Posts tagged Internet
Raise your hands if you love paying sales tax. Probably not too many hands up. Unfortunately, that’s just part of life, that is unless you shop online.
Currently, many online shops in the United States don’t require you to pay sales tax. This is about to change, at least if the Marketplace Fairness Act makes its way into law.
What’s the Marketplace Fairness Act (MFA)? It is a bill that aims to ensure that online retailers charge sales tax to all their customers, regardless of the state the business is operated out of, or the state that the goods are being shipped to.
Under the guidelines of the bill, this would only apply to those business that make more than million in annual out-of-state sales.
According to its proponents, the bill is not about creating new taxes, as most states already require you to pay a “use tax” for online goods, even when sales tax isn’t collected online. The problem is that few people actually pay the use tax, and there is currently little way to enforce it.
The MFA has already made it through the senate, with a vote of 69-to-27. Now the bill will be passed to the House of Representatives, where it will also need to be approved.
If the bill is passed into law, how will it affect consumers?
Right now, if you go online to buy an item, you don’t have to worry about tax. The exception to that rule is if the business you are buying from has a brick-and-mortar retail location, or warehouse in the state you live in.
If the “Marketplace Fairness Act” goes into affect, any goods you buy online will require you to pay the sales tax rate for the state you live in. What about digital purchases, like music, movies and apps? The answer to that seems to vary, depending on who you ask.
Cnet recently wrote an article indicating that “any business of a reasonable size selling digital goods to the 24 states that have decided to tax them must collect sales taxes.”
What makes the issue even fuzzier is that the Bill’s sponsor, Senator Mike Enzi, says this isn’t the case:
Under the Marketplace Fairness Act, states would be able to apply the same sales tax collected locally to the same product sold online, out-of-state, or through a catalogue. A hammer sold online would be charged the same sales tax as it would be in-store. Since there is no digital good that can be purchased locally, the sales tax would not apply. The Marketplace Fairness Act does not affect the taxability of goods, digital or otherwise. It deals with collection of sales tax already owed under state law.
Of course books are sold both in digital and physical formats, as are music and movies, adding further confusion to the bill in its current form. Either way, if the MFA does end up extending into the realm of digital, it would only affect customers in the 24 states that currently consider digital goods taxable.
Now it is up to the House
For those that oppose the new bill, it isn’t over yet.
The House of Representatives is believed to have a much more mixed opinion of the Marketplace Fairness Act, and opponents of the bill will likely do their best to ensure that the House votes against it. If it does make it through? Then it goes to the President to be signed into law. Considering that President Obama has already expressed support of the MFA, it pretty much means that the house has the final say.
What do you think of the bill, do you agree that physical goods sold online should be taxed in the same manner as those bought in store?
I know that internet privacy is one of those topics which has been argued to the point of exhaustion, but when Vint Cerf speaks up we should probably pay attention. After all he co-invented the protocols that underpin the Internet back in the 70s, and works as Google’s “chief internet evangelist”.
In an interview with Reuters the other day, he acknowledged some of the intense debates which took place within Google’s own headquarters regarding the real name requirements for Google+ and the account mergers with Youtube, Gmail, and other Google services. Cerf argued that the current option, which allows users to display a pseudonym in place of their real name, offers users an adequate “choice”, and should be seen as a reasonable compromise between preserving anonymity and fostering an environment of user accountability.
But he does have his concerns about protecting the privacy of individuals, especially when it comes to dealing with oppressive regimes and government policing of the internet.
“Using real names is useful, … But I don’t think it should be forced on people, and I don’t think we do.”
“Anonymity and pseudonymity are perfectly reasonable under some situations,” … “But there are cases where in the transactions both parties really need to know who are we talking to. So what I’m looking for is not that we shut down anonymity, but rather that we offer an option when needed that can strongly authenticate who the parties are.”
His statements seem perfectly reasonable to me, after all people writing politically sensitive blogs certainly benefit from expressing their views without persecution, but when it comes to buying something online I’d obviously like to be able to verify who I’m dealing with. But Cerf isn’t very clear on exactly where that line between protecting freedom of expression and holding people accountable for their words and actions should be drawn, but that’s a pretty tricky call to make.
This isn’t the first time that Vint Cerf has stated his concerns about censoring and filtering the web, particularly when it comes to governments aiming to clamp down on free speech and weeding out trouble makers wishing to remain anonymous. Back in December he noted that Google was at the forefront of observing “the dangers of the government-led Net crackdown”. His comments no doubt referred to the increase in state requests for user data -which reached a record 21,389 cases at the end of last year- and government requests to remove content from web results.
At the risk of venturing off into another debate I’ll stop there, but what do you make of Vint Cerf’s comments? Does he make a rational argument, is it hypocritical to make the case that Google is good but governments are bad, or are you just past caring?
The post “Father of the internet”, Vint Cerf, says that Google services shouldn’t require real names appeared first on Android Authority.
Although there is no real shortage of streaming music apps available in BlackBerry World, another popular option has now arrived and is available for free on BlackBerry 10 devices as well as the BlackBerry PlayBook. 8Tracks brings a little bit of a different swing with their app in the fact it boasts more than 650,000+ mixes and playlists created by folks like yourself. Find a playlist you like or create your own and let it roll on through as you jam away to the tunes.
RSS Copyright © Hottest Mobile Phone News & Reviews | PhoneInferno [8Tracks internet radio app arrives in BlackBerry World for BlackBerry 10 and PlayBook], All Right Reserved. 2013.
Powered by Readers From RSS 2 Blog