Best Buy closes 50 stores

[Elfwreck]

Originally Posted by Merischino

You are wrong. Currently, Companies like Amazon, wine Vineyards or more broadly, alcohol distributors, etc are required by law to collect sales taxes in any jurisdiction in which they physically operate. States where they have no physical presence have no jurisdiction over them and also have no jurisdiction over customers who choose to purchase from out-of-state vendors, whatever their business model.

One of the issues going around is "what counts as a physical presence in the state?"

Amazon has warehouses & employees in several states where they don't currently pay sales taxes. I can understand a legal argument that, regardless of where corporate headquarters is, if the order is filled & shipped from within the state, that counts as a sale within the state and therefor is due sales tax.

Currently, that's legally blurry, or different in different states. Amazon is fighting to say that a warehouse/shipping center doesn't count as a physical presence for tax purposes; states are trying to say it does, because they know that most people aren't going to keep track of every online purchase and pay sales taxes accordingly. (Especially since that involves sorting out the difference between the *state* sales tax and the county & city sales taxes.)

I'm waiting for the ruling that says "if you sell ebooks, those count as purchases in that state and you pay taxes--which means your business counts as having a physical presence in that state, since you're making sales to individual addresses there, and any ebooks/mp3-and-physical-products combined vendor is going to have to collect sales taxes on all purchases."

[hidari]

Originally Posted by rkomar

The system is in an unstable state right now. God knows where this goes when rising fuel prices put a damper on low-cost shipping. Probably massive central shipping depots where you line up to pick up your orders. I can't really think of anything cheaper than that.

Karma to that..... The Elephant in the On-line room. The cost of oil... will rise a lot in then next 20 years.....

[Andrew H.]

Originally Posted by Elfwreck

One of the issues going around is "what counts as a physical presence in the state?"

[snip]
I'm waiting for the ruling that says "if you sell ebooks, those count as purchases in that state and you pay taxes--which means your business counts as having a physical presence in that state, since you're making sales to individual addresses there, and any ebooks/mp3-and-physical-products combined vendor is going to have to collect sales taxes on all purchases."

I think it's even more complicated than that; I think that Amazon's warehouse operations are legally a different company from Amazon-the-retailer.

[Kumabjorn]

Originally Posted by Elfwreck

One of the issues going around is "what counts as a physical presence in the state?"

Amazon has warehouses & employees in several states where they don't currently pay sales taxes. I can understand a legal argument that, regardless of where corporate headquarters is, if the order is filled & shipped from within the state, that counts as a sale within the state and therefor is due sales tax.

Fogrive an ignoramus. Just so I can follow this line of thought (not living in a federation makes it confusing). Let us assume that Rhode Island has a 5% sales tax. Let us further assume that Coca-Cola has no presence in RI. Every coke sold in RI comes either from Connecticut or Massachusets (distributors, bottling plants etc). Yet every retailer charges the RI consumer 5% on every Coke sold. Does that mean they can pocket those 5% for themselves? RI can't claim it since Coca-Cola has no presence in the state?
I realize this is an extreme example, and there might be several practical obstacles, but as a principle is this line of thought correct?

[cHex]

In your example, the manufacturers are not in Rhode Island and so are not required to collect the 5% sales tax for the state of Rhode Island. The retailers in Rhode Island, however, fall under that state's jurisdiction; they are required by the state to collect the 5% sales tax, which they must then remit to the state. A consumer might opt to order the beverages direct from the manufacturer; they will be shipped and the consumer will not be charged sales tax. However, (typically) at the time the consumer files his state tax return, he must declare that purchase (and any other transactions where he was in Rhode Island and the other party was not) and pay a 5% "use tax" on those transactions.

It is common for people to neither declare nor pay the use tax; though they are violating the law in neglecting the tax, there is usually little chance they'll be caught. This is why states are trying to gain the power to have businesses in other states collect sales taxes for them.

[Kumabjorn]

Does that then imply that the distributor in either CT or MA has to charge the retailer in RI the sales tax for their respective states? If so, is that then detuctible for the retailer when he collects sales tax from RI customers?

[fjtorres]

Originally Posted by Merischino

I'm curious to know how exactly a state would have either the knowledge of what the customer/state resident is using let alone the ability to estimate revenue based on a use tax applied to an internet (or out of state) vendor.

The law requires the taxpayer to track the sales themselves.
Some people actually comply.

[fjtorres]

Originally Posted by Kumabjorn

Does that then imply that the distributor in either CT or MA has to charge the retailer in RI the sales tax for their respective states? If so, is that then detuctible for the retailer when he collects sales tax from RI customers?

No.
Sales taxes (and use taxes) are consumption taxes, not value-added taxes. (There is no stacking of taxes as products change hands or cross localities.)
Sales taxes only apply at the retail site so the retailer in RI owes nothing to the state where the distributor operates. The consumer only owes the state he/she lives in or, for travelers, the state where they were physically present during the transaction.

The system evolved over two hundred years to prevent state protectionism; states applying duties or taxes to out-of-state vendors/customers. Some states still try--wine sales, for example--but in general the Congress frowns on attempts to hamper or regulate interstate commerce because that is the domain of the Congress itself. (How far that power goes is currently under litigation.)

The US, btw, is *not* a federation. It is a unitary republic with multi-level power/responsability distribution.
(Historically it started out as a loose confederation that failed, was replaced by a federated state, and since then has seen the central government acquire ever more power, especially since the Civil War of the 19th century settled once and for all that "The US *is*" rather than "The US *are*". )

If it seems inefficient it is because the system was designed on purpose to hamper government's ability to control the citizenry. Less intentional is the citizenry's difficulty controlling the (Federal) Government.

[ScotiaBurrell]

Originally Posted by Elfwreck

The Apple store sells a very small range of devices, all from one company;

Other companys copy everything else...should copy this too.

Apple sell accesories from others in its stores too and not just its own

[tubemonkey]

Best Buy CEO Abruptly Resigns

Best Buy Co. CEO Brian Dunn abruptly resigned on Tuesday after the nation's largest consumer electronics retailer said it decided to conduct an investigation into his "personal conduct."

The departure compounds the problems at the retailer, which has been widely criticized for not responding fast enough to growing competition from Amazon.com and other online rivals and the changing shopping habits of Americans.

"Certain issues were brought to the board's attention regarding Dunn's personal conduct, unrelated to the company's operations or financial controls, and an audit committee investigation was initiated," according to a company statement issued late Tuesday. "Prior to the completion of the investigation, Mr. Dunn chose to resign."

[beckywc]

I purchased a washer/Dryer and Refrigerator from Best Buy, I had trouble with the dryer after installation because the dryer wouldn't dry the clothes. I called in for service on two occasion finally on the 3rd call they sent a electrician and the electrician told me they had connected the cord wrong and the dryer shorted. I went up to BB to customer service with the report requesting a new dryer, at first they refused. I requested to speak to the Manager, not the Floor Manager. I had brought pictures of the back of the dryer where you could clearly see that the shorted area, plus the write up of the electrician.

I refused to leave until they got him there, when He came and I showed him the pictures and the write up and threatened to sue, they replaced my dryer.

My refrigerator they hooked up wrong as well I eventually had to call the manufacturer who sent there service contracted people who fixed the problem.

The service guy said that to never purchase major appliances from these type of businesses because they only pay a little over 10.00 an hour to people they hire off the street that have no electrician training.

I haven't purchased anything from them since, there customer service sucks and it doesn't surprise me that they are having difficulties.