Stereotypemebecauseyouknow
Those are state and local taxes which should be imposed in order to level the playing field. You send your money out of state/country every time you buy something online rather than purchasing in your city from your neighbor. When you spend it at home, it has a 70% chance of coming back to you. Makes perfect sense. Why should internet companies get a break over Mom and Pop?
It's bad enough that New York state handed $300 million to my huge competitor. The government does everything they can to pick the winners in our economy and lie to you about how they support small business.
Anonymous
Ever hear of "Obamacare"? it is between the biggest tax programs ever surpassed. Ever hear his plans to opposite the Bush tax cuts? once you eliminate a tax cut back, that's a tax develop! Obama eradicated all oil- and ethanol-specific tax breaks. wager what, it is surpassed alongside to customers. in certainty, each tax that hits agencies or "the wealthy" is surpassed alongside and hurts the customers. If taxes are greater beneficial on a agency or a agency proprietor, they have 3 alternatives. a million. develop expenses for their products. greater expenses injury the "familiar guy". 2. Take it out of revenue. This lowers inventory dividends. an excellent component of shares are bought as an component of retirement money alongside with a 401k. lots of working adult adult males and females are in step with those to shop for retirement. 4. close the agency. If greater beneficial expenses (alongside with taxes) makes working the agencies unprofitable or purely marginally worthwhile, then many will close. a minimum of, it is going to limit enlargement of a few agencies because of the fact the government could be taking money that could desire to routinely reinvested. If agencies close or do not strengthen, that will develop unemployment. Obama could have us believe that a tax develop on the "wealthy" does not impression the "midsection type", regardless of the undeniable fact that it has a very real impact! Obama desires to tax the wealthy, regardless of the undeniable fact that it is the wealthy that create jobs! we choose jobs!!! in case you're taking money from "the wealthy", you shrink their skill to create jobs. If that became into not the case, why not tax the wealthy at a hundred%? If we take all (or maximum)of their revenue away, what incentive could they might desire to be in agency? If, regardless of the undeniable fact that, we make it much less annoying for them to succeed (make a income) then they're going to make investments greater and create greater jobs. agencies pass to different worldwide places partly to apply decrease tax quotes. Why not make it a threat for them to have decrease taxes right here? Who could income? all and sundry!
Rick31
Obama is a chronic liar. The biggest one is that he wants to help the middle class. His policies are designed to destroy the middle class. The problem is too many gullible and ignorant people believe his lies. When he says anything about helping the middle class I know he is lying.
Anonymous
It was introduced by Sens. Mike Enzi (R-Wyo.), Lamar Alexander (R-Tenn.), and Dick Durbin (D-Ill.) and is backed by Wal-Mart, Best Buy, Home Depot, and other companies that have stores in nearly every state and are currently required to collect sales taxes in both their physical and virtual storefronts.
Well, well look at that the bill was introduced by 2 R and 1 D. I do not see Obamas name anywhere on here. But please do not let the facts get in your way.
Susan M
The White House is pushing this bill! I saw Jay Carney trying to justify it today. Whoever sponsored the bill should be voted out next election!