LifeinAsia - 4:34 pm on May 6, 2013 (gmt 0)
The reason I do not support the bill is simple- it violates the law and spirit of sales tax.
Sales tax is supposed to be collected at the point of sale. If I buy something at a store in my county, I pay 7.5% sales tax. If I cross the street to the next county and buy the exact same thing, I would have to pay 9.0%. If I buy online, I would pay the retailer 0% (up until recently), but I would still legally owe the state 7.5% use tax.
The poor sap in the next county doesn't like having to pay the extra 1.5% for all his local purchases, so he's going to a lot of shopping in my county. But if he buys online, he's still going to have to pay 9.0% based on his shipping address. (If he's smart, and lives close to the county line, he'll probably get a PO box in my county and use for all online purchases- I see a new industry here...) Oh, and if he travels to Oregon and buys the same item, he pays no sales tax to the merchant (although he is still legally obligated to pay 9.0% to the state). Yet if he stays at home and buys the same product from an Internet company based in Oregon, he'd have to pay 9%. If he buys the same item from a mail order catalog, he'd pay 0% sales tax to the retailer (but still owe 9% to the state).
The law clearly discriminates against Internet retailers. If the law required all B&M stores (as well as mail order) to charge the appropriate sales tax based on the address of the buyer, then I might be for it. But that obviously won't ever happen.