Best regards,
mam98031 • Volunteer Community Member • Buyer/Seller since 1999
I saw this post on the M2M board ...
I agree 110% that "used" items, collectibles, antiques, etc ... meaning any thing that isn't "current and new" should NOT be subject to sales tax. The sales tax was paid at the original point of purchase (except in Delaware) so the state got their cut then ... charging tax again on these items is at a minimum Double Taxation ... time to throw something other then Tea into the Boston Harbor ... can I get an "Amen?"
@Anonymous wrote:
@luckythewinner wrote:
@Anonymous wrote:
And just because someone put it on paper doesn't mean I'm obligated to follow it. The whole meaning around the cause of celebration today and the very essence of our American identity is rebelling against unjust "laws"; especially those that steal from the average citizen to give to the degenerate dregs and the corrupt elite.ROTFL.
Are you seriously equating our forefathers risking their lives in the revolutionary war with your campaign against "unjust" sales taxes on used trinkets?
Abso-**bleep**-lutelty! Learn your history. The 12 years leading up to the first shots of the Rev War in April of 1775 were rife with the colonists doing exactly what some are engaging in now; civil disobedience and rebellion against unjust laws. Just a refresher in case you weren't paying attention during 6th-grade history class, a very elementary example is the Boston Tea Party was in response to an increase in tax on tea; not a necessity but rather a luxury item item at the time. They pleaded, begged, appealed, attempted to work within a corrupt system until the only option was force of arms. So yes, I am 100% equating the current times to the 1760's and our Founders plight as they did everything in their power to avoid a shooting match.. And thank God they did, or this conversation would never have even been possible. So you can ROTFL all you want, but know you have the freedom to do so because others gave their lives to make it possible for you to mock their ideals today.
And for what it's worth, I served and once swore an oath and wrote a blank check to protect the Constitution against all enemies foreign and domestic. How about you?
I am standing, applauding and saluting ... absolutely one of the best posts I've ever read. Worthy of a repeat AND in red white and blue ... We have freedom of speech, can discuss and voice our opinions and yes, even disagree with respect with others here ... can't do that in some parts of the world, no you can't. Taxation in many cases has been corrupted pure and simple. And yes, I do not like having tax charged multiple times on an item or transaction for said item (for those who are splitting hairs on this point). Malls and stores are closing across the country ... states are losing their retail sales tax from those venues ... so now they are after the multi-billion dollar online sales industry to recuperate those losses ... okay, I get that and okay go ahead and tax NEW items but let the vintage, antique, collectibles alone that have already had the tax paid on them ...
@luckythewinner wrote:
@mr_lincoln wrote:Semantics ... the Superman Socks that sold at Ben Franklin's when they were new in 1979 were taxed then and if resold today on eBay would be taxed again ... I think you and some others know what I am talking about ... the item is taxed twice in this example and I don't agree with it ...
What you are calling "semantics" is an explanation of the fundamental concept behind a sales tax.
If there are 100 transactions involving the same item, each of those 100 transactions is taxed 1 time.
The fact that you don't agree that there is a distinction between an object and an activity does not alter the law.
Sorry for the delay in responding ... I missed your reply ... still don't agree and you are missing the point because without the item there is no transaction in the case of this thread ... in your "100" example its the same item and should be taxed the first time it is sold retail not the other 99 times is it sold in a transaction. I respect that your opinion is different but again, don't agree and I respect the fact that you do not agree with me on this thread's topic ... just remember its a discussion, all business and nothing personal ...
Not a soul on this thread questioned you about being a vet or in any way said there was anything wrong with being a vet. In fact it was quite the opposite. So thank you for your service and I hope you can show a little respect to the others here too.
