Conservative Bloggers Voice Support For Marketplace Fairness Act


Conservative Bloggers Voice Support For Marketplace Fairness Act

Consensus continues to grow regarding the need for e-fairness legislation as two prominent conservative bloggers recently voiced their support for the Marketplace Fairness Act. Neil Stevens’ post over the weekend on the conservative blog RedState explains how he’s come around on the idea of e-fairness legislation.

From Neil Stevens’ post on RedState:

“Also, we’re back to discussing the Marketplace Fairness Act. As we’ve discussed before, this is a bill that would give Congressional approval to an interstate compact between the states to collect sales tax across state lines, requires member states to harmonize their tax rules to fit in with the interstate system. The bill is gaining Congressional support this time around. In theory I’m fine with this. It’s Constitutional and it’s reasonable. I disagree with Overstock.com’s complaints of complexity, because the compact imposes restrictions on the way the states can tax items, and also creates mechanisms to ease collection of the taxes.”

In yesterday’s post on Hot Air, Jazz Shaw goes even further – saying he’s no longer “on the fence” about the Marketplace Fairness Act – especially after yet another conservative voice, Maine Governor Paul LePage (R), declared his support for it.

From Jazz Shaw’s post on Hot Air:

“As I’ve stated before, I was on the fence about this one for a long time. Even leaving aside the “taxes are bad” thing, anything which could impede online commerce just strikes a sour note with many of us. I had also considered the possibility that maybe this could be worked out at the state level, but a recent attempt in Illinois to do just that produced… nothing. But after sifting through all of the pros and cons, I have to admit that it may be time to just get it over with and do this.

The reason? Like it or not, fiscal conservatives must, at a minimum, believe in a level playing field. Equality of opportunity, not results… remember? After looking over the new Ryan Plan Part 2, I’m reminded that as we tighten our belt at the federal level, more and more things will need to be pushed back down to the states. Each of them will have to manage their budgets as they see best, and for the majority of them a state sales tax is part of their revenue stream. While it may be depressing, the feds need to provide each of them a chance to compete evenly…”

It may be time to just bite the bullet and pass this legislation.”


Comments

  1. Like it or not, fiscal conservatives must, at a minimum, believe in a level playing field. Equality of opportunity, not results… remember?

    Don’t we use taxes to discourage behavior? We could always lower taxes to stimulate the economy and “level the playing field”.

  2. Yes, conservatives usually are against further taxation; however, in this case it is far worse to pick winners and losers with taxation. There is no chance we’d do away with sales tax, so we then must tax all retailers equally. Loopholes that allow some to escape taxes are not right no matter if you are liberal or conservative.

    • I’ve suggested lowering the sales tax, not eliminating it. If lower taxation spread across more retailers is off the table, then the harshest critics are correct about this being a money grab.

  3. Strong neighborhoods thrive on the businesses that surround them. The online retailers are really putting the squeeze on our local businesses by being able to offer a virtual discount. Retailing is a hard business, and our laws should not make it harder to compete. This bill is really about leveling the playing field, not about new taxes. The time for this bill has come. If we do not pass it soon, we are going to see even more empty storefronts, which bring blight to our communities.

  4. As a small business owner, I can say that it is patently unfair that Amazon continues to get away with this. It’s so frustrating.

  5. This isn’t about leveling the playing field, it is about lost tax revenue to state and local tax authorities. The pukes in Washington are dying to levy taxes on internet transactions under overwhelming objections of web users. Watch them structure a ploy to use the proceeds to benefit “children”, to cover their wanton desire for another revenue source, another way to grow the government’s reach. Just as soon as they levy a tax on all interstate transactions, they will institute a federal tax on those transactions. Internet sales companies are domiciled in practically every state in the union and pay income taxes in the state they operate. One could argue that this levels the playing field. Practically any retailer in Arizona or elsewhere has the ability to sell their wares online to consumers in other states. Tax pigs are feigning concern for “local retailers” but their M.O. is more tax revenue for the bloated, burdensome monstrosity known as government.

  6. hotflasholly says:

    Governor Brewer should force companies to play by the same rules..A BIG CORPORATE GIFT to amazon. Why should amazon get a deal better than an Arizona business selling the same thing for the same cost. STOP playing favorites Governor…we are starving out here while you play favorites with your big corporate buddies. If all the small businesses go broke then you have a helluva mess on your hands.

  7. It would be interesting to find out how many of the retailers wanting the sales tax imposed on out of state retailers also supported Brewer’s temporary sales tax increase. Any retailer who advocated for an increase in sales tax rates has no business complaining about the unfairness of the way the sales tax is currently implemented. If the sales tax rate is lower, then this is less of an issue. With a small tax rate, people would not care that much about whether they have to pay sales tax at a retailer in order to get the convenience of buying immediately and having a chance to see the item before buying,

    Also, a legitimate case can be made that the sales tax should be based on the point of sale which could be defined as the online retailer’s location. In that case, the sales tax would be simple to compute and various tax jurisdictions would be competing to offer low tax rates to attract online retailers to make their jurisdiction their official sales location. That would benefit all consumers. This is not unreasonable since purchases made at local retail merchants when the item is not delivered or legally registered are usually based on the tax rate at the store and not the sales tax rate of where the purchaser lives. If a law is passed making it legal to collect sales tax for interstate purchases, there is no reason that the tax could not be collected in the jurisdiction of the retailer rather than the jurisdiction of the purchaser. The fact that the item is delivered could be considered incidental for most online purchases – particularly those under a certain dollar amount – and be taxed at the local rate for the retailer.

    I think this is more of a government money grab than a “fairness” issue.

  8. Paula Pennypacker says:

    The AZ legislatures failure to close the Amazon sales tax loophole cements that tea party Republicans supports corporate welfare. Amazon owes AZ taxpayers over $800 million in uncollected sales tax. As the owner of an e-tailer business with NO store front in AZ, unlike Amazon who pays ZERO in sales tax, we have to charge our AZ customers almost 10 percent in sales tax. Why should products purchased from Just for Redheads cost more than products purchased from Amazon?! This puts we small mom an pop shops at a HUGE disadvantage.

    So to answer your question Hunter — I will NOT be supporting making Brewer’s temporary sales tax permanent.

    We need a lower and broader sales tax for everyone NOT just corporate giants like Amazon. It should make no difference whatsoever whether you purchase something on the Internet or at the mall.

    That said — add me to the list of conservative bloggers who supports the Marketplace Fairness Act. Once in place, we can begin to phase out the corporate and personal income tax. A move that will grow the economy by bring back manufacturing jobs from overseas, and finally bring our tax code into the digital age.

    How can we Republicans be opposed to a lower and broader sales taxes for everyone — NOT just Amazon?

  9. There is no level playing field. A business does what it has to do to make itself competitive. Tax abatements, for example, are handed out to developers who bribe legislators and city and county officials. Amazon us a big 800 pound gorilla, and will do whatever it takes to force our low income legislature to do their bidding. It’s the American way — compete by buying off republican politicians (they are cheaper to buy then democrats). If you don’t like it, move !

  10. Gov. LePage’s efforts on The Marketplace Fairness Act are to close a legal loophole that Internet vendors have exploited to put the onus of remitting the sales tax on the customer. Collecting and remitting the sales tax by the vendor has been common business practice for several hundred years. Why should the Internet make it any different?

    Please read my complete thoughts on Maine Street Business Blogspot

Speak Your Mind

*