Video: Sorry eBay — Turns Out Some Small Businesses Support the Marketplace Fairness Act

  • Share
  • Read Later

Online giant eBay is leading the charge against legislation that would require sales tax to be collected on Internet sales. The mandate would be an unfair burden on small businesses, eBay says. And yet who are among the bill’s strongest supporters? Yep, small businesses.

For years, online sellers have benefitted from what brick-and-mortar retailers call the “internet sales tax loophole.” For the most part, e-retailers are only required to charge customers sales tax if the vendor has a physical presence in the state where the purchase is being made. Consumers are supposed to pay the appropriate sales tax when they file their annual federal and state income taxes, but almost no one does. The situation gives e-commerce businesses an obvious pricing advantage over brick-and-mortar stores and online retailers with a physical presence in the state, which must always tack on sales tax.

The Marketplace Fairness Act, which passed in the U.S. Senate and is now being considered in the House, would close this loophole. The legislation would allow states to require out-of-state vendors to collect sales taxes just like the physical stores at the customer’s location.

(MORE: 5 Ways to Save Money Shopping Online, Regardless of New Internet Sales Tax Legislation)

Amazon, the world’s largest e-retailer, has voiced support for online sales tax collection initiatives in recent years. The only big company that’s actively fighting the legislation today is eBay. Company CEO John Donahoe was quoted on NPR this week arguing that the law would hurt small businesses:

If it’s allowed to play out things will still sell in eBay marketplace, but it will be larger and larger sellers that are doing the selling and the small guy will, over time, slowly be squeezed out.

Currently, the Marketplace Fairness Act would exempt retailers with less than $1 million in annual revenues. Instead, eBay wants the exemption pushed to the $10 million revenue mark, which Donahoe pointed to as one of the criteria used in Obamacare to define a small business. “All we’re saying is an exemption at $10 million – small business or less – that’s the balance we think this bill should have,” said Donahoe.

What’s more, eBay has played up the idea that the legislation represents a new tax, when supporters of the bill say it’s actually just an effort to enforce existing taxes. “No small business should face new taxes,” said Brian Bieron, eBay’s senior director of global public policy, told AllThingsD. “There’s no benefit compared to the harm that would be done.”

(MORE: Why Is Wall Street Fighting the Online Sales Tax?)

Overall, eBay claims it is simply fighting for the little guy. But a coalition called the Alliance for Main Street Fairness says that just the opposite is true. “Hundreds of thousands of small businesses are rooting for this legislation to level the playing field” the group states in a newly released video that rips apart eBay’s arguments point by point:

48 comments
mcgrathfirm
mcgrathfirm

Good read/watch.  I just completed a series of blog posts about the Marketplace Fairness Act from a policy and legal perspective.  If you are interested in this proposed law, it is worth a read: http://thebuffalolawyer.blogspot.com/

sirkarl101
sirkarl101

Does this include China?  Are they allowed to proceed to sell directly to the U.S market unfettered and unregulated?  Ebay has a problem.  They allow Chinese companies to flood the U.S market via the internet with toxic products.  Counterfeiting everything they can.  Coins, antiquities etc..Ebay continues to collect their pay-offs.

I imagined that E-bay was for individuals who wish to sell a few items here and there to hopefully pick up a few dollars on reusable items no longer needed or maybe some collectables.  When I see sellers with tens of thousands if not hundres of thousands of sales then YES they need to be taxed.  One million in sales and over definitely need  taxing...

bluehawk99
bluehawk99

Who's going to police all these sales tax transactions for all the different states? It's an impossibility! All that will happen is sellers will pocket a good amount of the taxes collected to increase their profits!

I have never found Amazon to have the best prices for the things I shop for but I certainly have gotten amazing deals off Ebay!!!!!!

Iceman
Iceman

I find laughable that ebay talks about the little guy getting pushed out when that is what they want. They want to be Amazon and they don't like having people on their site selling the stuff out of their closest. They do nothing to protect sellers from fraud and will one day only allow power sellers to sell on the site.


I enjoy not having to pay the sales tax but the big online companies will all find was to compensate. My problem isn't them asking us to finally pay the sales tax but the reason why. They are doing this because the politicians can't stop their out of control spending or get a budget to together. Washington is causing the problem and they will pass the cost on to us in as many ways as possible

Strat
Strat

I'll buy online.  Stop the crying.  Even with tax, I don't burn gas, no wear and tear on my vehicle, saves me tons of time and shipping is free.  I also don't have to deal with some disgruntled, underpaid stupid-a** that knows less about what I'm looking for than I do, and that is the rule, not the exception.  But I'm sure with all the increased revenue that will result from this B.S. "equalizer tax" you'll be paying your employees higher wages...yeah, right.  I don't see any mention about Amazon's and other online seller's unequaled customer service.  That's a HUGE reason I buy from them.  Plus they don't rip me off my trying to charge me MSRP and their return policy is as good as it gets.  You want more customers, take care of these things and you'll have a better chance.  Another tax isn't going to do that, it's just going to p*ss people off and you'll be blamed for making it happen.  I'll buy online.  End of story.

MrJones
MrJones

EBay's philosophy is rooted in secondhand items. The author completely misses the point. And obviously endorses charging an illegal second sales tax on people who are barely getting by in the first place. Smells like fascism to me.

MaryPeck1
MaryPeck1

Moreover, you pay taxes if you buy on ebay from a seller in your state.  Why would I want to enrich the treasury of another state?  It's just another grab for money.

MaryPeck1
MaryPeck1

Stores usually don't have to add shipping charges.  Who will be hurt is the small town or rural buyer.

cajunliberty7
cajunliberty7

I do not know any eBay seller who supports this stupid legislation, nor do I know any small brick and mortar business who supports it either.  Somewhere, somehow, some folks think business people love taxes.  Those who want less government do not.  You cannot want smaller government and smaller government intrusion and want more taxes on anyone.

pangea
pangea

This is precisely what the government (a/k/a Big Industry) wants...all the little guys fighting with each other so no one notices the real tax evaders! A simple case of "Divide and conquer"   Stop the bickering and focus on the real bad guys!   truth be told the people can only bear so many taxes...a quick study of our own history reveals what happens...enough already

Jc_sasquatch
Jc_sasquatch

In the end it's  really the consumer who gets screwed anyway, not just these small businesses. Not to mention theyll simply be passing on the extra cost to the consumer. online pricing? that'll be a thing of the past in the United States of Taxation

chris_jacomet
chris_jacomet

government is supposed to and required to reflect the will of the majority of the people,  early on in your article you indicate that the overwhelming majority of persons opt to not pay the tax on their income tax statements,  that is their will,  that is then the obligation of that government to fulfill, it matters not what a bunch of wealthy snobs in dc wish, not the persons operating brick and mortor stores or on line groups which wish to establish their monopoly,  it is the will of the people only which counts,  brick and mortor stores need to organize and eliminate the sales tax which they currently collect. less government benefits all and improves the quality of life for all

IndependentThinker
IndependentThinker

I'm a small retailer located in Arizona and I'm primarily brick and mortar although I sell online too so I can speak from both sides of this issue. I am strongly in favor of this legislation and believe that the vast majority of small brick and mortar retailers are also in favor of it. Here is an example to illustrate how unfair the current situation is. The majority of my merchandise is $100-$150 and the sales tax rate in Arizona averages 9%. I absorb the shipping cost which is typically $7-14 per order. Many of my vendors prohibit advertising prices below their suggested prices so the prices are the same in my store as with online competitors. The only difference in bottom line cost between my store and an out of state retailer is the $9-$15 in sales tax. Since I'm required to collect that tax and my remote online competitors are not, that is a disadvantage imposed by law that I am not able to overcome. How is that considered fair? If my competitors want to have the privilege of transacting sales to customers in my state then they should be expected to comply with the same sales tax laws. It's fundamentally wrong for the government to impose different laws on different businesses that are engaged in the same marketplace. Let businesses compete on their own merits and get sales tax collection laws out of the equation.

waivethefive
waivethefive

It was noted elsewhere that 60% of America shops at Walmart.  What do we do to control that 'unfairness'? Where were all these concerns over fairness when WalMart was running small businesses out of town throughout America?  Small online retailers need small advantages like no sales tax to counter the efficiencies of big businesses that dominate the marketplace.  This is nothing more than legislation purchased by the dominant rich trying to control and contain the upstart competitors.

citygirl
citygirl

this law is harmful to small businesses. Small businesses ARE in fact against it. I don't know where you got this info from. very irresponsible to say something like this if you have not completed your research :(

Pacificltd
Pacificltd

In regards to the “Marketplace Fairness Act”. While good intentioned, this legislation is harmful in many ways and since rushed through the Senate deserves a more thoughtful study before passage. Proponents of this bill say it will be easy. REALLY? Even if we take them at their word "only one state tax rate" and "perfect running software to calculate", HOW DO PAYMENTS GET REMITTED to all 46 states? Do we write 46 monthly checks? Not all small merchants run automated and to input additional information by hand is time consuming and takes time away from normal business operations. What about audit risk? Can the tax board in Tennessee come after a merchant in Florida? Is it even moral to burden an out of state merchant to collect taxes on behalf of a state they don't live or work in? Why not ask China or Mexico to collect Tennessee taxes?

Is this constitutional? Will surely be challenged in the courts, but why this legislation is truly harmful is that in such a weak recovery you are burdening the very small businesses that are one of the few sources of growth in our economy. Hiring in the Etailing sector will freeze or decline and companies that are mobile and of large enough scale will simply move offshore to compete. Our tax code is already written in a manner that encourages large companies to domicile offshore this legislation encourages the medium and even portable smaller sized USA businesses to join them. Don't kid yourselves this revenue comes right out of the pockets of the average American consumer who at the moment isn't exactly "winning". The extra taxes the citizens will have to pay means LESS money in their pockets to spend locally DEFLATIONARY (except of course for the growth of state government).

If this legislation must be passed then the small business limit needs to be moved up to at least five million instead of one million as it is easy to get to this level even as a very small company if you sell electronics, cars, machinery, luxury products, travel, etc. The law should require one payment address for all 46 states. Let the software folks forward 46 separate payments not American businessmen and women.

AztecEmperor
AztecEmperor

Anyone who believes that small business OR any halfway intelligent individual advocates additional sales tax collections is merely a fool.  There is nothing fair about burdening society with excessive taxes, created only so that government can further waste money that it should not count on in the first place,  furthering impediments to privacy by increasingly controlling the daily lives of its inhabitants.  the decline of society begins with excess and where factions fight for the plunder-government is the biggest business that exists and the capital to fuel it is  raising funds through taxation (its own equity market)-the general flock, i.e., the fools AND the uneducated in this world, which is the majority, will just blindly follow the shepherd.

UJ
UJ

Shame on you, Mr. Tuttle.  Shame on you.  Did Wal-Mart write your entire article for you or did you get help from Amazon, too?  What a piece of slanted, biased garbage.  I refuse to call this news.  Anybody interested in the membership of this so called "Alliance for Main Street Fariness" which you refer to as "small businesses"?   Leading off with Wal-Mart, we move on to Target, Sears, Home Depot, Best Buy and AutoZone.  A real slice of American mom and pop shops, wouldn't we all agree??  What a crock!  How much did you get paid to embed this propaganda video in your, and I use this term loosely, "article"?  What you have written is simply an advertisement for the largest retailers in this country.  

Expecting a small 1-2 person business in 1 state to suddenly be able to account for the other 49 state's taxes across the country is simply ludicrous.  The bill only requires an as yet unnamed and non-existent accounting software into be provided, but does not guarantee that the software must integrate with current accounting programs.  This is a bureaucratic nightmare and will put undue burden on honest, hardworking Americans struggling to compete with the big boys that you so obviously are smitten with.  

Why don't these states bother chasing after the citizens of their own states who are not paying their required use taxes?!  They are the millions currently breaking the law.  

Again.  Shame on you, Brad.  Perhaps you actually ran a business, rather than "commenting" on it, you would know how fatally flawed this bill in Congress actually is.

TractorUP1
TractorUP1

Mr. Tuttle, are you aware that the lobbyists promoting this act were hired by Walmart, Best Buy, Home Depot? Is this Main Street? These are the same retailers that used tax incentives, price bullying and other tactics to crush Main St. to begin with. Are you also aware that Wal-Mart has made some big donations in favor of this act to their Republican Senator, who was a co-sponsor? 

In your opinion, is it ok that MY small business will be forced to make some difficult decisions if this goes through, not because of "unfairness", but because I will become a tax collector for 45 states? 

States have a duty to collect their OWN taxes, a duty which is not mine. Go after the people that don't pay them. Of course Ebay is looking after it's own interests. This isn't about "Main Street"- it's about huge retailers once again crushing small business, and you're lending the "coalition" credibility by siding with them. How would you feel if someone used false information to take away your livelihood as a writer? Would you worry about your children? 

Please, check your facts and report the whole story.

UFT
UFT

There are many issues with this article. Would like to point out one glaring one... the author says "The situation gives e-commerce businesses an obvious pricing advantage over brick-and-mortar stores and online retailers with a physical presence in the state."
This is a tired talking point from Walmart the the retail lobby. Internet Retailers do NOT have a pricing advantage over Brick And Mortar businesses. Companies who sell online have to pay to ship things across the country (B&M do not). The cost to ship things is almost always more than the sales tax on those items. If anything, internet retailers are at a pricing disadvantage.
People need to stop repeating these untrue and unfair talking points.

KeithYockey
KeithYockey

First, there is no 'Internet Sales Tax Loophole'.  Never has been one.  You buy online and the vendor does not collect tax, it's the responsibility of the buyer to pay Use Tax.  States have done little to educate the public that this law exists, nor have they bothered to enforce existing law. Rather than do the job legislators hired them to do, the answer is always to write new, bad law.

Of course Mom and Pop stores support this bill.  They would rather blame the Internet for their woes than look at thier own back yard.  Did they not scream 'unfair' when WalMart moved in next door and stole a chunk of their business?  B&Ms have one store one location, one tax rate and yes, one tax form to fill out.

In S.C., as an online seller, I collect Sales Tax for all in-state sales.  Unlike my B&M competitor, I have to deal with over 150 tax districts, none that are defined by zip code, and what does my State offer to figure correct tax?  A PDF file/excel spreadsheet!  SC DOR offers no software  solutions to the online community.  Bookeeping alone takes several hours each quarter, and I run a very small business.  The State offers a token compensation, which does not cover the fees CC processors get on Sales Tax collected.

Ask that small business how they would feel if they had to fill out 45 State tax returns instead of the single form they fill out now.  But that's exactly what the Market Place Fairness act does.  Software/technology has the answer they say, yet for those who sell mufti-platform businesses will have to first compile data, then file the forms manually. (Note: Tax filings now include all US territories and Sovereign Indian Nations, bringing the total filings to over 600).

Multiply that 2 hours that B&Ms and in-state online to fill out a return, then multiply that times 600.

Sen Durbin had another comment stated on the Senate Floor:  If you don't want to comply with IL law or collect IL Sales TAx, then don't sell to that State.  Sorry Mr. Durbin, eBay nor Amazon allows that option.

Next are compliance costs.  As mentioned before, there are the filing costs.  Next are software costs.  There are several comapnies that do this, but the cost, based on volume, range from $1 to $.08 per transaction, and does not cover the cost to install the software, code your product line to NACIS standards, nor the cost of upgrades. (The US adds 1500 new tax districts each year).

MFA is a bad bill, plain and simple.  There is nothing 'fair' about this bill

lagunarick
lagunarick

Sorry, but there's nothing fair about poorly written legislation that requires my small company to become the tax collector for about 45 more states.  I truly don't know how it will be possible to comply with the demands of monthly payments to all these sources and the occasional audit from each state.  We are a small company with a part-time bookkeeper.  You have no idea what the real-world demands on us this would impose..    A dead giveaway is who now supports this bill as they approach nexus in all states.  

And yes, it is a new tax realistically.  How about enforcing existing use taxes.  We're not the tax collector for states that we have no presence in.  2 California sales tax audits x about 45 more states will be a business killer.

KaneTrain
KaneTrain

There are several problems with this article.... and with the legislation. This bill simply replaces one perceived unfairness with another. Online retailers, particularly ones with over 1M in annual sales are discriminated in this bill terribly. They will bear a heavy burden of compliance costs and will be open to audits for 50 different taxing authorities. Have you ever had to go through an audit? Not fun and very very costly. Now multiply that by 50. The audits will come from states where Internet Retailers have no political voice or right to vote. There are significant due process issues at stake here. We will face a steady parade of auditors at our doorstep and there's no protections for us. 

Online retailers do not necessarily oppose an online sales tax. I do not. I am an online retailer who will be affected by this bill. It will cost us my company jobs and it will give our smaller competitors an unfair advantage. Let me reiterate I SUPPORT a fair and reasonable internet tax bill. But it has to be fair, simple and be applied to everyone equally. If we're applying to some and exempting others... aren't we just right back where we started?

SBABG
SBABG

There are some errors in this article.  First off, it IS a new tax.  It replaces an old tax - the use tax (actually, it's unclear whether or not it does), with a new one - a sales tax.

Most of the opposition from online retailers is not with the tax, but problems related to compliance, due process, the unfair exemption.

A tax that is so difficult to comply with, so complex and burdensome, that Congress has to exempt any business (in this case, businesses selling less than $1,000,000) from collecting and paying it is a bad tax and is bad policy.

Online retailers will be forced to collect and remit sales taxes for over 9,000 different taxing jurisdictions with differing tax rates and laws.  Online retailers will be subjected to audits by 50 different states even though they have no presence, voting rights or access to political representation in those states. Some online retailers will be forced to charge sales taxes while their competitors who are just a touch smaller in sales volume are exempt from the law because it’s considered too “burdensome” for them to comply.

in addition, t
he bill undermines States Sovereignty by giving states the ability to levy taxes beyond their own borders, creates a situation where there is taxation without representation - putting businesses into jurisdictions that can audit them while keeping those businesses outside representation in that jurisdiction, damages consumer privacy by forcing retailers to turn over customer data to state governments, hurts healthy tax competition between states, and faces legal issues regarding due process.


sreynolds
sreynolds

They aren't just selling junk. A lot of them are manufactures who used to wholesale to American companies, some of them selling quality products, who now go directly to eBay. Like the large chain stores, they are putting smaller sellers out of business. They can sell an item for 1.99 and free shipping on something we'd normally pay 9.99 for. Their government subsidizes their postage so it is extremely low in bulk. Some them have up to 11, 000 items listed at one time. Only Chinese are allowed to sell on Chinese eBay, but they are allowed to take over the North American ebay. Except for the antique/collectible/vintage and maybe vehicle categories, they'll have closed down American sellers in a couple of years.

sirkarl101
sirkarl101

@adamhairfield I agree wholeheartedly  If we allow the U.S government to widen their control of the internet.  They will soon control the content.  Besides.  Since when does big business pay their fair share of anything.. When 95% of Americans want something done and 5% get their way.  The country is obviously under control by the wealthy and influential.  We are no longer a democracy.  We will pay the taxes and big business will continue to reap the rewards on Wall Street which very few have the ability to participate in.  It is a new world people.  Wal-Mart, Banks, all insurance companies are our masters....

KaneTrain
KaneTrain

@IndependentThinker The fairness argument is a lie and a farece. This bill was written to give Amazon and Walmart a monoply on ecommerce. You are on the wrong side of this argument. There is noting "fair" about this bill. You've been deceived. :/

UWOTM8?
UWOTM8?

@IndependentThinker ... also... "It's fundamentally wrong for the government to impose different laws on different businesses that are engaged in the same marketplace."

It's the SAME EXACT law. You don't collect use taxes for jurisdictions where you don't have a nexus, do you? Neither do online retailers. You collect taxes for the sales to people you make in your own state, don't you? So do online retailers.

The "fairness" argument is a lie.

UWOTM8?
UWOTM8?

@IndependentThinker -- Pretty simple solution... up your online sales and sell to customers in other states. Those competitors online obviously have a nexus in some state, right? Well, your 0% sales tax (online) vs their X% sales tax should balance out the "unfairness".

chris_jacomet
chris_jacomet

@IndependentThinker  if you wish to not sell to people out of state,  you have that right,  remove yourself from on line and you have your situation you deserve, don t interfere with the lives of others who do not wish to enlarge a vile government any further

cajunliberty7
cajunliberty7

@waivethefive 

Absolutely.  You  have succinctly articulated what small businesspeople, even many brick and mortar businesspeople, have told me.

IndependentThinker
IndependentThinker

@citygirl The small businesses which are opposed are predominantly online ones. The majority of small brick and mortar businesses support this bill. I'm a small brick and mortar retailer, although I also do a significant amount of online sales, and I very much favor this legislation.

chris_jacomet
chris_jacomet

@Pacificltd fact of the matter is that it is unconstitutional, and as a result is never law,  no one need comply as only the federal government can regulate commerce,  if it goes to court,  judges hands are tied and cannot force the collection,  if people succumb to intimidation and don t fight it will become a precedent and the constitution then becomes void,  so education of the masses is important

IndependentThinker
IndependentThinker

@AztecEmperor I share your sentiment about excessive taxes and I advocate for lower taxes and lower government spending. However, I don't advocate for illegal tax evasion. We are talking about taxes which are already on the books but which more than 99% unpaid (ie, illegal tax evasion). Having retail businesses collect sales taxes from customers as they do for local brick and mortar transactions is the only realistic way of these taxes getting paid.

JoePadilla
JoePadilla

@AztecEmperor Small business isn't necessarily for or against it. They want equal treatment. If you tax their customers, you must tax Ebays.

MareeSzymanski
MareeSzymanski

@UJ I agree with you! Someone paid that jacka--- to write this garbage lies article. He's a real idiot to believe what he wrote!

IndependentThinker
IndependentThinker

@UJ I run a small retail business so by your standard I'm qualified to comment on the situation. This is absolutely the right legislation. Local brick and mortar stores have been greatly harmed by the current unequal application of sales tax collection laws and this legislation is a big step towards rectifying that. Countless small businesses and their employees have been hindered by the current situation. As a small retailer I don't want the government carving out special exemptions for some of my competitors.

IndependentThinker
IndependentThinker

@TractorUP1 Yes it is about small, local "Main Street" retailers. It just so happens that their interests on this issue line up with the big retailers. Why do you feel that you are entitled to a special exemption to transact sales in states where you don't reside? Yes, there are costs with complying with laws where a business transacts. I have costs that I don't enjoy for transacting business where I'm located and I'm not looking forward to taking on more compliance costs that this legislation will bring to my ecommerce business. However, I understand that there are costs and burdens associated with having the privilege of conducting sales to customers located in different states. I don't believe I'm entitled to special favors and neither should you.

IndependentThinker
IndependentThinker

@UFT When an online store is not required to add sales tax to the same transaction that a brick and mortar store is, that is most definitely and unfair pricing advantage. Many online stores don't charge for shipping so in those situations your argument falls apart. Shipping is just one cost that goes into delivering merchandise to customers. Yes, online stores have a higher cost in that area than b&m stores. However, online stores have lower rent and payroll costs than b&m stores. Each business has it's own strengths and weaknesses and the marketplace allows everyone to showcase them and let customers decide where to spend their money. I simply don't want government sales tax collection laws to be a deciding factor. Let business compete on their own merits and not government sanctioned ones.

MareeSzymanski
MareeSzymanski

@IndependentThinker @citygirl What is the name of your store? If I previously shopped with you I will NO longer shop with you when this new legislation of taxation takes place! I don't intend to have to spend more money. It isn't gonna happen! To compensate for the added taxes " I will definitely spend less" see how your business does when others adapt this same mentality as I. Ha ha see how much money you make after these decisons become reality.

UWOTM8?
UWOTM8?

@IndependentThinker @AztecEmperor Those unpaid taxes are between the customer and their tax municipality/city/county/state. An out of state business has zero moral obligation to act as a tax collector for that state. ZERO.

Online businesses collect taxes for their own state whenever one of their neighbors makes a purchase. As a resident of that state, you have that obligation to help with tax collection (arguable, but at least remotely sensible). This is like requiring a small e-business in Denmark to collect sales tax for a resident of Arizona. It's ludicrous.

cajunliberty7
cajunliberty7

@IndependentThinker @UJ 

Sell also to out of state customers, which businesspeople I know are doing.  They increased their purchases, lowered their costs per unit, increased their profits, streamlined their operations, and shortly after doing so, were making more profit through their on-line out of state sales than their local sales.  Some have considered closing down their local sales and not being "open" for the local public.

UWOTM8?
UWOTM8?

@IndependentThinker @UJ Small retail stores have been hurt by an outdated business model. Online stores cut out much of the distribution middlemen, offer a wider selection, and have fewer costs so they then offer at better prices. No amount of taxation is going to correct this.

What taxation (without representation) WILL DO however is put up new hurdles for those looking to start a business.

UWOTM8?
UWOTM8?

@IndependentThinker@TractorUP1 -- "However, I understand that there are costs and burdens associated with having the privilege of conducting sales to customers located in different states."

So do you also believe that main street retailers should collect information from their customers as to where the product will be used, charge that destination's taxes, and send it to the appropriate agency? Obviously, there are privileges of conducting sales to customers VISITING from other municipalities/cities/counties/states as well.

If you expect online businesses to be involuntary taxmen for thousands of jurisdictions, the only way to make it fair is to require the same of the offline mom-n-pop shops/big-box stores.