OK, I'm jumping in....I sell to all 50 states, but my office is in
Minnesota.  If I have to fill out 50 sales tax forms every month and submit
collected sales tax to 50 states every month...........well, how many of
you would look forward to that???  Is this not reason for EXTREMELY careful
consideration of this issue.

John Lee
Vaske Computer Solutions

At 09:51 AM 6/2/2000 -0400, Joseph Rosenblatt wrote:
>Bob Graham wrote that this list provides:
>>yet another's "opportunity to pontificate"
>So here goes.
>
>The reactionary use of the terminology "Internet Tax" sends the everyone
>into a panic. This is not an "Internet Tax" it is a *sales tax.* If you
>accept the premise that the state government is allowed to  levy sales tax
>in on one mode of commerce then it is allowed to do so on all others. (If
>you don't accept the premise that the state can levy a sales tax, please
>skip to the end of this posting. ;-)) BTW they have been doing this for
>years on catalogue sales. For all of you out there that that think this is
>some crazy *California thing* think again. My home state, Connecticut, Can
>legally charge me a usage tax (read sales tax) for products bought out of
>state. This is not new ground.
>
>What I find interesting is that this discussion is happening at all. Why
>should electronic retailers (I refuse to use the jargon e-tailer) and their
>customers be exempt from the obligations that other businesses and consumers
>must follow. What is so special about  electronic commerce that it should be
>exempt? Do these companies need protection? If so, protection from what?
>This particular law, only effects companies with a physical presence in the
>state i.e. companies already doing business and therefore do not need
>protection.
>
>The argument that the Internet is some sort of special entity that must not
>fall under government regulation is specious. When the Internet (ARPANET)
>was the domain of academia and scientists the concept of unfettered
>communications was important. Even today, thought, opinion and information,
>no matter what its content, should remain unregulated. (I would be more
>afraid of self styled moralists seeking to censor content than government
>regulation.) The Internet as a tool for disseminating information is
>unprecedented in the history of the world. The speed at which information
>can be obtained, the volume of people that can receive the information and
>the relatively low cost to the recipient make the Internet an invaluable
>tool for anyone seeking intellectual freedom.
>
>However, when one seeks to use this technology to do the same old business
>of selling products to customers then there is no reason for preferential
>treatment. If you want to use the Internet for business you should be
>subject to the laws of business. Making these businesses collect sales tax
>will not cause the Internet to be subject to undue regulation.
>
>If  you are afraid that "Big Brother" is out to shutdown, take over  or
>otherwise interfere with the Internet look to what regulation occurs on the
>*idea* side not the business side.
>
>Joseph (climbing off my soapbox) Rosenblatt
>
>