Call 855-808-4530 or email [email protected] to receive your discount on a new subscription.
U.S. states lost $2.8 billion last year in uncollected Internet sales taxes, much lower than previous estimates, according to a study released by the Direct Marketing Association (DMA).
Other studies have confused different types of online transactions and relied on fuzzy numbers to arrive at their figures, according to the DMA.
As a result, the amount of potential revenue that cash-strapped states are missing out on has been grossly overstated, report author Peter Johnson said.
'The Internet is not creating a massive leak in state coffers,' Johnson, a DMA economist, writes in the report.
Many states worry that their revenues will shrink as residents turn increasingly to the Internet to make purchases.
A 1992 Supreme Court decision prohibits states from collecting taxes on out-of-state retailers unless they have a physical presence in the state. Quill Corp. v. North Dakota, 504 U.S. 298; 112 S.Ct. 1904; 110 L. Ed. 2d 91(1992). That meant $13.3 billion in lost revenues in 2001, according to a University of Tennessee study.
Actual losses are probably closer to $2.5 billion for that year, the DMA said.
The DMA report estimates that states will miss out on $4.5 billion in tax revenue in 2011, while the University of Tennessee report estimates that states will lose $54 billion.
While the University of Tennessee study used sales estimates compiled by Forrester Research at the height of the dot-com bubble, the DMA used actual sales figures compiled by the Commerce Department and relied on a more conservative growth estimate, the report says.
The DMA also factored out business-to-business sales made over the Electronic Data Interchange network, or EDI, a decades-old proprietary system used by large businesses to manage orders from suppliers. Users of this system, which still handles most wholesale e-commerce transactions, almost always report and pay taxes on these purchases, the DMA said.
State governments have sought to simplify their sales-tax codes with the hopes that Congress will allow them to tax online sales, and some large retailers, including Target and Wal-Mart, have begun voluntarily collecting taxes on their own.
Samuel Fineman, Esq. is the Editor-in-Chief of this publication. Information from Reuters contributed to this article.
U.S. states lost $2.8 billion last year in uncollected Internet sales taxes, much lower than previous estimates, according to a study released by the Direct Marketing Association (DMA).
Other studies have confused different types of online transactions and relied on fuzzy numbers to arrive at their figures, according to the DMA.
As a result, the amount of potential revenue that cash-strapped states are missing out on has been grossly overstated, report author Peter Johnson said.
'The Internet is not creating a massive leak in state coffers,' Johnson, a DMA economist, writes in the report.
Many states worry that their revenues will shrink as residents turn increasingly to the Internet to make purchases.
A 1992 Supreme Court decision prohibits states from collecting taxes on out-of-state retailers unless they have a physical presence in the state.
Actual losses are probably closer to $2.5 billion for that year, the DMA said.
The DMA report estimates that states will miss out on $4.5 billion in tax revenue in 2011, while the University of Tennessee report estimates that states will lose $54 billion.
While the University of Tennessee study used sales estimates compiled by Forrester Research at the height of the dot-com bubble, the DMA used actual sales figures compiled by the Commerce Department and relied on a more conservative growth estimate, the report says.
The DMA also factored out business-to-business sales made over the Electronic Data Interchange network, or EDI, a decades-old proprietary system used by large businesses to manage orders from suppliers. Users of this system, which still handles most wholesale e-commerce transactions, almost always report and pay taxes on these purchases, the DMA said.
State governments have sought to simplify their sales-tax codes with the hopes that Congress will allow them to tax online sales, and some large retailers, including
Samuel Fineman, Esq. is the Editor-in-Chief of this publication. Information from Reuters contributed to this article.
ENJOY UNLIMITED ACCESS TO THE SINGLE SOURCE OF OBJECTIVE LEGAL ANALYSIS, PRACTICAL INSIGHTS, AND NEWS IN ENTERTAINMENT LAW.
Already a have an account? Sign In Now Log In Now
For enterprise-wide or corporate acess, please contact Customer Service at [email protected] or 877-256-2473
With each successive large-scale cyber attack, it is slowly becoming clear that ransomware attacks are targeting the critical infrastructure of the most powerful country on the planet. Understanding the strategy, and tactics of our opponents, as well as the strategy and the tactics we implement as a response are vital to victory.
In June 2024, the First Department decided Huguenot LLC v. Megalith Capital Group Fund I, L.P., which resolved a question of liability for a group of condominium apartment buyers and in so doing, touched on a wide range of issues about how contracts can obligate purchasers of real property.
The Article 8 opt-in election adds an additional layer of complexity to the already labyrinthine rules governing perfection of security interests under the UCC. A lender that is unaware of the nuances created by the opt in (may find its security interest vulnerable to being primed by another party that has taken steps to perfect in a superior manner under the circumstances.
Latham & Watkins helped the largest U.S. commercial real estate research company prevail in a breach-of-contract dispute in District of Columbia federal court.