Quote:
Originally Posted by MacEachaidh
Ouch, I can see that it would get very tangled very quickly. So, even within the US, you get charged sales tax according to where the buyer is located, not the vendor? (I'm not implying any criticism, just trying to be clear about it.)
|
Yes. The sales tax is imposed by the area in which the sale is made. Some localities don't
have sales taxes
Quote:
|
I would have guessed it would be based on the vendor, because that's where the business is being transacted, but I s'pose the other way makes sense, because otherwise the higher-taxing states would find it hard to get businesses to set up there, wouldn't they?
|
No, the vendor is with whom the transaction is made. Where the transaction occurs is another matter.
And higher taxing states
do have problems getting businesses to set up shop there, which is another politically fraught issue. If a state imposes too high a level of corporate taxes, the business might just pick up and move to a lower tax area. The state loses not only the taxes, but the jobs the business provided to folks who live in the area. "Soak big business" may be popular among short-sighted voters, but the longer term effects of doing so aren't what the voters have in mind.
Quote:
|
(I know -- or think I do! -- from my reading that the independent sovereignty of the various states has been retained more strongly in the US than most other countries that have been separate states (like my own country, for instance) that then confederated. So I know it's one thing to do a transaction within the same state, but a lot of rules change once it involves crossing one or more state lines.)
|
Yes, it has. And "State's Rights" is another political football over here, with lots of squabbling over just what rights the Federal Government has, and what areas are reserved to the states and the Feds have no control over. It gets thorny when business crosses state lines, as interstate commerce
is under Federal jurisdiction.
______
Dennis