlined above, he's right.

te:

thing about the topic of the post. So I'm getting even with a few posters here who do that often.

he Supreme Court ruled that a company selling $100,000 worth of goods or 20

0 sales must collect sales tax for the jurisdiction of the buyer even if th ey have no physical presence there. That sucks!

rth Dakota, which is not common. The physical-presence rule of Quill was s tated in the opinion to be "unsound and incorrect". This was based on such sound legal arguments such as the revenue of such untaxed sales being much higher than previously and implying that states and local governments woul d be insolvent without these taxes. I've always felt practical aspects of every day life should dominate when interpreting the Constitution... not!

gs will be available from outside the country (can you say China?) since th is ruling now provides an even greater advantage to buying overseas which i s still not taxed through the sellers. Until Trump creates a universal, al l country import tax.

y

le

Not really. You say some stuff that comes from your emotions and expect me to have some idea of the logic involved when there really isn't any. That 's the problem. You are all wound up about this and react to everything wi thout giving it any real thought as I've explained several times pointing o ut that you have wrong facts or misinterpret the facts and you just rocket past any of that.

rs

nt

You state irrelevant data to support your wrong claims. I looked it up and told you how it works now. The US is setting rates that they have raised each year for several years now starting in 2014. So this is clearly not a Trump fix going on.

the mail we deliver.

Yes, that is correct.

cts are all wrong.

Only if you don't read what I wrote. Yes, the US does not collect the full cost of delivering packages from China. Otherwise every one of your facts are not correct.

se fees were often not as high as charged to US customers. However, this i s regular mail with no tracking. People want tracking now so the USPS has created a service called "ePacket" which includes tracking. This has a bet ter result for the USPS. Also, rates have increased 13% every year from 20

14 to 2017. The article in the Washington Post says, "the USPS actually ma kes an operating profit on this kind of international mail".

That is one of the few things you have gotten right.

change in Washington.

You are greatly exaggerating this claim. The vast majority of the money mo st people spend is through US companies. The goods may have been made over seas but that is not the issue at hand. The $1 crap you keep touting is ju st that, crap that no one in the US would even think of selling other than Dollar Tree where everything is a dollar.

Who cares of US companies can't sell pipe cleaners... no, I just bought som e of those here... well, they can't sell nail clippers... nope, I just boug ht some of those... well, there must be something you can't buy in the US b ecause it costs too much! I just can't think of anything.

tage.

ds!

Your facts about the treaty are wrong, so all your conclusions from those f acts are wrong.

ee

???

You complained that someone is ripping off the guy's patents. Do you reall y think if these people had to pay another $1 for shipping they would stop selling the mugs? Of course his problem is the patent! Otherwise there is never a way to stop the Chinese from undercutting his price. That's why U S makers actually make stuff in China and import it. Are you really not aw are of how the world works? The $1 vendors on eBay are of no significance in the economy. There are much bigger fish to fry.

hinese government to do more to enforce patents, trademarks and copyright.

Yes, Trump will fix the eBay $1 vendor problem. Then it will become the eB ay $2 vendor problem. lol

--

  Rick C. 

  -+- Get 1,000 miles of free Supercharging 
  -+- Tesla referral code - https://ts.la/richard11209

:

rote:

nothing about the topic of the post. So I'm getting even with a few poster s here who do that often.

the Supreme Court ruled that a company selling $100,000 worth of goods or

200 sales must collect sales tax for the jurisdiction of the buyer even if they have no physical presence there. That sucks!

North Dakota, which is not common. The physical-presence rule of Quill was stated in the opinion to be "unsound and incorrect". This was based on su ch sound legal arguments such as the revenue of such untaxed sales being mu ch higher than previously and implying that states and local governments wo uld be insolvent without these taxes. I've always felt practical aspects o f every day life should dominate when interpreting the Constitution... not!

ings will be available from outside the country (can you say China?) since this ruling now provides an even greater advantage to buying overseas which is still not taxed through the sellers. Until Trump creates a universal, all country import tax.

ady

ut

ople

uy

as

me to have some idea of the logic involved when there really isn't any. Th at's the problem. You are all wound up about this and react to everything without giving it any real thought as I've explained several times pointing out that you have wrong facts or misinterpret the facts and you just rocke t past any of that.

Sure, this coming from the dope that just told us it's "not hard to buy a machine gun in the USA". And who keeps asking what's your point? And who keeps claiming I said things, like there should be no restrictions on weapons", when I never said any such thing.

lers

.

an

t

ment

nd told you how it works now. The US is setting rates that they have raise d each year for several years now starting in 2014. So this is clearly not a Trump fix going on.

Wrong, wrong again. The US doesn't set the rates, the UPU does. If the US set the freaking rates, then the US/Trump, could just raise those rates. Duh? We can't raise them because of an international treaty and the UPU. THAT is why Trump is withdrawing from the UPU. Capiche?

Why is it that you silly libs always side with some foreign country that is screwing the US? It's even better when it's a commie country like China, right? They are shipping stuff here, with the price of the ite m and the shipping together being less than it costs a company in the USA to ship the same thing within the USA. You'd think that even a lib would recognize that it's not right, not fair. But nooooooo. Commies are right, the USA, especially anything that Trump does, has to be wrong.

:

rote:

al_Union

ered by the enormous increase in e-commerce originating from the Far East, where the terminal dues do not cover the unit costs of delivery in the dest ination countries, and the volumes are so big that the losses cannot be com pensated by better terminal dues from other traffic. In 2016, a new remuner ation system was implemented with a focus on e-commerce,[13] but while the

2016 reform balanced the costs to the delivery services, postage costs for shippers are still asymmetric. As of 2018, US companies pay more than twice as much to mail an item from a US plant to a US customer than does a manuf acturer in China to mail an item to a US customer.[14][15][16]

the UPU, effective October 17, 2019, with the US planning to switch to sel f-declared rates.[17]

e

e comparison is end to end rates. Do you really expect the Chinese or anyo ne else to raise their rates for shipping to match what US customers pay?

cially

ugh

gin with.

nment is setting the rates.

Yeah, this from the guy who earlier today told us that it's "not hard" to buy a machine gun in the US. Are you as sure about who sets the shipping rates as you were about that? Why would the US screw itself, screw the USPS, by setting rates absurdly low? So low that you can buy a cable from China with shipping to your home included for $1? Hello? Those rates are set by the UPU and US companies and the USPS are getting SCREWED? It would cost the US company $1 just to ship the thing across the US. That sounds fair to you?

This isn't something I made up, it's well documented.

ch as we pay auto workers in the US!

rs

The Chinese are using the US mail system to deliver packages at rates that are less than half of what US companies pay to ship the same item within the USA. Does that sound right to you?

side the US, we are passing on extra costs to US buyers with little improve ment in the competitiveness of US products. Do you really expect to see fl ash drives or USB cables or anything else that is typically sold from forei gn markets to be sole more here? We lost the manufacturing battle a long t ime ago. We ain't winning that war.

ts

t

This from the guy who just told us that "it's not hard" to buy a machine gun in the USA.

The numbers quoted are the TOTAL costs, both US and Chinese. Why should w e have any say in what the Chinese charge for their end of the service? Th eir costs are undoubtedly lower than ours, so it makes perfect sense they d on't have to charge as much as we do. We are setting the fees we charge th e Chinese government for delivery of Chinese mail in the US and are raising those fees to be more representative of our costs.

No we are not setting those rates. If we were, the govts of past or right now Trump, would be able to just raise the rates. He can't

The U.S. Postal Service currently collects below-cost payments, called term inal dues, to deliver small packages under 4.4 pounds from international sh ippers. These payments, set by the UPU, are being exploited, manufacturers say, by Chinese counterfeiters using e-commerce to flood the American marke t with cheap goods, delivered at much lower cost than goods shipped domesti cally, Bloomberg Government reported in April.

sten to what you are being told.

This from the guy who just told us that it's "not hard to buy a machine gun in the USA".

You didn't bother to read the recommendations did you? They show how the US is getting a raw deal and recommended simple to implement ways to improve the situation WITHIN the UPS. China was already paying the US government funds to offset the lower postage rates they enjoy, but China made an economic decision to subsidize their markets. There are methods to counter that which were relatively simple to implement and would not piss off the other trading partners of the USA.

"A senior administration official said the administration would prefer to stay within the union and that a full withdrawal takes a year to implement and that he hopes the U.S. can negotiate more favorable terms within that time frame."

However Trump is happily shedding allies left, right, and centre so the hopes of the unnamed senior bureaucrat may not be realized.

You don't listen to anyone but the POTUS do you? Is he your golden calf? Can you not critically evaluate information you encounter?

John

te:

y nothing about the topic of the post. So I'm getting even with a few post ers here who do that often.

c. the Supreme Court ruled that a company selling $100,000 worth of goods o r 200 sales must collect sales tax for the jurisdiction of the buyer even i f they have no physical presence there. That sucks!

. North Dakota, which is not common. The physical-presence rule of Quill w as stated in the opinion to be "unsound and incorrect". This was based on such sound legal arguments such as the revenue of such untaxed sales being much higher than previously and implying that states and local governments would be insolvent without these taxes. I've always felt practical aspects of every day life should dominate when interpreting the Constitution... no t!

things will be available from outside the country (can you say China?) sinc e this ruling now provides an even greater advantage to buying overseas whi ch is still not taxed through the sellers. Until Trump creates a universal , all country import tax.

ready

out

o

people

buy

was

t me to have some idea of the logic involved when there really isn't any. That's the problem. You are all wound up about this and react to everythin g without giving it any real thought as I've explained several times pointi ng out that you have wrong facts or misinterpret the facts and you just roc ket past any of that.

I quoted your words and asked you to explain what you meant. Instead of di scussing the issue you just want to flame and rant.

t

ellers

ng.

than

ost

eement

at

y

and told you how it works now. The US is setting rates that they have rai sed each year for several years now starting in 2014. So this is clearly n ot a Trump fix going on.

Ok, you are right, I misread that the US was raising the rates. But the ra tes are increasing...

"At the latest round of negotiations in 2012, countries did agree to raise fees slightly. The United States will get to charge about 13 percent more e very year from 2014 to 2017."

erm=.830785956080

See, this is the emotional thing I was talking about. Instead of discussin g the real issues, you have read a bunch of half truths and gotten wigged o ut over what is actually an insignificant issue. Then when someone wants t o discuss the issue rationally you start calling them names and making up s tuff about supporting other countries.

tem

Lol! I haven't heard anyone call them "commies" in a long time. You so fo cus on the shipping as if that was the reason why US makers can't sell the same stuff. NO ONE IN THE US CAN MAKE THE STUFF AS CHEAP AS CHINA CAN MAKE IT!!!! It wouldn't matter if the US vendor got free shipping. Oh, you ar e talking about US vendors buying Chinese stuff and trying to compete by be ing a cheaper retailer? Lol, that's even more funny.

What exactly are you talking about? Which companies in the US are actually trying to compete in these market space? Who would prosper if they had ch eap shipping?

Why not calm down, take a deep breath, count to 10. Then think about what you are really upset about.

--

  Rick C. 

  -++ Get 1,000 miles of free Supercharging 
  -++ Tesla referral code - https://ts.la/richard11209

Sure, according to you. All the articles I've read say otherwise. And a couple decades of experience show that nothing was being done about it either. Trump is doing something. And he didn't just pull the US out of it either. He said, either fix it or we withdraw. So, if it's so "fixable", like you claim, why didn't they just fix it?

Bingo and it's been 6 months. Has it been fixed? No. And had Trump not started the action, for sure nothing would have been done. So, what's your problem? Trump derangement syndrome?

Bingo! It is Trump derangement syndrome, thanks for proving that. I don't like Trump, I don't like a lot of what he does. But I'm fair and objective and when he's right, he's right. On this, on the immigration fiasco at the border, on China abusing the US by stealing intellectual property, forcing companies into joint partnerships, violating patents, allowing counterfeiting, he's right.

:

rote:

lly nothing about the topic of the post. So I'm getting even with a few po sters here who do that often.

Inc. the Supreme Court ruled that a company selling $100,000 worth of goods or 200 sales must collect sales tax for the jurisdiction of the buyer even if they have no physical presence there. That sucks!

v. North Dakota, which is not common. The physical-presence rule of Quill was stated in the opinion to be "unsound and incorrect". This was based o n such sound legal arguments such as the revenue of such untaxed sales bein g much higher than previously and implying that states and local government s would be insolvent without these taxes. I've always felt practical aspec ts of every day life should dominate when interpreting the Constitution... not!

e things will be available from outside the country (can you say China?) si nce this ruling now provides an even greater advantage to buying overseas w hich is still not taxed through the sellers. Until Trump creates a univers al, all country import tax.

already

me out

no

d people

to buy

.

I was

ect me to have some idea of the logic involved when there really isn't any. That's the problem. You are all wound up about this and react to everyth ing without giving it any real thought as I've explained several times poin ting out that you have wrong facts or misinterpret the facts and you just r ocket past any of that.

a

discussing the issue you just want to flame and rant.

n't

sellers

or

nd

ping.

r than

post

greement

that

y

way

up and told you how it works now. The US is setting rates that they have r aised each year for several years now starting in 2014. So this is clearly not a Trump fix going on.

e

rates are increasing...

Wow, the rates are increasing marginally, when US shippers are at over a 2X disadvantage. Again, always taking the side of foreign countries that are screwing us, making excuses for them.

e fees slightly. The United States will get to charge about 13 percent more every year from 2014 to 2017."

_term=.830785956080

ing the real issues,

I have discussed the real issues. You on the other hand get the facts wrong and rant on, taking the side against America. And how many times do I have to tell you that you're wrong? I had to bash your head 3 times when you falsely claimed that "it's not hard" to buy a machine gun in the USA. And then you complain that I was nitpicking, when it's actually the core of what you said that was wrong.

you have read a bunch of half truths and gotten wigged out over what is act ually an insignificant issue. Then when someone wants to discuss the issue rationally you start calling them names and making up stuff about supporti ng other countries.

item

focus on the shipping as if that was the reason why US makers can't sell th e same stuff. NO ONE IN THE US CAN MAKE THE STUFF AS CHEAP AS CHINA CAN MA KE IT!!!! It wouldn't matter if the US vendor got free shipping. Oh, you are talking about US vendors buying Chinese stuff and trying to compete by being a cheaper retailer? Lol, that's even more funny.

ly trying to compete in these market space? Who would prosper if they had cheap shipping?

t you are really upset about.

Why not go f*ck yourself and your Tesla spamming too?

Why not discuss electronics?

Any idiots can curse and insult. And do.

--

John Larkin         Highland Technology, Inc 

lunatic fringe electronics

Cursing rarely reflects well on the person doing the curing.

Insults /can/ be an artform, but that's rare and certainly not the case here. (Artform iff they are relevant, pointed and amusing)

rote:

the item

lib

to

so focus on the shipping as if that was the reason why US makers can't sel l the same stuff. NO ONE IN THE US CAN MAKE THE STUFF AS CHEAP AS CHINA CA N MAKE IT!!!! It wouldn't matter if the US vendor got free shipping. Oh, you are talking about US vendors buying Chinese stuff and trying to compete by being a cheaper retailer? Lol, that's even more funny.

tually trying to compete in these market space? Who would prosper if they had cheap shipping?

what you are really upset about.

Are you talking about Lenny Bruce or the Ice Man?

I think the Chinese are very good at designing, making and selling low pric ed electronics. I remember when I was a kid the running joke was about Jap anese electronics being very cheaply made. But that was really just from t he very inexpensive goods they could make immediately after the war which t hey quickly adapted to. So much so, that in the 70's they ate the world's lunch by making the most reliable cars in the world which the rest of us ha d to emulate to prevent the collapse of the auto industry elsewhere. Now p retty much every car has to live up to high standards in quality and reliab ility... thanks to the Japanese setting the standard.

I think in another 10 years we won't be focusing on the crap that is sold o n eBay and Aliexpress for $1. We'll be worrying about how to find ways to keep up with the quality and low cost of Chinese manufacturing. Oh, also t he US be buying Thorium fueled reactors... but not in 10 years. The rest o f the world will get them, but it will be at least 20 years before anyone s cales the ramparts of the NRC so we can have them in the US.

I guess state sales tax won't matter so much when everything we buy is from overs

--

  Rick C. 

  +-- Get 5,000 miles of free Supercharging 
  +-- Tesla referral code - https://ts.la/richard11209

Taxes on individuals? Only individuals pay taxes anyway. Collecting it in the middle only warps the economy and adds cost.

I've _never_ paid a "significant" tax when buying a house. A couple of hundred bucks, maybe, but nothing like even 1%. Of course, I've had to pay property taxes into escrow, or reimburse the seller for property taxes paid.

It's not a simple matter and is often wrong. The first problem is to know what jurisdiction the buyer is in.

You can still do it, even if you can't deduct it on your federal taxes. It's the same amount of work. It was never easy.

Trump has talked about it. I believe he's directed the USPS to investigate the actual cost of delivering packages. They claim it's not possible. Go figure.

Yet you don't like _any_ tariffs.

nothing about the topic of the post. So I'm getting even with a few post ers here who do that often.

the Supreme Court ruled that a company selling $100,000 worth of goods o r 200 sales must collect sales tax for the jurisdiction of the buyer even if they have no physical presence there. That sucks!

North Dakota, which is not common. The physical-presence rule of Quill w as stated in the opinion to be "unsound and incorrect". This was based o n such sound legal arguments such as the revenue of such untaxed sales be ing much higher than previously and implying that states and local govern ments would be insolvent without these taxes. I've always felt practical aspects of every day life should dominate when interpreting the Constitu tion... not!

ings will be available from outside the country (can you say China?) sinc e this ruling now provides an even greater advantage to buying overseas w hich is still not taxed through the sellers. Until Trump creates a unive rsal, all country import tax.

retty good

through the hassle of collecting VAT for that country, but one you start selling more to that country you have to pay the VAT and compete on equa l terms

sales tax. Is it collected by a vendor and then paid to the state? I g uess I had the impression it was integrated into the price of the item ra ther than collected as a separate item. Maybe I have this impression bec ause VAT is paid at each stage of the process but the only tax that shows is what is being added in a given transaction. So all VAT paid at earli er stages is hidden and not indicated explicitly. A sales tax is only co llected at the final retail sale.

o the state

can deduct the VAT they pay buying stuff from the VAT they have to pay wh en selling it

t for 100?, 20? is VAT,

e mandates a sales tax and a company doesn't have a presence in that stat e and doesn't pay the tax, how can the state collect it from them?

the VAT,

s and collect at delivery (unless it slips by customs with sometimes happ ens from China, in my experience never from the US)

t

I suppose you also would be opposed to taxes on wealth?

If companies want to be treated as people (legal fiction of course) then

the same company should be taxed. You can't have it both ways. If the company shouldn't pay taxes then it should have no rights - Disney would

have no copyright protection, companies couldn't sue to collect debts or

protect their interests, etc.

Why should companies have the legal rights of personhood but not the responsibility (to pay appropriate tax?

Companies were granted the right of personhood so they can exist - they just don't work otherwise, so they need to pay taxes just like the rest of us. And we have to keep an eye on them so they can't get away with Love Canals or tax avoidance!

John

Moralistic theory is not the best way to run an economy; see how Venezuela is doing. Since nobody, especially no politicians and no economists, understand economics, the best way to run an economy is to mostly leave it alone.

A company isn't a person, it is an organization of persons, namely the shareholders.

If government must tax (and government is addicted to taxing) it should tax personal consumption and maybe financial transactions.

--

John Larkin         Highland Technology, Inc 

lunatic fringe electronics

ally nothing about the topic of the post. So I'm getting even with a few p osters here who do that often.

Inc. the Supreme Court ruled that a company selling $100,000 worth of good s or 200 sales must collect sales tax for the jurisdiction of the buyer eve n if they have no physical presence there. That sucks!

. v. North Dakota, which is not common. The physical-presence rule of Quil l was stated in the opinion to be "unsound and incorrect". This was based on such sound legal arguments such as the revenue of such untaxed sales bei ng much higher than previously and implying that states and local governmen ts would be insolvent without these taxes. I've always felt practical aspe cts of every day life should dominate when interpreting the Constitution... not!

re things will be available from outside the country (can you say China?) s ince this ruling now provides an even greater advantage to buying overseas which is still not taxed through the sellers. Until Trump creates a univer sal, all country import tax.

a pretty good

o go through the hassle of collecting VAT for that country, but one you sta rt selling more to that country you have to pay the VAT and compete on equa l terms

as sales tax. Is it collected by a vendor and then paid to the state? I guess I had the impression it was integrated into the price of the item rat her than collected as a separate item. Maybe I have this impression becaus e VAT is paid at each stage of the process but the only tax that shows is w hat is being added in a given transaction. So all VAT paid at earlier stag es is hidden and not indicated explicitly. A sales tax is only collected a t the final retail sale.

to the state

s can deduct the VAT they pay buying stuff from the VAT they have to pay wh en selling it

it for 100?, 20? is VAT,

tate mandates a sales tax and a company doesn't have a presence in that sta te and doesn't pay the tax, how can the state collect it from them?

t the VAT,

oms and collect at delivery (unless it slips by customs with sometimes happ ens from China, in my experience never from the US)

ow

ost

t

But they charge a 6% tax when registering it. Every state I know of has ta xes on real estate. They may not call it "sales tax", but who cares? In m ost places houses have a rather significant tax when buying them.

Same here, though there now is a millionaire's tax on homes that sell for $1 mil plus, 1% of the sale price, not just the amount over $1 mil. But it affects on a small number of sales.