So sellers, who have no physical presence in a State, are now possibly subject to about 10,000 different local taxing regulations and associations that represent B&M stores are hailing it as a victory and claiming it finally levels the playing field and creates "fairness" for B&M stores.
So my question is this: Since this ruling basically says that a seller may be required to remit taxes on the buyers behalf, to the State where the buyer lives, in all fairness then, when I go on vacation in another State and buy anything that is taxed in my State, shouldn't the B&M store then have to ask for ID and then remit the tax to my State? Fairness should always be fair. If the whiney B&M stores have cried that they have to charge sales tax to all customers and remit that tax thereby putting them at a disadvantage, it seems to me that if online sellers are going to be subject to 10,000 different taxing bodies the B&M stores should be too. There is no difference in my case. It matters not where the item is purchased, the ruling is based solely upon where the buyer lives, so the same thing should be applied to all B&M purchases.
