ADI vs. Internet Pricing

It's not a set of federal regulations. A US Supreme Court decision in Quill v. North Dakota established that states cannot force a company located outside their borders to collect sales taxes on their behalf unless the company has "nexus" (a physical presence) within the taxing state.

Technically, it only prohibits states from forcing out of state merchants to collect on their behalf. A number of states can require their citizens to report and pay sales tax on things bought over the Internet or otherwise. Enforcement is between the state and its citizens -- the merchant is under no obligation to assist the states in any way.

Exactly. The same is done by CT, FL and several others.

Although the "no sales tax advantage" clearly benefits online merchants like me, I disagree with you on this one, Bob. The states have every right to collect sales tax from their citizens. If their citizens wish otherwise they can vote in new legislators. Unless and until they do, they'll be legally obligated to pay their own sales taxes but online vendors like me are not required to assist them in doing so.

Heh, heh, heh... :^)

In California and I suspect many other states, you are required to pay a use tax on products purchased in other states/countries if the sales tax isn't collected by the seller. The onus being on the buyer to pay the tax.

Doug L

I agree. ADI is not interrested in small dealers, at least in San Diego. js

It's not just ADI. Everybody wants to skim the cream. The extreme examples of this are the manufacturers like DMP and Bosch, who won't even sell to dealers without a guaranteed level of purchases. Distributors do something similar with pricing tiers, it's just not quite so blatant.

- badenov