What others say: Impact of Supreme Court decision on taxes yet to be seen

Let’s juxtapose some Eugene O’Neill and George Harrison — “The Taxman Cometh,” and we’re not talking about April 15.

A decision by the U.S. Supreme Court has a lot of online shoppers grumbling unprintable things under their collective breaths; online retailers clutching their worry beads; and conventional brick-and-mortar stores and state governments waving pom-poms and cheering.

The court in a 5-4 ruling said states can collect sales taxes from online retailers — and many have been revving their engines waiting for this decision, with laws in place just waiting for the go-ahead.

South Dakota, the plaintiff in the case, wanted to collect taxes from online retailers who had posted more than $100,000 in annual sales or recorded at least 200 transactions in the state.

The problem was a Supreme Court decision in 1992 that barred states from requiring online sellers to collect sales taxes unless they had a physical presence there.

Last week’s ruling overturned that precedent, calling it “unsound and incorrect” given how ubiquitous online shopping is today compared to a generation ago.

So what’s going to happen moving forward?

—As noted, cash-strapped states whose residents view new taxes in about the same light as a raging case of bubonic plague have long been eyeing this existing revenue source that could total billions of dollars. (Alabamians have long been required to pay sales taxes when shopping online; 99 percent of them just take the Bart Simpson approach — “I didn’t do it, no one saw me do it, you can’t prove anything” — and lie on their tax returns.)

—Other than confirming South Dakota’s law, the court left it up to states to set their individual tax policies on online sales. That’s fully in line with federalism, but could be a recipe for chaos in the real world. (The decision noted that Congress and lower courts might have to intervene if discrepancies got out of hand.)

—Specifically, it could burden online retailers who potentially could have to set up a system, without much notice, to distribute the tax money it collects to 45 different states (five states don’t have sales taxes) in 45 different ways. It won’t impact the monoliths like Amazon and Wal-Mart an iota; it could be a massive change and disruption for folks on eBay or Etsy. States should show some consideration and offer some help as those sellers try to make this work, instead of sticking their hands out and screeching “gimme.”

—Brick-and-mortar stores who have been pleading for an even playing field could benefit somewhat, but this won’t be a complete cure for their issues. For every cheapskate focused completely on the bottom line, there’s another shopper who likes going online because of the product selection most local places can’t match, paired with cheap (if not free) and quick shipping.

—We also question just how massive an impact this will have on consumers. According to USA Today, most of the top 20 online vendors already collect sales taxes on purchases, and the top 100 sellers have been submitting close to 90 percent of the taxes owed. If you’ve been shopping online, most likely you’ve already been paying up. The Supreme Court’s decision just means everyone else will, too.

About 10 percent of shopping in the U.S. is done online, according to USA Today, to the tune of $500 billion annually. Closing this loophole won’t dent that.

People may grumble, may falsely call this a new tax — but the lure of the shopping app is just too strong.

—The Gadsden Times, June 25, 2018

More in Opinion

(Juneau Empire file photo)
Opinion: Alaska House makes the right decision on constitutionally guaranteed PFD

The proposed amendment would have elevated the PFD to a higher status than any other need in the state

Rep. Justin Ruffridge, a Soldotna Republican who co-chairs the House Education Committee, speaks during floor debate of a joint session of the Alaska State Legislature on Monday, March 18, 2024. (Mark Sabbatini / Juneau Empire)
Rep. Justin Ruffridge: Creating a road map to our shared future

Capitol Corner: Legislators report back from Juneau

An array of solar panels stand in the sunlight at Whistle Hill in Soldotna, Alaska, on Sunday, April 7, 2024. (Jake Dye/Peninsula Clarion)
Renewable Energy Fund: Key to Alaska’s clean economy transition

AEA will continue to strive to deliver affordable, reliable, and sustainable energy to provide a brighter future for all Alaskans.

Mount Redoubt can be seen acoss Cook Inlet from North Kenai Beach on Thursday, July 2, 2022. (Photo by Erin Thompson/Peninsula Clarion)
Opinion: An open letter to the HEA board of directors

Renewable energy is a viable option for Alaska

Sen. Jesse Bjorkman, R-Nikiski, speaks in opposition to an executive order that would abolish the Board of Certified Direct-Entry Midwives during a joint legislative session on Tuesday, March 12, 2024 in Juneau, Alaska. (Ashlyn O’Hara/Peninsula Clarion)
Sen. Jesse Bjorkman: Making progress, passing bills

Capitol Corner: Legislators report back from Juneau

Priya Helweg is the deputy regional director and executive officer for the Office of the Regional Director (ORD), Office of Intergovernmental and External Affairs, Department of Health and Human Services, Region 10. (Image via hhs.gov)
Opinion: Taking action on the maternal health crisis

The United States has the highest maternal mortality rate among high-income countries

Heidi Hedberg. (Photo courtesy of the Alaska Department of Health)
Opinion: Alaska’s public assistance division is on course to serve Alaskans in need more efficiently than ever

We are now able to provide in-person service at our offices in Bethel, Juneau, Kodiak, Kenai, Homer and Wasilla

Sara Hondel (Courtesy photo)
Opinion: Alaskan advocate shines light on Alzheimer’s crisis

In the heart of the nation’s capital next week, volunteers will champion the urgent need for legislative action to support those affected by Alzheimer’s

Most Read