Comments on: Senator Enzi Pushing for Federal Action http://nyaffiliatevoice.com/2009/03/senator-enzi-pushing-for-federal-action/ My Life as an Affiliate from New York Wed, 23 Jun 2010 04:22:22 +0000 http://wordpress.org/?v=2.9.2 hourly 1 By: Minnesota Looks in Direction of Affiliate Sales Tax « Affiliate Marketing Blog http://nyaffiliatevoice.com/2009/03/senator-enzi-pushing-for-federal-action/comment-page-1/#comment-3937 Minnesota Looks in Direction of Affiliate Sales Tax « Affiliate Marketing Blog Sun, 31 Jan 2010 15:14:53 +0000 http://nyaffiliatevoice.com/?p=701#comment-3937 [...] The precedent set in the State of New York last year is already turning into a “nasty” one as other states are considering following the same model. Connecticut, Illinois, Tennessee and Hawaii are being said to be on their way as well. Some senators, however, seem to be taking a different root, and this is certainly good to see (read about Senator Enzi’s Sales Tax Fairness and Simplification bill here). [...] [...] The precedent set in the State of New York last year is already turning into a “nasty” one as other states are considering following the same model. Connecticut, Illinois, Tennessee and Hawaii are being said to be on their way as well. Some senators, however, seem to be taking a different root, and this is certainly good to see (read about Senator Enzi’s Sales Tax Fairness and Simplification bill here). [...]

]]> By: Richard Hofrichter http://nyaffiliatevoice.com/2009/03/senator-enzi-pushing-for-federal-action/comment-page-1/#comment-1038 Richard Hofrichter Fri, 17 Apr 2009 13:59:12 +0000 http://nyaffiliatevoice.com/?p=701#comment-1038 Without putting out my feelings about the politics of this, it is important to point out that SSTP does NOT get rid of the varying local tax rates. While it DOES try to establish uniform TAXABILITY of a given item (anything subject to the STATE sales tax is also subject to any county, city, or district tax rates), it still does allow for each and every city, town, county, and special purpose district (like transit or stadium districts) to still impose their own varying tax rates on top of the state rate. As such, even with SSTP there are still potentially thousands of different tax rates in a state, and over 10,000 in the 50 states, even if SSTP was adopted. Just a correction of a statement in the article - SSTP will NOT require the elimination of the various county, city, and district tax rates. The only thing it does is require state administration of those taxes, whereas now in some states like Alabama, Colorado, and Louisiana, many of these local taxes are actually sent to (and administered by) the locality or a private collection agency. This requires a seller to all locations in Alabama, for example, to remit possibly hundreds of tax returns per month just in that state alone. Now you can see why many businesses are resistant to collecting these taxes all over the country, as they could be required to file over 1,000 tax returns per month if they registered in every locallity and state. How's THAT for going green? Imagine all those pieces of paper and documents being mailed, that require fuel to deliver, that would waste. And by the way, New York has NOT signed on to the SSTP. Without putting out my feelings about the politics of this, it is important to point out that SSTP does NOT get rid of the varying local tax rates. While it DOES try to establish uniform TAXABILITY of a given item (anything subject to the STATE sales tax is also subject to any county, city, or district tax rates), it still does allow for each and every city, town, county, and special purpose district (like transit or stadium districts) to still impose their own varying tax rates on top of the state rate. As such, even with SSTP there are still potentially thousands of different tax rates in a state, and over 10,000 in the 50 states, even if SSTP was adopted. Just a correction of a statement in the article – SSTP will NOT require the elimination of the various county, city, and district tax rates. The only thing it does is require state administration of those taxes, whereas now in some states like Alabama, Colorado, and Louisiana, many of these local taxes are actually sent to (and administered by) the locality or a private collection agency.

This requires a seller to all locations in Alabama, for example, to remit possibly hundreds of tax returns per month just in that state alone. Now you can see why many businesses are resistant to collecting these taxes all over the country, as they could be required to file over 1,000 tax returns per month if they registered in every locallity and state. How’s THAT for going green? Imagine all those pieces of paper and documents being mailed, that require fuel to deliver, that would waste.

And by the way, New York has NOT signed on to the SSTP.

]]> By: Franklin Banker http://nyaffiliatevoice.com/2009/03/senator-enzi-pushing-for-federal-action/comment-page-1/#comment-923 Franklin Banker Tue, 07 Apr 2009 03:10:25 +0000 http://nyaffiliatevoice.com/?p=701#comment-923 Sorry to be so irritated, but I was mainly commenting on the trend of states enacting the type of legislation NY did. I was not commenting on the proposal Senator Enzi has made. Actually the Federal approach would be far better than watching our industry be eliminated slowly as each state passes the same type of bill. We must support the Enzi approach, which should stem the tide of state by state legislation, at least I hope it would. If such a bill were to pass, how would it affect the NY law already in place? There are 4 or 5 other states considering the same kind of laws. This Enzi proposal is the only ray of sunshine so far in the scheme of things for affiliates living in the affected states. Let's support the effort, and then the industry could adjust to a standardized system. Sorry to be so irritated, but I was mainly commenting on the trend of states enacting the type of legislation NY did. I was not commenting on the proposal Senator Enzi has made. Actually the Federal approach would be far better than watching our industry be eliminated slowly as each state passes the same type of bill.

We must support the Enzi approach, which should stem the tide of state by state legislation, at least I hope it would.

If such a bill were to pass, how would it affect the NY law already in place? There are 4 or 5 other states considering the same kind of laws.

This Enzi proposal is the only ray of sunshine so far in the scheme of things for affiliates living in the affected states. Let’s support the effort, and then the industry could adjust to a standardized system.

]]>