IPcentral Weblog
  The DACA Blog

Monday, March 8, 2004

Use Tax
(previous | next)

The Associated Press reports that California and New York have joined the ranks of 20 other states that include a line on tax forms for individuals to report use taxes. Use taxes apply to goods purchased in other states and then brought home to a different jurisdiction. Sometimes these goods are purchased while traveling - like a suitcase to bring home trinkets from Disneyland. By most standards, the suitcase and the trinkets are all covered by use taxes. Oftentimes to the dismay of revenuers, a form of tax arbitrage takes place. That's one reason why so many furniture and outlet stores exist in Newark just outside of high-tax New York.

One big problem with the use tax is enforcement. Regardless of how difficult it is to enforce compliance, there is no excuse for states that fail to even ask citizens to pay the tax. I don't like sales or use taxes. As commerce and economic wealth trends toward digits, transaction-based taxes should become a thing of the past.

Nonetheless, if there is a properly enacted tax, then we ought to pay and it ought to be collected. There is a duel obligation: one for citizens and one for the state. Here in North Carolina, the use tax is universally known as "Line 16" for its place on the standard form. Now New York and California have their own place for the use tax. And, importantly, purchases made using the Internet can be taxed according to the laws of the state where the buyer resides.

posted by @ 9:48 AM | General

Share |

Link to this Entry | Printer-Friendly

Post a Comment:

Blog Main
RSS Feed  
Recent Posts
  EFF-PFF Amicus Brief in Schwarzenegger v. EMA Supreme Court Videogame Violence Case
New OECD Study Finds That Improved IPR Protections Benefit Developing Countries
Hubris, Cowardice, File-sharing, and TechDirt
iPhones, DRM, and Doom-Mongers
"Rogue Archivist" Carl Malamud On How to Fix Gov2.0
Coping with Information Overload: Thoughts on Hamlet's BlackBerry by William Powers
How Many Times Has Michael "Dr. Doom" Copps Forecast an Internet Apocalypse?
Google / Verizon Proposal May Be Important Compromise, But Regulatory Trajectory Concerns Many
Two Schools of Internet Pessimism
GAO: Wireless Prices Plummeting; Public Knowledge: We Must Regulate!
Archives by Month
  September 2010
August 2010
July 2010
June 2010
  - (see all)
Archives by Topic
  - A La Carte
- Add category
- Advertising & Marketing
- Antitrust & Competition Policy
- Appleplectics
- Books & Book Reviews
- Broadband
- Cable
- Campaign Finance Law
- Capitalism
- Capitol Hill
- China
- Commons
- Communications
- Copyright
- Cutting the Video Cord
- Cyber-Security
- Digital Americas
- Digital Europe
- Digital Europe 2006
- Digital TV
- E-commerce
- e-Government & Transparency
- Economics
- Education
- Electricity
- Energy
- Events
- Exaflood
- Free Speech
- Gambling
- General
- Generic Rant
- Global Innovation
- Googlephobia
- Googlephobia
- Human Capital
- Innovation
- Intermediary Deputization & Section 230
- Internet
- Internet Governance
- Internet TV
- Interoperability
- IP
- Local Franchising
- Mass Media
- Media Regulation
- Monetary Policy
- Municipal Ownership
- Net Neutrality
- Neutrality
- Non-PFF Podcasts
- Ongoing Series
- Online Safety & Parental Controls
- Open Source
- PFF Podcasts
- Philosophy / Cyber-Libertarianism
- Privacy
- Privacy Solutions
- Regulation
- Search
- Security
- Software
- Space
- Spectrum
- Sports
- State Policy
- Supreme Court
- Taxes
- The FCC
- The FTC
- The News Frontier
- Think Tanks
- Trade
- Trademark
- Universal Service
- Video Games & Virtual Worlds
- VoIP
- What We're Reading
- Wireless
- Wireline
Archives by Author
PFF Blogosphere Archives
We welcome comments by email - look for a link to the author's email address in the byline of each post. Please let us know if we may publish your remarks.

The Progress & Freedom Foundation