advertisement
advertisement

This is page 2 of:

Online Sales Tax Bill Could Help Chains With Taxes, Too

April 24th, 2013

And states will have to provide—and keep updated—the databases the software uses to identify which products and services are subject to the taxes, as well as how the boundaries are drawn. In short, if a merchant uses the state’s software and database, the merchant is off the hook for any errors—and the software should handle most of the complexities.

That’s actually a much better deal than most big chains (or small retailers, for that matter) currently get from their state sales-tax authorities. Since the bill also specifies that out-of-state “remote” retailers can’t be required to collect taxes differently than in-state stores, brick-and-mortar chains would be crazy to pass up the opportunity to get access to those databases—and to the centralized tax filing that the bill also requires—both for their own in-state online commerce and for physical stores.

Unfortunately, the bill requires that states provide the software and databases if it wants remote sellers to collect sales tax for them. It doesn’t specify anything else. That means there’s a good chance that some states, at least, will provide buggy software that only runs under its own operating system, while others may port the aging minicomputer application they use at the Bureau of Equalization to MS-DOS and claim that’s enough.

What would be much smarter—though harder for large retailers to integrate—would be something cloud-based, so the state wouldn’t have to push out updates to every E-tailer across the country. Ordinarily doing something like that wouldn’t be likely, especially since states aren’t known for cutting-edge systems.

But there’s potentially a lot of money on the table from better sales-tax collection, and states are only able to require collection from remote merchants under a federal law. If one merchant thinks a state hasn’t fulfilled the requirements of the law, the place to go is federal court—and losing there might mean a state would have to somehow refund all the taxes it collected from remote retailers. In that light, spending a little more on a clean IT solution to the tax-software problem might be worth it.

And considering that so many unhappy E-tailers really were hoping out-of-state collection of online sales taxes would die in committee again, this will almost certainly will end up in court anyway at the first hint of an excuse. That being the case, unusable software isn’t an excuse any state should want to offer.


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.