tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4657419926017502677.comments2023-05-23T05:59:38.458-04:00Eyes on eCom LawMartinhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/01733140939874603115noreply@blogger.comBlogger26125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4657419926017502677.post-8093092219562618172014-05-05T06:50:38.900-04:002014-05-05T06:50:38.900-04:00we provide best services in performance management...we provide best services in performance management we are <a href="http://www.faperformance.com/" rel="nofollow"><br /> best company</a> who do performance management in this areaAnonymoushttps://www.blogger.com/profile/10686756669002166952noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4657419926017502677.post-92188425312965091432014-05-05T06:44:06.147-04:002014-05-05T06:44:06.147-04:00we provide best services in performance management...we provide best services in performance management we are best company who do <a href="https://www.facebook.com/" rel="nofollow"><br />keyword</a> in this area<br /><br /><br />website:faperforma.com<br />keyowrds:performance management<br />we provide best services in performance management we are best company who do performance management in this areaAnonymoushttps://www.blogger.com/profile/10686756669002166952noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4657419926017502677.post-69104016157517436872014-05-05T06:43:13.266-04:002014-05-05T06:43:13.266-04:00we provide best services in performance management...we provide best services in performance management we are best company who do <a href="website%20url" rel="nofollow"><br />keyword</a> in this area<br /><br /><br />website:faperforma.com<br />keyowrds:performance management<br />we provide best services in performance management we are best company who do performance management in this areaAnonymoushttps://www.blogger.com/profile/10686756669002166952noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4657419926017502677.post-27985809530594340382014-05-05T06:41:05.582-04:002014-05-05T06:41:05.582-04:00we provide best services in performance management...we provide best services in performance management we are best company who do <a href="facebook.com" rel="nofollow"><br />keyword</a> in this area<br /><br /><br />website:faperforma.com<br />keyowrds:performance management<br />we provide best services in performance management we are best company who do performance management in this areaAnonymoushttps://www.blogger.com/profile/10686756669002166952noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4657419926017502677.post-747403017427993852014-05-05T06:39:03.838-04:002014-05-05T06:39:03.838-04:00we provide best services in performance management...we provide best services in performance management we are best company who do <a href="facebook.com''" rel="nofollow"><br />keyword</a> in this area<br /><br /><br />website:faperforma.com<br />keyowrds:performance management<br />we provide best services in performance management we are best company who do performance management in this areaAnonymoushttps://www.blogger.com/profile/10686756669002166952noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4657419926017502677.post-75524389108491519872014-05-05T06:37:51.569-04:002014-05-05T06:37:51.569-04:00we provide best services in performance management...we provide best services in performance management we are best company who do <a href="website" rel="nofollow"><br />keyword</a> in this area<br /><br /><br />website:faperforma.com<br />keyowrds:performance management<br />we provide best services in performance management we are best company who do performance management in this areaAnonymoushttps://www.blogger.com/profile/10686756669002166952noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4657419926017502677.post-21358568411670721092014-05-05T06:31:34.988-04:002014-05-05T06:31:34.988-04:00we provide best services in performance management...we provide best services in performance management we are best company who do <a href="faperforma.com" rel="nofollow"><br />performance management</a> in this areaAnonymoushttps://www.blogger.com/profile/10686756669002166952noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4657419926017502677.post-84921423914639611832014-05-05T06:31:03.810-04:002014-05-05T06:31:03.810-04:00http://eyesonecomlaw.blogspot.com/2013/05/illinois...http://eyesonecomlaw.blogspot.com/2013/05/illinois-update-oral-arguments-heard-in.htmlAnonymoushttps://www.blogger.com/profile/10686756669002166952noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4657419926017502677.post-16711726618216039962013-07-13T06:22:39.843-04:002013-07-13T06:22:39.843-04:00lets hope they go further. Our registered trademar...lets hope they go further. Our registered trademark, reptile parties, is ripped off daily by other reptile show people in Melbourne Australia via google adverts and the scammers use our other registered trademarks in their ads. The search engines have yet to stop the ads.Peter Hallowhttp://www.reptileparty.com.aunoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4657419926017502677.post-22136671228176007152012-12-18T00:07:13.177-05:002012-12-18T00:07:13.177-05:00Nice article will follow
Thanks!Nice article will follow<br />Thanks!Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4657419926017502677.post-75494570343210710722011-08-16T10:37:28.168-04:002011-08-16T10:37:28.168-04:00It's good to know that there is a cap set on C...It's good to know that there is a cap set on <a href="http://www.payprosonline.com/colorado-payroll-services/" rel="nofollow">Colorado payroll</a> services. It's nice to know that businesses wont have to worry about that getting out of hand.Roy D. Slaterhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/02288442431559130809noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4657419926017502677.post-18425345169522920932011-06-02T11:57:27.929-04:002011-06-02T11:57:27.929-04:00Thanks - you can read one of several of our posts ...Thanks - you can read one of several of our posts about the Illinois bill <a href="http://eyesonecomlaw.blogspot.com/2011/03/illinois-governor-signs-amazon.html" rel="nofollow">here</a>.<br /><br />There will also be another post on the topic later today.Barbarahttps://www.blogger.com/profile/09699666601692284692noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4657419926017502677.post-63019115942670892882011-06-01T16:02:59.629-04:002011-06-01T16:02:59.629-04:00Governor Quinn of Illinois has signed HB3659. HB36...Governor Quinn of Illinois has signed HB3659. HB3659 will require out-of-state retailers with Illinois affiliates who refer at least $10,000 in sales from Illinois purchasers to collect and remit sales tax. The tax collection and remittance requirements will go into effect on July 1, 2011.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4657419926017502677.post-17021988703357452312011-03-01T12:43:06.847-05:002011-03-01T12:43:06.847-05:00Mr. Campbell:
Thank you for your comment. I do n...Mr. Campbell:<br /><br />Thank you for your comment. I do not agree, however, that the SSUTA represents true simplification of the sales and use tax systems of SSUTA member states. As my partner, George Isaacson, has repeatedly demonstrated in testimony to Congress in <a href="http://www.brannlaw.com/images/MediaAndPublications/39/State_Tax_Notes_(2003).pdf" rel="nofollow">2003</a>, <a href="http://www.brannlaw.com/images/MediaAndPublications/78/Senate_Testimony.pdf" rel="nofollow">2006</a>, and again in <a href="http://judiciary.house.gov/hearings/pdf/Isaacson071206.pdf" rel="nofollow">2007</a>, the SSUTA has “resulted in little in the way of tax simplification.”<br /><br />In any event, the “open question” identified by the D.C. Circuit suggests that advocates for the SSUTA may need to convince not only Congress to override <i>Quill</i>, as they had already supposed they must do, but also that they must convince the federal courts that SSUTA-authorizing legislation sufficiently addresses very real concerns about “presence and burden” in order to survive scrutiny under the Due Process Clause, as well.Matt Schaeferhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/04821311592541145328noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4657419926017502677.post-2843459716264179482011-02-24T17:05:01.069-05:002011-02-24T17:05:01.069-05:00I am unsure how the "open question" woul...I am unsure how the "open question" would "send shivers up the spines" of Streamlined Sales Tax advocates. The Streamlined Sales and Use Tax Agreement (SSUTA) creates standardized and simplified sales and use tax regulations for states seeking the authorization that will be granted by federal legislation.<br /><br />The Main Street Fairness Act (which has been introduced in previous sessions of Congress, most recently as H.R. 5660 in the 111th) does not allow states to force e-commerce retailers to comply with "disparate state levies" -- it only allows states to compel remote sellers to collect sales tax if the state has simplified and standardized its sales and use tax laws pursuant to the SSUTA.<br /><br />The SSUTA has enabled 24 sovereign states (soon 28) to share common and simplified sales tax rules and definitions and to eliminate any undue burdens cited in Quill (1992), or more specifically in Bellas Hess (1967), which Quill re-affirmed:<br /><br /><br />"The many variations in rates of tax, in allowable exemptions, and in administrative and record-keeping requirements could entangle National's interstate business in a virtual welter of complicated obligations to local jurisdictions."<br /><br />The SSUTA, along with modern technology, absolutely renders these historical concerns about presence and burden obsolete. Retailers can now use FREE internet services to calculate, collect, and remit local sales taxes for every jurisdiction in the country -- hardly the "virtual welter" of burden that it was 44 years ago.<br /><br />R. David L. Campbell<br />Chief Executive Officer<br />The Federal Tax Authority (FedTax.net)Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4657419926017502677.post-87902018193942364872011-02-19T11:38:12.813-05:002011-02-19T11:38:12.813-05:00Not so fast, John. Remember the other strand of C...Not so fast, John. Remember the other strand of Commerce Clause jurisprudence: undue burden.<br /><br />As Matt notes above, “It is the danger of undue burdens on interstate commerce that led the Supreme Court, in <i>Quill Corp. v. North Dakota</i>, to conclude that the Commerce Clause limits the power of a state to impose sales and use tax collection obligations upon retailers with no physical presence in the state.” Because Amazon appears to have no physical presence in Maine (no stores, no warehouses, no employees, etc.), <i>Quill</i> protects it from collection requirements imposed on retailers that do have a physical presence in Maine.Barbarahttps://www.blogger.com/profile/09699666601692284692noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4657419926017502677.post-46960377014981737092011-02-18T17:07:45.223-05:002011-02-18T17:07:45.223-05:00Matt:
Thanks for the elaboration. It's becomi...Matt:<br /><br />Thanks for the elaboration. It's becoming less foggy.<br /><br />"A state must regulate even-handedly, imposing the same burdens on in-state companies that it does on out-of-state companies." <br /><br />So, it seems to me like Maine could pass a law requiring Amazon to charge a Maine sales tax to all Maine residents because that's what Maine requires of its in-state retailers with a physical presence. The problem with LD 49 seems to be the reporting requirements, which would seem to impose special burdens on retailers like Amazon.<br /><br />I'm sympathetic to online retailers and understand the importance of protecting interstate commerce. I'm also sympathetic to States needing to generate tax revenue. I look forward to seeing these types of laws challenged. <br /><br />Thanks again.John Moorehttps://www.blogger.com/profile/12778424819416009933noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4657419926017502677.post-33458865172223497422011-02-16T11:11:30.233-05:002011-02-16T11:11:30.233-05:00John:
The constitutional infirmity of the Colorad...John:<br /><br />The constitutional infirmity of the Colorado notice and reporting law, and of the legislation introduced in Maine, arises from the imposition of discriminatory burdens on out-of-state companies that are not imposed on in-state companies, as well as from the protection afforded under the Commerce Clause against state laws that may subject interstate commerce to inconsistent and unduly burdensome regulation. <br /><br />Non-discrimination against interstate commerce is a bedrock principle of our nation. Under constitutional jurisprudence dating back more than 180 years, and based on concerns for protecting the free flow of interstate commerce that were a primary motivation for convening the Constitutional Convention, a state cannot target any group of out-of-state companies with burdens not borne by in-state companies. This is true even if a state, in adopting such discriminatory burdens, is seeking somehow to “level the playing field” by “making-up” for a burden that in-state sellers bear, but the burden of which is not (or cannot be, consistent with the Constitution) imposed on out-of-state companies. [The only exception to this principle is the extremely narrow “compensatory tax” doctrine, which has no application to notice and reporting obligations.] Under the Constitution, only Congress, and not the states, has the authority to make such judgments. <br /><br />Thus, the fundamental requirement of a constitutionally permissible state scheme for taxing or regulating private (as opposed to government-operated) enterprises is simple: a state must regulate even-handedly, imposing the same burdens on in-state companies that it does on out-of-state companies. Now, such an “even-handed” scheme may still impose undue burdens on interstate commerce. It is the danger of undue burdens on interstate commerce that led the Supreme Court, in <i>Quill Corp. v. North Dakota</i>, to conclude that the Commerce Clause limits the power of a state to impose sales and use tax collection obligations upon retailers with no physical presence in the state. In other words, most sales and use taxes are not discriminatory; rather, imposing the obligation to collect such taxes on out-of-state sellers with no physical presence presents very real concerns about inconsistent regulation of interstate commerce by the more than 7,500 taxing jurisdictions in the United States. <br /><br />The problem under the Commerce Clause with notice and reporting laws that seek to “end run” the limitations imposed on state taxing power under <i>Quill</i> is that they <i>both</i> discriminate against out-of-state retailers <i>and</i> impose potentially conflicting and burdensome state regulation of interstate commerce. (Not to mention other inherent constitutional infirmities, including compromising privacy rights, chilling free speech, and taking property without due process or fair compensation.)Matt Schaeferhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/04821311592541145328noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4657419926017502677.post-73801525539509196142011-02-14T22:08:20.676-05:002011-02-14T22:08:20.676-05:00I'm new to this stuff. Is the argument that st...I'm new to this stuff. Is the argument that states aren't entitled to this revenue? Could states seek these taxes in a non-discriminatory way? I'm trying to figure out what a permissible scheme would look like. Maybe it's not possible.John Moorehttps://www.blogger.com/profile/12778424819416009933noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4657419926017502677.post-30283526603379000712010-07-16T15:22:57.819-04:002010-07-16T15:22:57.819-04:00It seems like both the Colorado and Oklahoma notic...It seems like both the Colorado and Oklahoma notice and reporting regimes are sort of the 2.0 of alternative sales tax enforcement theories. (1.0 being the Amazon-law or click-through nexus approach adopted in NC, NY, and RI).<br /><br />With its release of its draft Model Sales and Use Tax Notification and Reporting law yesterday, it looks like other states will be considering this approach in 201l.Steven Rollhttp://www.bnatax.com/State-Tax-Blog/noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4657419926017502677.post-45638820550747551422010-05-22T17:09:19.162-04:002010-05-22T17:09:19.162-04:00It's good to see Colorado law makers take a st...It's good to see Colorado law makers take a step in protecting consumers form unruly gift card fees. <br /><br />I'd like to see gift cards without expiration dates be excluded from Colorado's definition of unclaimed property. This would give the issuers an incentive to issue cards without expiration dates.<br /><br />Here is a summary of the current Colorado law pertaining to gift cards: http://scripsmart.com/states/33-colorado-gift-card-lawJuddL333https://www.blogger.com/profile/17123202097840190799noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4657419926017502677.post-42901612694077279252010-05-14T16:47:33.062-04:002010-05-14T16:47:33.062-04:00Word on the street has been that Connecticut might...Word on the street has been that Connecticut might be tinkering with its definition of "vendor" to reach less traditional "agency" relationships. That effort may be stalled while at least one major case involving Scholastic Book Clubs gets resolved by the Connecticut Supreme Court later this year.David B.https://www.blogger.com/profile/01570057683293055321noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4657419926017502677.post-62986011346084841922010-04-19T20:21:57.000-04:002010-04-19T20:21:57.000-04:00This comment has been removed by a blog administrator.Dinah Bee Menilhttp://bailglobal.com/noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4657419926017502677.post-71741698383104172142010-04-13T01:59:16.545-04:002010-04-13T01:59:16.545-04:00At WeMakeItSafer.com, we have written extensively ...At WeMakeItSafer.com, we have written extensively on our blog about the CPSIA and how it impacts businesses. We also have what we believe is the most advanced CPSC recall database in the world. See our Recall Statistics Reports at http://wemakeitsafer.com/RecallStatistics.htmlC Lavinhttp://wemakeitsafer.com/RecallStatistics.htmlnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4657419926017502677.post-45046734093446674562010-03-31T16:50:59.182-04:002010-03-31T16:50:59.182-04:00The text of the law states that the Michigan Busin...The text of the law states that the Michigan Business Tax applies only to companies with a physical presence in the state or that have more than $350,000 per year of sales in Michigan. However, sales are based on sales of all entities under common ownership. The law also states that the net income tax portion of the MBT does not apply to companies that are exempt under Public Law 86-272, a federal statute. Thus, the economic presence standard of sales of greater than $350,000 applies only to the gross receipts portion of the MBT. There is a good argument that the economic presence test is unconstitutional.Martinhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/01733140939874603115noreply@blogger.com