advertisement
advertisement

This is page 2 of:

The Claw Beats The Taxman

April 11th, 2013

Thus, the tax authority argued, the concessionaire could not claim the resale exemption when it transferred those toys to the consumer. The Texas Supreme Court disagreed, and found that these transactions were exempt from taxation. So, unless you are intimately associated with the corn dog and cotton candy industries, what does this mean to you?

We all know that sales are not generally about the product itself, but frequently about the experience surrounding the product. When you pay $4.50 for a Starbucks blonde coffee instead of $1.75 for the Dunkin Donuts brew, you are paying for the big brown leather chair you had to chase that snot-nosed teenager out of, and the fact that you can hang out at the café for a few hours. That “experience” is part of the “value” of the coffee, and is reflected in its taxable price.

These things are not exempt from taxation because they are an integral part of it. But what if Starbucks charged a “sitting fee” (or alternatively gave a take-away discount) and split the cost of the product from the service (assuming the service was not itself taxable).

Apple offers “Applecare” services – a warranty extension service. During the warranty period, you get free customer service; afterwards you pay. Imagine if Nordstrom’s did the same. To speak to a salesperson for help with sizes, etc., costs $5, but that is taken off the cost of the blouse or shoes.

So $50 shoes now cost $45 plus a $5 salesperson service charge. Assuming that the “service” is not taxable (and it probably is, since I am not a tax lawyer and hopefully can write that on my tombstone), can we split products and services for sales tax purposes? Should those Best Buy kiosks at the airport include a claw to exempt the headphones or charger from sales tax?

Each of these “schemes” has already been tried, and most of them unsuccessfully. For example, many states exempt food from sales tax. If you buy an orange for $30,000 (tax free) you get to buy a new car for only a buck (plus 6 cents in sales tax.) That dog won’t hunt. Taxing authorities are pretty vigilant about protecting their slice of the pie. The claw exception is a tiny chink in the armor, but I wouldn’t expect it to have much effect outside the boardwalk.

If you disagree with me, I’ll see you in court, buddy. If you agree with me, however, I would love to hear from you.


advertisement

Comments are closed.

Newsletters

StorefrontBacktalk delivers the latest retail technology news & analysis. Join more than 60,000 retail IT leaders who subscribe to our free weekly email. Sign up today!
advertisement

Most Recent Comments

Why Did Gonzales Hackers Like European Cards So Much Better?

I am still unclear about the core point here-- why higher value of European cards. Supply and demand, yes, makes sense. But the fact that the cards were chip and pin (EMV) should make them less valuable because that demonstrably reduces the ability to use them fraudulently. Did the author mean that the chip and pin cards could be used in a country where EMV is not implemented--the US--and this mis-match make it easier to us them since the issuing banks may not have as robust anti-fraud controls as non-EMV banks because they assumed EMV would do the fraud prevention for them Read more...
Two possible reasons that I can think of and have seen in the past - 1) Cards issued by European banks when used online cross border don't usually support AVS checks. So, when a European card is used with a billing address that's in the US, an ecom merchant wouldn't necessarily know that the shipping zip code doesn't match the billing code. 2) Also, in offline chip countries the card determines whether or not a transaction is approved, not the issuer. In my experience, European issuers haven't developed the same checks on authorization requests as US issuers. So, these cards might be more valuable because they are more likely to get approved. Read more...
A smart card slot in terminals doesn't mean there is a reader or that the reader is activated. Then, activated reader or not, the U.S. processors don't have apps certified or ready to load into those terminals to accept and process smart card transactions just yet. Don't get your card(t) before the terminal (horse). Read more...
The marketplace does speak. More fraud capacity translates to higher value for the stolen data. Because nearly 100% of all US transactions are authorized online in real time, we have less fraud regardless of whether the card is Magstripe only or chip and PIn. Hence, $10 prices for US cards vs $25 for the European counterparts. Read more...
@David True. The European cards have both an EMV chip AND a mag stripe. Europeans may generally use the chip for their transactions, but the insecure stripe remains vulnerable to skimming, whether it be from a false front on an ATM or a dishonest waiter with a handheld skimmer. If their stripe is skimmed, the track data can still be cloned and used fraudulently in the United States. If European banks only detect fraud from 9-5 GMT, that might explain why American criminals prefer them over American bank issued cards, who have fraud detection in place 24x7. Read more...

StorefrontBacktalk
Our apologies. Due to legal and security copyright issues, we can't facilitate the printing of Premium Content. If you absolutely need a hard copy, please contact customer service.