←back to thread

295 points AndrewDucker | 1 comments | | HN request time: 0s | source
Show context
WUMBOWUMBO ◴[] No.45044734[source]
Clueless human, but what stops a company from ignoring these laws from certain states? How is this enforceable if a company doesn't have any infrastructure within that state?
replies(5): >>45044771 #>>45044813 #>>45045074 #>>45045223 #>>45045523 #
VWWHFSfQ ◴[] No.45045074[source]
> How is this enforceable if a company doesn't have any infrastructure within that state?

It's a good question. Maybe something with interstate commerce laws?

replies(1): >>45045151 #
petcat ◴[] No.45045151[source]
There used to be the "Oregon sales tax loophole" where residents of neighboring states (Washington, California, Idaho) would make large purchases (car) just over the border in Oregon where there was no sales tax.

That loophole got closed once inter-state data sharing became possible and Oregon merchants were required to start collecting those out-of-state taxes at the point of sale.

replies(3): >>45045203 #>>45046040 #>>45048413 #
chrismcb ◴[] No.45045203[source]
That wasn't a loophole. It was just a bunch of people evading taxes.
replies(3): >>45045285 #>>45045431 #>>45045437 #
petcat ◴[] No.45045285[source]
> people evading taxes

Avoiding taxes. It's different. It was always perfectly legal to travel to another state to buy something expensive and bring it back home. No crimes were committed.

It was a loophole that you could buy in Oregon specifically to avoid $1,000s in sales taxes.

replies(4): >>45045339 #>>45045611 #>>45045732 #>>45046063 #
1. lotsofpulp ◴[] No.45046063{5}[source]
chrismcb is correct.

The situation petcat described is tax evasion (illegal, since use tax is due in lieu of paying sales tax at point of purchase, assuming item is brought back to home state).

Tax avoidance is simply minimizing tax liability, completely legal.