Power Sellers Unite

elgato · Joined: 24 Feb 2005 Posts: 17235 Location: Texas

"Small eBay and Amazon Sellers Getting Screwed by New Tax Law"

The government and fraud experts tell us to carefully guard our social security number, but a new regulation is giving carte blanche to ecommerce companies to collect those numbers from small sellers.

PayPal won't disclose what triggers its request for tax ID numbers (see "PayPal Coy about Request for Seller Social Security Numbers"), but Amazon just revealed it will require sellers with only 50 transactions - no matter the dollar volume - to provide tax ID numbers (TINs).

Unfortunately many sole proprietors are unaware they can obtain tax ID numbers from the government so they don't have to provide social security numbers as they conduct business.

Thus, many small sellers on sites such as eBay and Amazon are facing a dilemma - hand over social security numbers or face account suspension, which would effectively kill their business.

http://blog.auctionbytes.com/cgi-bin/blog/blog.pl

Webshop4u · Joined: 12 Oct 2011 Posts: 5

Can Anyone Here Tell Me If You Have To File Taxes When You Are Selling On, Online Sites?? They Don't tax Us for garage sales, thats how I see it, online garge sale. And if you are selling on say for example ecrater.com, and you have your own website, does that change anything??

elgato · Joined: 24 Feb 2005 Posts: 17235 Location: Texas

"A new take on a national web sales tax"

A House bill with bipartisan support would fast-track a national sales tax system. It would be easier to implement than the approach that Congress has been debating for years, which requires each state to simplify its sales tax rules before it can force e-retailers to collect sales tax.

A sales tax bill with bipartisan support was introduced in the U.S. House of Representatives yesterday, proposing a fast-track way for states to require online and catalog retailers to collect sales tax.

The bill exempts sales tax collection by retailers with less than $1 million in annual nationwide sales; for individual states, the exemption is based on having annual in-state sales of less than $100,000.

The bill, introduced by Rep. Steve Womack, a Republican from Arkansas, and Rep. Jackie Speier, a Democrat from California, was designed to be simpler to implement than existing legislation introduced in the Senate in July by Sen. Dick Durbin, a Democrat from Illinois. As such, its backers, including the Retail Industry Leaders Association, a trade group representing large retail chains, hope it will win more political support from Republican lawmakers and have a better chance of passing, says Daniel Schibley, a state tax analyst with CCH, a unit of Wolters Kluwer that publishes tax and business information.

http://www.internetretailer.com/2011/10/13/new-take-national-web-sales-tax

Hotspur8 · Joined: 05 Aug 2006 Posts: 34 Location: Pasadena, Texas

Webshop4u wrote (View Post): › docWrite("quote")Can Anyone Here Tell Me If You Have To File Taxes When You Are Selling On, Online Sites?? They Don't tax Us for garage sales, thats how I see it, online garge sale. And if you are selling on say for example ecrater.com, and you have your own website, does that change anything??

This is an article I found on the net: Do I have to pay taxes

I always report my small, meager, earnings or losses. But I became a business because I thought I could make some extra money. Or at least offset my losses. I will ask my wife (a tax CPA) about your question for further clarification.

charlce-p · Joined: 21 Oct 2011 Posts: 1

In the United States, a tax is imposed on income by the Federal, most state, and many local governments. The income tax is determined by applying a tax rate, which may increase as income increases, to taxable income as defined. Individuals and corporations are directly taxable, and estates and trusts may be taxable on undistributed income. Partnerships are not taxed, but their partners are taxed on their shares of partnership income. Residents and citizens are taxed on worldwide income, while nonresidents are taxed only on income within the jurisdiction. Several types of credits reduce tax, and some types of credits may exceed tax before credits. An alternative tax applies at the Federal and some state levels.

Taxable income is total income less allowable deductions. Income is broadly defined. Most business expenses are deductible. Individuals may also deduct a personal allowance (exemption) and certain personal expenses, including home mortgage interest, state taxes, contributions to charity, and some other items. Some deductions are subject to limits.

Capital gains are fully taxable, and capital losses reduce taxable income only to the extent of gains. Individuals currently pay a lower rate of tax on capital gains and certain corporate dividends.

Taxpayers generally must self assess income tax by filing tax returns. Advance payments of tax are required in the form of withholding tax or estimated tax payments. Taxes are determined separately by each jurisdiction imposing tax. Due dates and other administrative procedures vary by jurisdiction. April 15 following the tax year is the due date for individual returns for Federal and many state and local returns. Tax as determined by the taxpayer may be adjusted by the taxing jurisdiction.

I'm saying that those of us, who have had businesses in the "real" world know just how much more you have to pay, just to be able to have a business, as opposed to the internet.

But at the same time, we know how to make the "system" work for us, in regards to deductables and write-offs.

As for your gas price comparison, if the "powers that be", whether they be state or federal, came forward and offered to resurface the roads to eliminate potholes, and would do so with a minimum of disruption, by doing the work at night, in exchange for an 25¢ per gallon increase in the gas tax, I do believe that most people would agree that it was a worthwhile trade-off.

As for Europeans paying more for gas, that is primarily taxes. That is how they pay for their national health care, among other things.

How much you drive is something you DO have control over. When gas prices were reaching $4 per gallon and beyond, I never spent more than $10 at a time for gas, and it would last me at least 2 weeks. And my car is considered to be a gas hog (1994 Ford Crown Victoria LX)...I simply don't drive that much.

I wonder...

If the government came out and offered everyone National Healthcare, similar to what members of Congress get (remember, Obama promised as much), in exchange for a $2 per gallon increase in the gas tax, do you think that the majority of Americans would go for it, knowing that they have some control over how much driving they do?

I think they would.

So while your comparison didn't fit in the vein of the argument, it did lead towards another possible thread. Maybe you should go start that one.
[/quote]DaLizardsLair wrote (View Post): › docWrite("quote")
johndonahoe wrote (View Post): › docWrite("quote")Yeah, but with your logic it's like saying Americans shouldn't complain about gas price hikes because Europeans has had higher prices longer. How many people are actually going to agree to higher prices even after they heard that argument? Answer: very few.

Not even close.

I'm saying that those of us, who have had businesses in the "real" world know just how much more you have to pay, just to be able to have a business, as opposed to the internet.

But at the same time, we know how to make the "system" work for us, in regards to deductables and write-offs.

As for your gas price comparison, if the "powers that be", whether they be state or federal, came forward and offered to resurface the roads to eliminate potholes, and would do so with a minimum of disruption, by doing the work at night, in exchange for an 25¢ per gallon increase in the gas tax, I do believe that most people would agree that it was a worthwhile trade-off.

As for Europeans paying more for gas, that is primarily taxes. That is how they pay for their national health care, among other things.

How much you drive is something you DO have control over. When gas prices were reaching $4 per gallon and beyond, I never spent more than $10 at a time for gas, and it would last me at least 2 weeks. And my car is considered to be a gas hog (1994 Ford Crown Victoria LX)...I simply don't drive that much.

I wonder...

If the government came out and offered everyone National Healthcare, similar to what members of Congress get (remember, Obama promised as much), in exchange for a $2 per gallon increase in the gas tax, do you think that the majority of Americans would go for it, knowing that they have some control over how much driving they do?

I think they would.

So while your comparison didn't fit in the vein of the argument, it did lead towards another possible thread. Maybe you should go start that one.
DaLizardsLair wrote (View Post): › docWrite("quote")
johndonahoe wrote (View Post): › docWrite("quote")Yeah, but with your logic it's like saying Americans shouldn't complain about gas price hikes because Europeans has had higher prices longer. How many people are actually going to agree to higher prices even after they heard that argument? Answer: very few.

Not even close.

I'm saying that those of us, who have had businesses in the "real" world know just how much more you have to pay, just to be able to have a business, as opposed to the internet.

But at the same time, we know how to make the "system" work for us, in regards to deductables and write-offs.

As for your gas price comparison, if the "powers that be", whether they be state or federal, came forward and offered to resurface the roads to eliminate potholes, and would do so with a minimum of disruption, by doing the work at night, in exchange for an 25¢ per gallon increase in the gas tax, I do believe that most people would agree that it was a worthwhile trade-off.

As for Europeans paying more for gas, that is primarily taxes. That is how they pay for their national health care, among other things.

How much you drive is something you DO have control over. When gas prices were reaching $4 per gallon and beyond, I never spent more than $10 at a time for gas, and it would last me at least 2 weeks. And my car is considered to be a gas hog (1994 Ford Crown Victoria LX)...I simply don't drive that much.

I wonder...

If the government came out and offered everyone National Healthcare, similar to what members of Congress get (remember, Obama promised as much), in exchange for a $2 per gallon increase in the gas tax, do you think that the majority of Americans would go for it, knowing that they have some control over how much driving they do?

I think they would.

So while your comparison didn't fit in the vein of the argument, it did lead towards another possible thread. Maybe you should go start that one.
DaLizardsLair wrote (View Post): › docWrite("quote")
johndonahoe wrote (View Post): › docWrite("quote")Yeah, but with your logic it's like saying Americans shouldn't complain about gas price hikes because Europeans has had higher prices longer. How many people are actually going to agree to higher prices even after they heard that argument? Answer: very few.

Not even close.

I'm saying that those of us, who have had businesses in the "real" world know just how much more you have to pay, just to be able to have a business, as opposed to the internet.

But at the same time, we know how to make the "system" work for us, in regards to deductables and write-offs.

As for your gas price comparison, if the "powers that be", whether they be state or federal, came forward and offered to resurface the roads to eliminate potholes, and would do so with a minimum of disruption, by doing the work at night, in exchange for an 25¢ per gallon increase in the gas tax, I do believe that most people would agree that it was a worthwhile trade-off.

As for Europeans paying more for gas, that is primarily taxes. That is how they pay for their national health care, among other things.

How much you drive is something you DO have control over. When gas prices were reaching $4 per gallon and beyond, I never spent more than $10 at a time for gas, and it would last me at least 2 weeks. And my car is considered to be a gas hog (1994 Ford Crown Victoria LX)...I simply don't drive that much.

I wonder...

If the government came out and offered everyone National Healthcare, similar to what members of Congress get (remember, Obama promised as much), in exchange for a $2 per gallon increase in the gas tax, do you think that the majority of Americans would go for it, knowing that they have some control over how much driving they do?

I think they would.

So while your comparison didn't fit in the vein of the argument, it did lead towards another possible thread. Maybe you should go start that one.
DaLizardsLair wrote (View Post): › docWrite("quote")
johndonahoe wrote (View Post): › docWrite("quote")Yeah, but with your logic it's like saying Americans shouldn't complain about gas price hikes because Europeans has had higher prices longer. How many people are actually going to agree to higher prices even after they heard that argument? Answer: very few.

Not even close.

I'm saying that those of us, who have had businesses in the "real" world know just how much more you have to pay, just to be able to have a business, as opposed to the internet.

But at the same time, we know how to make the "system" work for us, in regards to deductables and write-offs.

As for your gas price comparison, if the "powers that be", whether they be state or federal, came forward and offered to resurface the roads to eliminate potholes, and would do so with a minimum of disruption, by doing the work at night, in exchange for an 25¢ per gallon increase in the gas tax, I do believe that most people would agree that it was a worthwhile trade-off.

As for Europeans paying more for gas, that is primarily taxes. That is how they pay for their national health care, among other things.

How much you drive is something you DO have control over. When gas prices were reaching $4 per gallon and beyond, I never spent more than $10 at a time for gas, and it would last me at least 2 weeks. And my car is considered to be a gas hog (1994 Ford Crown Victoria LX)...I simply don't drive that much.

I wonder...

If the government came out and offered everyone National Healthcare, similar to what members of Congress get (remember, Obama promised as much), in exchange for a $2 per gallon increase in the gas tax, do you think that the majority of Americans would go for it, knowing that they have some control over how much driving they do?

I think they would.

So while your comparison didn't fit in the vein of the argument, it did lead towards another possible thread. Maybe you should go start that one.
DaLizardsLair wrote (View Post): › docWrite("quote")
johndonahoe wrote (View Post): › docWrite("quote")Yeah, but with your logic it's like saying Americans shouldn't complain about gas price hikes because Europeans has had higher prices longer. How many people are actually going to agree to higher prices even after they heard that argument? Answer: very few.

Not even close.

I'm saying that those of us, who have had businesses in the "real" world know just how much more you have to pay, just to be able to have a business, as opposed to the internet.

But at the same time, we know how to make the "system" work for us, in regards to deductables and write-offs.

As for your gas price comparison, if the "powers that be", whether they be state or federal, came forward and offered to resurface the roads to eliminate potholes, and would do so with a minimum of disruption, by doing the work at night, in exchange for an 25¢ per gallon increase in the gas tax, I do believe that most people would agree that it was a worthwhile trade-off.

As for Europeans paying more for gas, that is primarily taxes. That is how they pay for their national health care, among other things.

How much you drive is something you DO have control over. When gas prices were reaching $4 per gallon and beyond, I never spent more than $10 at a time for gas, and it would last me at least 2 weeks. And my car is considered to be a gas hog (1994 Ford Crown Victoria LX)...I simply don't drive that much.

I wonder...

If the government came out and offered everyone National Healthcare, similar to what members of Congress get (remember, Obama promised as much), in exchange for a $2 per gallon increase in the gas tax, do you think that the majority of Americans would go for it, knowing that they have some control over how much driving they do?

I think they would.

So while your comparison didn't fit in the vein of the argument, it did lead towards another possible thread. Maybe you should go start that one.
DaLizardsLair wrote (View Post): › docWrite("quote")
johndonahoe wrote (View Post): › docWrite("quote")Yeah, but with your logic it's like saying Americans shouldn't complain about gas price hikes because Europeans has had higher prices longer. How many people are actually going to agree to higher prices even after they heard that argument? Answer: very few.

Not even close.

I'm saying that those of us, who have had businesses in the "real" world know just how much more you have to pay, just to be able to have a business, as opposed to the internet.

But at the same time, we know how to make the "system" work for us, in regards to deductables and write-offs.

As for your gas price comparison, if the "powers that be", whether they be state or federal, came forward and offered to resurface the roads to eliminate potholes, and would do so with a minimum of disruption, by doing the work at night, in exchange for an 25¢ per gallon increase in the gas tax, I do believe that most people would agree that it was a worthwhile trade-off.

As for Europeans paying more for gas, that is primarily taxes. That is how they pay for their national health care, among other things.

How much you drive is something you DO have control over. When gas prices were reaching $4 per gallon and beyond, I never spent more than $10 at a time for gas, and it would last me at least 2 weeks. And my car is considered to be a gas hog (1994 Ford Crown Victoria LX)...I simply don't drive that much.

I wonder...

If the government came out and offered everyone National Healthcare, similar to what members of Congress get (remember, Obama promised as much), in exchange for a $2 per gallon increase in the gas tax, do you think that the majority of Americans would go for it, knowing that they have some control over how much driving they do?

I think they would.

So while your comparison didn't fit in the vein of the argument, it did lead towards another possible thread. Maybe you should go start that one.

elgato · Joined: 24 Feb 2005 Posts: 17235 Location: Texas

"What is the Right Solution for Internet Tax?"

The Internet sales tax issue has been debated for a number of years, but the issue grew to a new level of intensity after the state of California signed into law a bill that required all online retailing sites to pay taxes on their affiliate advertising. This, of course, sparked a big dispute since many online retailers such as Amazon cut off their affiliate programs in the state.

As a result, a lot of the affiliates in the state lost most, if not all, of their revenue. Nick Loper, who was among the affiliate victims, spoke to WebProNews back in August and told us that he lost 70 percent of his revenue almost immediately after the law went into effect. He ended up moving to Nevada and starting completely over.

The motive for California’s law was driven primarily by its struggling financial situation. Because many other states are facing similar scenarios with large budget deficits, they too are contemplating related actions. It’s understandable why states want to impose these taxes, but does that make it right?

http://www.webpronews.com/what-about-an-origin-based-tax-solution-for-the-internet-2011-10

elgato · Joined: 24 Feb 2005 Posts: 17235 Location: Texas

"Senate bill powers up state online sales taxes"

WASHINGTON (Reuters) - State governments would be able to collect online sales taxes under a bill due to be introduced in the Senate on Wednesday, said sources familiar with the bill.

Supporters of the online sales tax collection requirement include Wal-Mart Stores Inc, Target Corp and other "big box" retailers who argue they are at a disadvantage against online-only competitors.

A bipartisan group of up to seven senators will introduce the bill, which is broader than similar legislation introduced in the Senate in July. The new bill will differ from a bill in the House of Representatives by affecting more small businesses under a lower exemption threshold, the sources said.

State and local governments support the upcoming bill even more than earlier measures.

Retailers have been exempted from collecting taxes on sales in states where they do not have a physical presence since a 1992 Supreme Court case -- before the advent of e-commerce.

Backers of the new bill say state and local governments will lose $24 billion in uncollected sales taxes in 2012 without the power to tax Web transactions. States have worked for more than a decade to streamline rules and get congressional approval to collect the taxes.

http://finance.yahoo.com/news/Senate-bill-powers-up-state-rb-765042297.html?x=0&.v=3

elgato · Joined: 24 Feb 2005 Posts: 17235 Location: Texas

"eBay and Amazon Spar again Over Online Sales Taxes"

WASHINGTON - Consensus was in short supply here at the annual State of the Net conference, where representatives from eBay and Amazon squared off in a panel discussion concerning the contentious issue of online sales taxes.

For eBay, the fight to defeat legislation that would empower states to require out-of-state Internet companies to collect sales taxes has vaulted to the top of the company's policy agenda, according to Becky Relic, head of North American government relations for all of eBay's properties, including PayPal.

http://www.auctionbytes.com/cab/abn/y12/m01/i18/s02

elgato · Joined: 24 Feb 2005 Posts: 17235 Location: Texas

"81% of US consumers refuse to pay sales tax"

It’s that time of year that if you haven’t already your income tax bill is due to be paid. I’m sure not many of us like paying tax. I suspect that quite a few of us would avoid paying tax if we could. Now a survey of South Carolina residents in the US has confirmed this with almost 81% saying that they plan to fiddle their tax forms.

When selling on eBay it’s pretty much impossible to fiddle your figures. Your eBay account records every sale and your PayPal account and bank account record the payments. If the tax man wants to check you’ve paid what’s due it’s pretty easy for him. The same goes for VAT for those of us that are registered – everything leaves an electronic record which is easy to follow.

Many companies such as Amazon are busily opposing the requirement to collect sales tax (and for smaller sellers understandably you don’t want to be figuring out tax rates across 51 states!). Amazon have recently negotiated a 5 year deal not to collect sales tax in South Carolina on condition they merely email their customers and let them know what tax is due. That doesn’t appear to make much difference though – consumers are happily buying on the Internet tax free and costing the State some $110 million annually in unpaid tax.

http://tamebay.com/2012/01/81-of-us-consumers-refuse-to-pay-sales-tax.html

montoya76 · Joined: 04 Jan 2012 Posts: 5

I didn't read all of it, but it's quite a discussion going on here. I don't have a hard stance on paying taxes, I think income and sales tax are a legit way in order for our government to raise revenues and actually pay for things that make sense for our society (teachers, policemen, roads, bridges, ... ) and shouldn't be used for things that don't make any (wars, subsidies, ...).
Since online shopping is not getting any less important (if you want have a look at the quite impressive numbers on online shopping here) and some day basically all Americans will buy stuff on the internet the government better think about how to collect it income and sales tax on those transactions or it will run out of money eventually (well it already has, and should save, yes, but that's not my point).

As much as everyone would like to pay less taxes, it's good the government is spending time discussing this topic. Actually one of the few they are actually considering the near future. They should do that more often..

elgato · Joined: 24 Feb 2005 Posts: 17235 Location: Texas

"A federal judge rules Colorado’s online tax law unconstitutional"

A Colorado law that required online retailers without a physical presence in the state to inform Colorado customers of their use tax obligations and also report that information to the state’s Department of Revenue has been ruled unconstitutional by a federal court judge.

The Colorado law, passed in 2010 but never enforced, required retailers with $100,000 or more in annual sales to Colorado residents to provide those consumers with a report of their past year’s purchases and notify them of their responsibility to pay use tax—essentially the equivalent of the state sales tax—on those purchases. The law also required the retailers to provide the state with an annual report listing the names, billing addresses, shipping addresses and the total amount of purchases for each of their Colorado customers.

In his ruling late last week, Judge Robert Blackburn, of the U.S. District Court for the district of Colorado, wrote that the Colorado law placed unique burdens on out-of-state retailers and were discriminatory. “The Act and the Regulations [of the Colorado law] directly regulate and discriminate against out-of-state retailers and, therefore, interstate commerce,” wrote Blackburn. His ruling cited a 1992 U.S. Supreme Court decision from which was born a requirement that states can’t tax online purchases from e-retailers that don’t have a physical presence in those states.

http://www.internetretailer.com/2012/04/04/federal-judge-rules-colorados-online-tax-law-unconstitutional

elgato · Joined: 24 Feb 2005 Posts: 17235 Location: Texas

"States and Snitches Target eBay Sellers Who Duck Sales Taxes"

Sellers who take the trouble to register with the relevant tax authorities and equip their online shops with a tax calculator might be understandably frustrated when they see rivals selling in their same category who do not charge customers sales taxes. After all, they're playing by the rules, and are rewarded with what can be a steep competitive disadvantage, right?

Much of the discussion around online taxes has been steered by the ongoing debate over interstate issues, relating to whether sellers in one state should be required to collect and remit sales taxes on purchases made by customers in another state.

http://www.auctionbytes.com/cab/abn/y12/m04/i10/s01