|T O P I C R E V I E W
||Posted - 06/27/2018 : 16:13:30
Internet sales tax is surely coming for every state … what is Atomic doing to help assist their sellers in the upcoming complex tax collection process?
|6 L A T E S T R E P L I E S (Newest First)
||Posted - 09/28/2018 : 13:15:45
That's a good question - and it's prompted some more thought on the issue. Since Atomic Avenue collects the money, they are the vendor.
The buyer purchases the comics from Atomic Avenue, the "seller" ships to the buyer and Atomic purchases the item from the "seller" approximately two weeks after it was shipped (minus a fee).
As a contrast, sellers on ebay are supposed to collect their sales taxes because they get paid directly from the seller via Paypal. Ebay later collects a selling fee.
||Posted - 09/28/2018 : 04:25:49
Pete, does Human Computing take the position that Atomic Avenue is a vendor or that Atomic Avenue is a venue? I'm not a lawyer, but it seems to me the answer has different implications for individual sellers that use Atomic Avenue.
||Posted - 09/27/2018 : 11:11:51
The short answer is, we're going to have to see how this all shakes out. Nobody can know what the ultimate effect of all this is--but the idea of small sellers having to deal with the approximately 10,000 sales tax jurisdictions in the country is absolutely insane. At its worst, it has the possibility of being an extinction-level-event for small businesses who sell online, not to put too fine a point on it. This is a solution which absolutely demands some sort of sensible rulemaking--fast.
See my blog post on this for more:
||Posted - 09/26/2018 : 12:52:55
Today I received an email from DCBS/InStockTrades/Tales of Wonder regarding their shift towards charging sales tax on orders from customers in particular states. They explicitly indicated that this is in response to the SCOTUS case mentioned in this thread.
So this seems like an opportune time to bump this thread and ask again what Atomic Avenue's position on this will be going forward.
||Posted - 06/29/2018 : 00:03:16
I suspect the answer to this question is the same as the ongoing (for years, now) request for sales reports: either "None" or "Wait"
The point of this message really wasn't to get an answer but rather to indicate that the sellers on here would like some help in regards to these matters.
||Posted - 06/27/2018 : 17:28:43
That's a good question.
While we're waiting for an official answer from Human Computing, here are some thoughts that should provide context for at least the present moment:
The recent SCOTUS decision was in regards to the law that South Dakota passed. As I understand things, for the South Dakota law to apply to Atomic Avenue sellers, an internet vendor must have either 200 transactions in the state in a single year OR at least $100,000 total transactions in the state in a single year.
It is not clear to me if the South Dakota law would treat Atomic Avenue as the vendor or if it treats Atomic Avenue as a venue and the individual sellers are vendors. I would be surprised if Atomic Avenue has $100K in transactions in South Dakota in a single year, but it very well might have 200 transactions. Most individual sellers on Atomic Avenue will not meet those thresholds (although a seller who sells on multiple venues might meet those thresholds if you combine all of their activities with purchasers in South Dakota).
What other states do in response to the SCOTUS decision remains to be seen. I think you are correct that many states will pass sales tax laws that expand to include internet transactions. However, the Court's opinion included an implication that one of the reasons the SD law was upheld was because of the thresholds included in that law. If states pass Internet tax laws very low thresholds -- or even no thresholds -- expect another court fight.