Tax Increase Implemented
The tax increases continue.
Wisconsin will collect sales taxes on Internet downloads of music, games, books, ring tones and other video entertainment - a decision that angers some who will find the 5% tax added to their credit-card bills after Oct. 1.
On Thursday, Gov. Jim Doyle signed into law a package of tax-law changes that included extending the sales tax to so-called digital downloads.
The District of Columbia and 15 states have similar laws, although none of those states borders Wisconsin.
The change will require vendors to add the tax when the product is sold and remit it to the state treasury. One of the most popular sellers of songs, CDs and other digital products, iTunes, already collects sales taxes on those sales for states that charge it, said Susan Lundgren, a spokeswoman for Apple.
It is expected to cost Wisconsin consumers about $6.7 million a year - a number that suggests it’s a $134 million annual industry here. Also, national experts estimate that downloads are growing by as much as 20% a year, which means the amount of sales tax in that area will grow substantially.
This issue is the ultimate litmus test between a Wisconsin “government dependent” liberal and a conservative.
I’ve had numerous economic discussions with friends and relatives who work for state or local government the past six-months. Whenever the issue of the budget comes up, they immediately talk about how logically insane it is that people buying over the internet are granted this “fraudulent benefit” of not having to pay their “fair share of taxes”
I mean they really view it as stealing from the State. Stealing.
Watch now as Barbara Lawton privately has her sister in Illinois buy her I-tunes for her and email her the files.
Posted by .(JavaScript must be enabled to view this email address) on February 21, 2009 at 1131 hrs
The challenge now will be to find out how to get around this tax. I suppose we could just ask any of the tax cheats in Obama’s cabinet for the details.
Posted by .(JavaScript must be enabled to view this email address) on February 21, 2009 at 1342 hrs
Legally, it is stealing from the state, Steve - no different than if you were to refuse to pay the sales tax at a bricks-and-mortar establishment in Wisconsin. The law requires you to pay, whether you like it not.
Also, Steve, Apple ievies sales tax on iTunes downloads in Illinois as well. And Minnesota. And Iowa. And Michigan. And the 36 other states in which they have a retail presence, plus any state in which they don’t have a retail presence but otherwise warehouse inventory or run part of their operations.
Ultimately, I think this will all be moot. As online commerce increases, I’d guess Congress will at some point try to define the nexus of an online transaction as the physical address to which the product (digital or otherwise) is delivered. It’s the only way to keep the nickel-and-dime dishonesty/laziness of millions of Americans from inadvertently undermining one of government’s core methods of revenue generation. Many people aren’t industrious enough to keep track of their online spending and report it, so government will make retailers do it for them. A minor inconvenience for business, government gets the revenue it’s legally entitled to, and consumers don’t have to worry about tracking this crap anymore.
Posted by Recess Supervisor on February 21, 2009 at 1420 hrs
downloads of music, games, books, ring tones and other video entertainment
Just another reason for people to search out free (or steal) content on the interweb
Posted by .(JavaScript must be enabled to view this email address) on February 21, 2009 at 1433 hrs
I doubt this will have much, if any, effect on illegal downloads. People who are illegally acquiring songs they can buy for a buck aren’t doing it because they can’t afford the dollar. They’re either doing it on principle (believing that the content should be free in the first place) or because they don’t figure they’ll get caught (the same reason people lie when they fail to pay use tax).
If we’re talking about larger programs (like Microsoft Office), people are either stealing on principle or because the actual cost of the program is too significant. After all, there are perfectly good freeware programs out there like OpenOffice.
I assure you, nobody is going to pay $129 to download Microsoft Office legally, but be driven to obtain it illegally because the state wants the six bucks the consumer would pay anyway if they bought it at a store.
This is a drop in the bucket tax that nobody’s going to care about. Apple collects it already and has for years. So for the average consumer, what’s really changing? Not much.
Posted by Recess Supervisor on February 21, 2009 at 1805 hrs
Why isn’t Doyle collecting on the MASSIVE amount of money owed to the state by people who buy cigarettes online? They know who they are and have the information but refuse to collect. In fact they sent refunds to people who they did start to collect from when they got all upset about it.
Doyle wants to impose new taxes yet refuses to collect on existing online revenue.
What a joke.Posted by .(JavaScript must be enabled to view this email address) on February 21, 2009 at 2012 hrs
If Doyle had made more of an effort to CUT spending - I don’t think people would care that much about this. But you know that this money is just going to get flushed down some rathole.
Posted by .(JavaScript must be enabled to view this email address) on February 22, 2009 at 0906 hrs
God forbid we would be one of the 35 states without another damn tax!
Posted by .(JavaScript must be enabled to view this email address) on February 22, 2009 at 1259 hrs
It’s only “another” tax if you’re not already paying it like you’re supposed to. If you’re being honest with the state when you file your taxes, this won’t affect you at all (unless maybe you’re buying customizable computer software). This isn’t a new tax, just a method to enhance collection of an existing tax. And Irwin, you’re totally right. Doyle should go after cigarettes as well. We should be maximizing existing lines of revenue before contemplating new ones.
Posted by Recess Supervisor on February 22, 2009 at 1337 hrs
Thanks for living in Wisconsin, would the last person to leave please turn off the lights.
Time for a tax revolt.
Posted by .(JavaScript must be enabled to view this email address) on February 22, 2009 at 2127 hrs
It’s only “another” tax if you’re not already paying it like you’re supposed to. If you’re being honest with the state when you file your taxes, this won’t affect you at all (unless maybe you’re buying customizable computer software). This isn’t a new tax, just a method to enhance collection of an existing tax. And Irwin, you’re totally right. Doyle should go after cigarettes as well. We should be maximizing existing lines of revenue before contemplating new ones.
:rolleyes:
Recess supervisor must be a teacher, because I cannot possibly imagine anyone in the private sector who is out there fighting hard to keep their job, and working hard for every dollar they earn, making a statement so ridiculous.
That statement implies that all money belongs to the government, and what we are allowed to keep is only by the generous and benevolent nature of said entity. The simple fact of the matter is that taxation to the extent we are suffering in the state of Wisconsin is not only wrong, but absolutely devastating to our quality of life. The rule of unintended consequences will rear its ugly head on this, and we will not like the results.
Posted by .(JavaScript must be enabled to view this email address) on February 22, 2009 at 2135 hrs
Legally, it is stealing from the state, Steve - no different than if you were to refuse to pay the sales tax at a bricks-and-mortar establishment in Wisconsin. The law requires you to pay, whether you like it not.
Absolutely disturbing and sick.
Please, please recess supervisor, read some history, and gain an understanding of the ideas this country is founded upon. Your apologism for a tyrannical state is absolutely and abjectly wrong. All I can say is that I am certainly glad that the backlash is already building, and the boilerplate from which our new President’s administration, and our state government are built from will not be strong enough to withstand the pressure that is building.
Posted by .(JavaScript must be enabled to view this email address) on February 22, 2009 at 2145 hrs
If I have to pay the tax when I buy from a brick-and-mortar retailer in Wisconsin (who pays property tax on the building, pays income tax to the state, etc.), why should I be allowed to avoid the tax when I buy in cyberspace? Explain to me exactly how this is a “tax increase”? You folks are nuts sometimes, and this is one of those times.
Posted by .(JavaScript must be enabled to view this email address) on February 23, 2009 at 1257 hrs
Yeah, the pressure. I can sure see it building. Watch out, people in Wisconsin are all set to rush to the defense of the super-rich and oil companies and smokers and enormous, multi-state corporations.
Whatever. As long as you giving to more people than you’re taking from, you’re always going to do fine in politics. We may not like that, but it’s the truth more often than not.
The reason Jim Doyle successfully gets away with the things he does time and again is because they are almost always targeted at groups that most voters hate. He did it in 2003, 2005, and 2007. In the middle, he won a resounding reelection in 2006. Why wouldn’t Doyle try and shoot for the moon in this budget?
Swing voters don’t care about an extra 1% on Scott Newcomer and his neighbors. They don’t care domestic partnership benefits at UW. The overwhelming majority of voters will, however, be grateful for some kind of a smoking ban. Doyle is smart enough to leave hunting/fishing fees alone. See, he cares about the little guy. Times are tough, Doyle says, and we need to sacrifice. The people who need to sacrifice the most are obviously the groups that everyone hates. That’s how politics works now.
Finally, perhaps some of you should simply be grateful that you have successfully cheated DOR out of revenue on your out-of-state purchases for so many years, instead of carping and moaning that they’re about to make it harder for you to do. Show some gratitude for Wisconsin’s lazy and lax enforcement of tax laws, will you?
Posted by Recess Supervisor on February 23, 2009 at 1409 hrs
Total Entries: 20000
Total Comments: 134053
Most Recent Entry: 05/25/2012 06:26 am
Most Recent Comment on: 05/25/2012 12:48 pm
Total Members: 9751
Total Logged in members: 0
Total guests: 113
Total anonymous users: 0
Most Recent Visitor on: 05/25/2012 01:16 pm
The most visitors ever was 538 on 12/01/2007 02:11 pm
Protected and licensed under a Creative Commons License (some rights reserved).