Re: "SB226 has the support of the Utah retailers large and small . . .
."Which virtually assures its passage. Even though the
overwhelming majority of voters oppose it.So, Utah legislators, who
do you really work for?
Mr Hymas,Are you suggesting that the good people of Utah are not
paying the sales tax on out of state purchases as required by law?
I agree with Mr. Hymas. I also calculate and pay Utah's use tax for my
online purchases. I'm curious, though, about how many of my fellow Utahns
do the same. It would be interesting to see the statistics on that one.
I do disagree with one statement Mr. Hymas made: "In fact, retailers of all
sizes thrive on competition — as long as that competition is fair."
This is one of the great myths perpetuated by free-market devotees, that
competition creates greater economic freedom. In reality, competition produces
what has been called economic Darwinism, or what Spencer identified as
"survival of the fittest." Competition, in essence, creates an
environment in which competition is eliminated.Competition produces
winners and losers. The winners get stronger; the losers disappear. All too
soon, power is aggregated in the hands of a few or even one competitor. For this
reason, collusion and the common business practice of seeking government
protection are the strategies companies pursue in order to ensure their
survival. No businessman really believes in the "free" market.
This is a bad idea. All it will accomplish is it will stop small online
retailers from selling things to people from Utah.If they are so
concerned about enforcing the Utah law that says you have to pay sales taxes on
items you purchased out of state for use in state, they need to set up a customs
shop at the Post Office, UPS, and Fed Ex.
Re: "Competition, in essence, creates an environment in which competition is
eliminated."That's why it's so important to prevent
government unethically placing its heavy thumb on the scale in favor of locals,
relatives, buddies, or business cronies.As SB226 does.
Let's look at it from another point of view. Online-only retailers have a
"base" in some state - let's say, Utah. Purchasers located in Utah,
where the online-only retailer has a base, pay sales taxes for the items they
buy. Purchasers who don't live in Utah do not. Conversely, a purchaser in
Utah doesn't pay sales tax to the online-only retailer whose base is in,
say, New York. But New Yorkers DO pay sales tax to that NY online retailer. I
would say the playing field is level when everyone pays sales taxes to the
online retailers who have a base in their state. Oh, you say, but there are more
online-only retailers in NY than Utah so they get more sales taxes. That may be,
but who's counting. Anyone? And another thing, most retailers
(in any state) have an online presence and sell their items online as well as
their brick & mortar store. So are the B&M retailers ready to collect
sales taxes from out-of-state purchasers?
When private commercial interests own and control the government the term
“level the business playing field” means “eliminate price
competition”. If you support the movement to eliminate price competition,
If you really want to level the business playing ground, require all like
commodities to be sold at the same price no matter which retailer. Or limit the
rate of return to the same for all investors. How about including the
worker/consumer a level playing ground? Same wages per hour for everyone.
To "Ultra Bob" so you want a liberal fascist government. You want the
government to provide for everybody AND control business without owning them.