advertisement
advertisement

This is page 2 of:

Wal-Mart: Tax Hypocrite?

September 8th, 2011

Online, it’s messier. When Target, Borders and ToysRUs outsourced their Web sites to Amazon a decade ago, it was easier for state-tax agencies to argue that the traditional retailers, with brick-and-mortar stores in the state, were still responsible for sales taxes. But what if a pure-play E-tailer uses a traditional retailer’s online store to sell its goods? Or what if one out-of-state E-tailer sells through another out-of-state E-tailer’s Web site—or if just part of the transaction is outsourced? Who exactly does the tax agency go after?

California hasn’t helped itself by carving out separate rules as part of the political fight over online tax collection. For example, traditional auctioneers in California are required to collect sales taxes on every sale. But eBay—which is based in California—isn’t being required to collect online sales taxes. That’s the job of the sellers themselves, according to a deal that was cut to encourage eBay to support tax collection.

In theory, that’s because eBay isn’t actually the seller—it’s just providing a mechanism for the sale, handling the money and taking a cut. There’s a usefulness in that logic: For example, it cleanly cuts the whole payment-card chain out of the tax-collection loop, so tax agencies won’t go after processors, acquiring banks, card networks and issuers to collect sales taxes.

Then again, what eBay actually does sounds a lot like what traditional auctioneers do. It also sounds pretty much like what Wal-Mart does for third-parties like Wayfair, who are the official sellers of some items on Walmart.com.

And the messiness doesn’t stop at California’s borders. In a brick-and-mortar store, sales-tax rates depend on the location of the store where the transaction is done. In most states, online sales-tax rates are based on the location the product is delivered to. But in a few, such as Illinois (which just passed its own online sales-tax collection law), the sales-tax rate is based on where the order is actually processed.

As a result (according to the Chicago Tribune), the same item sold to the same customer by different E-tailers could have different sales-tax rates—and it’s almost impossible for customers to confirm whether the sales-tax rate charged is correct. (Of course, whoever has the higher sales-tax rate will be blamed as a thief by any customer who notices the difference.)

No matter what finally happens with online sales-tax collection, there are going to be lots of theories about exactly who’s on the hook for the taxes. Fortunately, every retailer can count on one thing: The tax collectors will always think it’s 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.