Really Bad Precedent: Allowing Governments To Tax Non-Constituents

Indeed It Is

by Seton Motley, Contributing Author: The Supreme Court is currently considering South Dakota v Wayfair. A case debating whether or not state and municipal governments can collect their respective sales taxes – on non-resident business and people who have the temerity to complete a transaction in their jurisdictions.

President Donald Trump is on this absolutely correct – in one sense. Online retailers like the case-cited Wayfair – do have a tax-less advantage over brick-and-mortar stores in localities that impose sales taxes.

If you live in one or more sales tax jurisdictions and you shop brick-and-mortar – you pay the sales taxes. If you live there and shop Wayfair – you do not necessarily render unto Caesar. (Some online companies – Amazon, for instance – collect many of the sales taxes in much of the nation.)

Not paying sales taxes makes shopping online – (that much) more attractive. And brick-and-mortar retailers – have been understandably screaming bloody murder.

Unfortunately, they have expressed their distress and marshaled their forces – in precisely the wrong direction.

The correct answer – is to remove the sales taxes from brick-and-mortar retailers. Thereby rendering even the playing field. Oh: And less money for government – means more money for shopping.

These retailers are instead demanding the sales taxes that damage them – also be imposed upon their online competitors.

Misery loves company, I guess. But the miserable – should much prefer having their misery ended. Happiness loves company too.

The biggest problem would be the advent of governments being able to tax businesses and people – who do not live in these governments’ jurisdictions.

Taxation without representation, anyone? This would be a whole new level of obnoxious.

There are roughly 1,100 governments around the country that impose a sales tax. Imagine green-lighting all of these greedy mandarins to tax people…who can’t vote them out of office or do anything else politically about it.

The sky wouldn’t be the limit – it would be the floor of the new levels of tax imposition.

In short – this is a really terrible idea.

Which is exactly why Maryland’s Democrat-dominated legislature – is trying to do something obnoxiously similar.

Maryland is already the most-taxed-state in the nation. Their constituents are thus bled almost entirely dry. So when presented with the idea of taxing non-residents – Maryland of course ran with it:

“They have just passed a huge new tax increase. And done so – under the false flag of business tax ‘reform.’ Behold SB 1090.

“Democrat business tax ‘reform?’ We should know better – and so should (Maryland Republican Governor Larry) Hogan. Democrats don’t like business – so why would their business tax ‘reform’ do anything other than punish business?

“And here’s the obnoxious new wrinkle Democrats have added: SB 1090 increases taxes on businesses…not even incorporated in the state….

“The Democrat tax increase will be on many businesses – as much as 10%.”

A whole new way for governments to tax businesses – whose people (because businesses are just people incorporating) can’t do anything electorally about it.

I suppose you can give Maryland credit for ingenuity.

What Governor Hogan shouldn’t do – is give them his signature on the legislation.

Hogan should instead veto the living daylight out of it.

I do not consider governments coming up with new ways to tax businesses outside of their jurisdictions – “reform.”

Neither should Hogan.
----------------
Seton Motley is the President of Less Government and he contributes to ARRA News Service. Please feel free to follow him him on Twitter   /   Facebook.

---

Tags: Seton Motley, Less Government, Really Bad Precedent, Allowing Governments, Tax Non-Constituents, Maryland, Democrat tax increase, Governor Hogan To share or post to your site, click on "Post Link". Please mention / link to the ARRA News Service and "Like" Facebook Page - Thanks!