Tell me more x
, there is a new speed test available. Give it a try, leave feedback!
dslreports logo
spacer
1
spacer
 
   
spc
story category
Monday Evening Links
by Revcb 07:29PM Monday Apr 29 2013

view:
topics flat nest 

YukonHawk

join:2001-01-07
Patterson, NY

Two things in this world.....

are guaranteed.. death and taxes. No matter how you slice it every body wants a piece of you!

meeeeeeeeee

join:2003-07-13
Newburgh, NY

Re: Two things in this world.....

said by YukonHawk:

are guaranteed.. death and taxes. No matter how you slice it every body wants a piece of you!

Unless you're Verizon and then neither apply.

YukonHawk

join:2001-01-07
Patterson, NY

Re: Two things in this world.....

Very true!
openbox9
Premium
join:2004-01-26
Germany
kudos:2
VZ pays plenty of taxes. As for death, theoretically corporations are perpetual.
silbaco
Premium
join:2009-08-03
USA

Re: Two things in this world.....

They're immortal!
openbox9
Premium
join:2004-01-26
Germany
kudos:2

Re: Two things in this world.....

Not really. Corporations can die.

meeeeeeeeee

join:2003-07-13
Newburgh, NY
said by openbox9:

VZ pays plenty of taxes. As for death, theoretically corporations are perpetual.

Compared to? Wish I could pay at THEIR rate.
openbox9
Premium
join:2004-01-26
Germany
kudos:2

Re: Two things in this world.....

said by meeeeeeeeee:

Compared to?

The rest of the world?
»www.cato.org/sites/cato.org/file ··· b_65.pdf

VZ is a corporation so it pays many more taxes than you as a person pays. Money doesn't pass through corporations freely, and is often taxed multiple times. VZ's effective income tax rate for FY12 was -6.7%, thanks to VOD and fancy accounting practices. Go back two years and its effective rate was 19.4%, relatively high IMO.
said by VZ Annual Report :

The negative effective income tax rate for 2012 and the decrease in the provision for income taxes during 2012 compared to 2011 was primarily due to lower income before income taxes as a result of higher severance, pension, and benefit charges as well as early debt redemption costs recorded in the current year.


meeeeeeeeee

join:2003-07-13
Newburgh, NY

Re: Two things in this world.....

When was the last time YOU paid -6.7% due to ANYTHING?
openbox9
Premium
join:2004-01-26
Germany
kudos:2

Re: Two things in this world.....

My 2010 federal income tax return.

hey hey hey

@charter.com
What most people don't get is that they are SUPPOSED to be paying those sales taxes. The Supreme Court ruling only applies to the online/catalog businesses having to COLLECT sales taxes. It doesn't say people still aren't required to pay it. Most people just don't do it.

meeeeeeeeee

join:2003-07-13
Newburgh, NY

Re: Two things in this world.....

said by hey hey hey :

What most people don't get is that they are SUPPOSED to be paying those sales taxes. The Supreme Court ruling only applies to the online/catalog businesses having to COLLECT sales taxes. It doesn't say people still aren't required to pay it. Most people just don't do it.

We "get" it, but various parts of the government are SUPPOSED to protect citizens from terrorist acts and SUPPOSED to maintain the roadways, bridges and other infrastructure and SUPPOSED to do a great many other things they don't do. When THEY start DOING their "SUPPOSED TO's", we'll consider doing ours.
--
"when the people have suffered many abuses under the control of a totalitarian leader, they not only have the right but the duty to overthrow that government." - The U.S. Declaration of Independence

skeechan
Ai Otsukaholic
Premium
join:2012-01-26
AA169|170
kudos:2

Microsoft turns Forbes magazines into Wi-Fi hot spots

Too bad they couldn't turn WindoW 8 into something other than a POS.
--
Nocchi rules.

skeechan
Ai Otsukaholic
Premium
join:2012-01-26
AA169|170
kudos:2

Dish-Sprint could usher in a new broadband, content era

Writer talks about how only 3% of US subs have 50Mb service and 46% have 10Mb service...

...as if Dishonest Charlie getting a hold of Sprint and Clearwire would change any of that.
--
Nocchi rules.
silbaco
Premium
join:2009-08-03
USA

Re: Dish-Sprint could usher in a new broadband, content era

Apparently he thinks Clearwire's crappy spectrum with crappy range can offer home internet with generous 20-25GB monthly caps. I am sure telcos are bracing themselves for the worst and planning a complete ftth roll-out. Have to get people off those wire pairs so they can offer more bonded T1 backhaul solutions to Clearwire's rural towers.

Sarick
It's Only Logical
Premium
join:2003-06-03
USA
Reviews:
·Frontier Communi..

2 edits
Yea, I just got a notice in the mail that my CONTRACT for a years subscription is getting dropped. I get all my left over months pro-rated back but they're apparently charging me the new increased monthly rates. If I'm wrong about this they failed to explain otherwise.

I pay for my programming on an annual basis and I have just received a letter from DISH as follows:

quote:
"April 20, 2013

Dear Valued Customer,

On 5/22 there will be some changes happening to your account. To ensure your full understanding, we
wanted to take the time to describe what those changes will be. You currently pay for some of your DISH
programming once a year.

Beginning 5/22, DISH will no longer offer annual billed services. As a result, you will now be billed
monthly.

Since you already paid for 12 months of service, any unused portion of what you previously paid will
be credited back to your DISH account to be used toward future monthly payments.

For each annual billed programming package you subscribed to, an additional credit of one free
month will be applied to your DISH account. This will ensure you receive the full 12 month benefit
for the annual service that you signed up for."
They should've let me finish my contract rates. I already paid for a full year subscription. I don't want my MONEY back I want the full year or service.

I recently read a story about Charlie and his first attempt at making money. Apparently, his first attempt to get rich involved counting cards at casinos with his buddy. His buddy was caught lip syncing the cards as he was handed them and they both got kicked out.

It's things like this that make me think most companies who make it big do so by hook or crook. Then again no one on this planet is 100% honest or totally pure hearted. If there are then others who are greedy will be sure to abuse those flaws.

On a further note I sent Karl an IM about this but he never responded toward it.
--
Sarick's Dungeon Clipart

Sarick
It's Only Logical
Premium
join:2003-06-03
USA
Reviews:
·Frontier Communi..

Fairness act, sorry there is more to it then taxes!

Small brick retailers may cost customers extra taxes but online retailers have shipping and handling charges as well.

Want to talk about fairness. Well, how is it fair if the local shops are suddenly given an advantage? Look at it this way if you purchase online now outside of state the retailer doesn't need to apply taxes.

Most of these retailers still charge heavy fees for shipping and handling. If the online retailers have sales taxes on all purchases it'll cost significantly more to purchase items from retailers. I'd put it at over 14-25% or more if using some credit transaction services.

This fairness bill should offer reduced taxes for out of state shipping to make things fair for all retailers both online and local. The local shops losing money aren't always because the online retailers don't include taxes.

If the online retailers must apply taxes with shipping and handling it'll cost significantly more to purchase from online retailers then to buy locally even if they have better product offers. Most online retailers don't see how much this will affect their busyness.

Take Newegg as an example. Why by from them? Unless they offer deals that undercut local shops and give free shipping they're going to lose deals from some customers who've been making purchases do to good service.

Bottem line is this bill might seem fair ro some but when everything is added together it gives a huge unfair advantage to local shops where in the current system there is a slight advantage towards online retailers.

There are ways around it though by purchasing outside the USA through a 3rd party. They obviously can't make companies in Canada or Mexico charge state sales takes even if they use 3rd party distribution centers inside the states to deliver goods.

What's this say? It will send some customers/businesses out of the states just like the wonderful free trade bill they passed. You know the one that allowed companies to move most of their assets to places like India or China? How wonderful is that?
--
Sarick's Dungeon Clipart
openbox9
Premium
join:2004-01-26
Germany
kudos:2

Re: Fairness act, sorry there is more to it then taxes!

said by Sarick:

Want to talk about fairness. Well, how is it fair if the local shops are suddenly given an advantage?

What's the advantage?
said by Sarick:

This fairness bill should offer reduced taxes for out of state shipping to make things fair for all retailers both online and local.

How is that fair? If you cross the state line and purchase a product from a neighboring state, do you not pay sales taxes (in most states)? Why should that be different if you go interstates via the Internet?
said by Sarick:

If the online retailers must apply taxes with shipping and handling it'll cost significantly more to purchase from online retailers then to buy locally even if they have better product offers.

B&M retailers have distribution and shipping costs as well.
said by Sarick:

Take Newegg as an example. Why by from them?

Breadth of products to choose from? Plethora of product reviews at your fingertips? Ability to shop from your couch in your underwear?
said by Sarick:

There are ways around it though by purchasing outside the USA through a 3rd party. They obviously can't make companies in Canada or Mexico charge state sales takes even if they use 3rd party distribution centers inside the states to deliver goods.

You'll pay tariffs, shipping, and other associated costs to import products.

Sarick
It's Only Logical
Premium
join:2003-06-03
USA
Reviews:
·Frontier Communi..

2 edits

Re: Fairness act, sorry there is more to it then taxes!

Did you even read my post, every question you quoted was answered already in my post. Please reread what I said, if you still can't ascertain the full context then there is no reason to discuss this further.

All they're doing is making other businesses to apply their taxes to people outside their state. Who's to say these taxes will even be managed right. Thieves will be taking advantage of the governments convoluted tax management system.

Oh that's right! I see you're from Japan, why are you commenting on US TAX politics?

--
Sarick's Dungeon Clipart
openbox9
Premium
join:2004-01-26
Germany
kudos:2

Re: Fairness act, sorry there is more to it then taxes!

I did read it and I quoted the parts I questioned. You did not demonstrate how online retailers will be harmed by being required to collect sales taxes (that you're already paying, right ) over the B&M retailers that are already do so. Your premise appears to be that online retailers pay shipping and handling charges, while B&M retailers don't, and therefore shouldn't be required to collect sales taxes. B&M retailers have shipping and distribution costs to move products as well.
said by Sarick:

All they're doing is making other businesses to apply their taxes to people outside their state. Who's to say these taxes will even be managed right. Thieves will be taking advantage of the governments convoluted tax management system.

Huh? Sales taxes are already collected and submitted, based on point of presence where the transaction occurs. You're already supposed to remit your sales tax payments when you purchase products where they aren't collected. Why should interstate transactions not be required to collect taxes to make it easier for consumers to manage? Many "thieves" are already taking advantage of convoluted tax schemes by not paying their legally required sales taxes.
said by Sarick:

Oh that's right! I see you're from Japan, why are you commenting on US TAX politics?

Not that it's relevant to a discussion about collecting sales taxes, but I'm a US citizen currently living abroad that routinely orders products online from US retailers.

notsofast123

@wideopenwest.com
Gee, last time I went to Chicago to bootleg soda (no deposit) and brought it back to Michigan (deposit), I paid taxes on the taxable items. Where did you come up with the idea if you travel out of state to buy something, you don't pay a tax? Sarick is right. You will end up ordering from amazon via china. Problem solved and who wins?

KrK
Heavy Artillery For The Little Guy
Premium
join:2000-01-17
Tulsa, OK

1 edit

1 recommendation

I don't feel sorry for Brick and Mortars because they could just as easily take advantage and sell online as well.... In fact most do.

So what they really want is to hamstring competition, not "Fairness." This is always what Corporations mean when they mention "Fairness." They mean they want an advantage, and their competition to be disadvantaged... and then they call it "Fair."

"Level Playing Field" = Advantage for us, barriers to entry for them....
--
"Fascism should more properly be called corporatism because it is the merger of state and corporate power." -- Benito Mussolini
Rekrul

join:2007-04-21
Milford, CT

Re: Fairness act, sorry there is more to it then taxes!

said by KrK:

I don't feel sorry for Brick and Mortars because they could just as easily take advantage and sell online as well.... In fact most do.

And now, the B&Ms who sell online will have to charge out of state sales tax as well. I wonder if they wanted that as well...

Sarick
It's Only Logical
Premium
join:2003-06-03
USA
Reviews:
·Frontier Communi..

Re: Fairness act, sorry there is more to it then taxes!

said by KrK See Profile
And now, the B&Ms who sell online will have to charge out of state sales tax as well. I wonder if they wanted that as well...
[/BQUOTE :

Apprently the bill has loophole that only B&M companies that make over 1,000,000 gross sales a year they have some immunity to the bill.
--
Sarick's Dungeon Clipart


Sarick
It's Only Logical
Premium
join:2003-06-03
USA
Reviews:
·Frontier Communi..
If they want fairness it should be for both parties to be have to the customer cost on equal grounds.

When you pay taxes at a local store your paying a percentage on that product. When you buy online only some stores charge these taxes.

These online sites that charge shipping and handling on top of the state sales taxes are at a disadvantage because NOT ONLY does the customer pay for shipping and handling most of the time they also must pay the taxes on top of that.

Some companies like Walmart offer free shipping if the product is shipped to the store. The customer still pays taxes but they only need to pickup the product at the store. Most online retailers don't have these advantages and either need to offset cost to offer free shipping or attach a fee to cover the cost.

Lets say you buy a product that cost 100 in a state with 10% sales tax and shipping and handling cost amount to 10%.

Lets assume that the customer purchases a a local retailer they pay $100 + $10 in taxes. A total of $110 for a $100 product.

Now lets look the online retailer that doesn't apply state taxes. They also add a fee of 10% or more to cover shipping and handling. The cost of the product is $100 + 10% shipping cost. Total product cost $110

Last lets look at the 3rd setup with large online retailers that attach that 10 percent on top of the shipping and handling. You have a $110 product and it gets a shipping fee of $10. This comes to $110 now the states want their take that adds another 10% or $11 because the taxes are the total of ALL fees combined.

As you can see unless the online retailer has free shipping and can sale their product at $11 less then the local retailer they are at a significant disadvantage. The total amount to buy the same product online is $121 to buy online.

This is what I mean.

As for tariffs if the product is in a 3rd party warehouse in the USA it can be independent of the online retailer. If the online retailer is located outside the USA they can sell the product using a 3rd party warehouse to bypass the new state taxes law. This people can still get around the new bill.

You see, Since shipping from the warehouse is done inside the states and the retailer is making a purchase transaction outside the US laws they can effectively bypass the tariffs and the new tax laws that (because they are outside jurisdiction) forces them to charge online taxes.

MY take on this bill is it has NOTHING to do with making it fair to local shops. It's all about greedy states getting money that is owed to them without acknowledging all aspects of what is truly fair. Seriously if they wanted to be fair they'd give an a tax allowance for shipping cost to keep online and offline retailers competitive.
--
Sarick's Dungeon Clipart
openbox9
Premium
join:2004-01-26
Germany
kudos:2

Re: Fairness act, sorry there is more to it then taxes!

said by Sarick:

These online sites that charge shipping and handling on top of the state sales taxes are at a disadvantage because NOT ONLY does the customer pay for shipping and handling most of the time they also must pay the taxes on top of that.

You pay "shipping and handling" at your local B&M stores too, you just don't see it as a separate line item.
said by Sarick:

Last lets look at the 3rd setup with large online retailers that attach that 10 percent on top of the shipping and handling. You have a $110 product and it gets a shipping fee of $10. This comes to $110 now the states want their take that adds another 10% or $11 because the taxes are the total of ALL fees combined.

I guess retailers will need to start billing the actual cost of shipping (which isn't calculated into sales tax) instead of of padding their bottom lines with inflated "shipping and handling fees".
said by Sarick:

As you can see unless the online retailer has free shipping and can sale their product at $11 less then the local retailer they are at a significant disadvantage. The total amount to buy the same product online is $121 to buy online.

Not if actual shipping costs are billed. Given your scenario, the prices are the same, plus the cost of shipping. How many products cost the same through online retailers as they do in your local B&M stores? None? Because your local B&M stores have already priced in their shipping and distribution costs, as well as various other overheads not typically realized by online retailers.
said by Sarick:

If the online retailer is located outside the USA they can sell the product using a 3rd party warehouse to bypass the new state taxes law. This people can still get around the new bill.

No. You'll be paying even more for products purchased and shipped from outside of the states to get to you than you would by simply purchasing from a retailer located in the states.
said by Sarick:

MY take on this bill is it has NOTHING to do with making it fair to local shops. It's all about greedy states getting money that is owed to them without acknowledging all aspects of what is truly fair.

Do you currently pay your required sales taxes when you purchase products from online retailers?

notsofast123

@wideopenwest.com

Re: Fairness act, sorry there is more to it then taxes!

I order from a few online companies who sale from China. I get free shipping. And, the item purchased was 60.00 less (a jacket) then a local retailer. So, rather there are added costs or not, I saved 60 bucks. The problem here is, we are paying less for the same CRAP the local B&M is selling us and they don't like it. As my congresswomen said, they are just bringing inline revenue collection with technology. Well, if BestBuy, WalMart and Sears can't evolve, then they need to do the same thing Circuit city and Computer USA did. Die.