Is it sinful to buy things through the mail in order to avoid sales tax?

[melensdad]

OK, so no state has the authority to levy taxes against the citizens of a different state for out of state transactions.

I’m a citizen of Kansas, and they want me to pay a use tax on something I buy from Land’s End or Amazon located out of my state–an internet sale. Would the same thing apply if I travel to New Jersey or Michigan or California and buy things in those states and bring them back? Why would the KS use tax apply only to items I buy on-line or by catalog, but not to things I buy in person? Each of those transactions could be occurring in the exact same state.

If I’m there in person, no use tax, if I’m there by computer, there’s a use tax.

First off, I am not an expert on the specifics of Kansas tax laws. But it is very possible that the state respects the sales tax of other states when you make an in-person purchase. But if you purchase by mail-order, catalog, internet, telephone then you have not paid any tax at all.

Consequently your example is one where you are willing to drive somewhere and pay tax, but you are not willing to pay the same tax when you order it by phone? Seems to me that is somewhat hypocritical and that may be how your homes state views things. Then again, your home state may require you to pay tax on ALL out of state purchases no matter how you buy them. And I know of at least some instances where states require a “differential” to be paid whereby you pay the HIGHER tax rate of the two states. So if you paid 4% at the remote state and your state has a 5% tax then you would be liable for the 1% differential. Again each state has different laws and I am not an expert on the specifics of your state.

I can tell you that several states have begun sending tax bills to people who have purchased goods across state lines. Californina and Illiniois are two that come to mind. Both states used supeona powers to attain the records of some retailers who were advertising “tax free” sales and both states sent bills to every consumer that was on the customer list of those companies for approximately 2 years worth of purchases. I believe that items like cigarettes, lawn tractors, furniture and other goods were involved.

DISCLAIMER: I am not an IRS official. I am not a certified accountant. However I have been used as an “expert witness” in federal trials involving multi-national corporations and have testified as an “expert witness” on cross-border tax issues, excise tax issues, and issues of bootlegging in multiple states and cities. I have testified at the request of Senators, Representatives and also at the request of paid lobbiests on this issue.​

Please don’t misunderstand me,** I am not defending the tax law**, just explaining where many people are wrong. I don’t have to agree with it to know the facts. People who “justify” cheating the revenue department are doing nothing other than lying to themselves about what is clearly wrong. Again, the original poster asked if it a sin to INTENTIONALLY evade the tax laws. Many folks here are justifying evasion by applying unlawful actions and logic.

I have a real problem answering the original question though. The premise is that these and all other taxes are for the benefit of society. The bible says we are to tithe 10%. ** I pay a lot more than 10% in taxes.** Our politians waste most everything I pay in taxes and they always want more. So why should I give them amounts I believe they are going to waste, and not going to use properly for the benefit of those that the “premise” of taxes say it was meant for?

Using this logic, then why should you agree to pay any tax at all if you tithe 10%?

You seem to feel that your entire obilgation to society is 10%.

Or do I misunderstand you?

 

[JimG]

When shopping in a different state, I don’t even think about taxes–I just pay whatever they charge. It would never occur to me to try to pay the tax again when I return home. This could be a nightmare in metro areas like Kansas City which straddles the state line.

My neighbor who is retired military can (and does!) simply drive to the Air Force base located right here in the city, do his grocery shopping at the base exchange and pay no sales tax at all. Is he thereby guilty of evading sales taxes by not shopping at the local grocery stores?

And when I was employed by the federal govt, we had a small retail outlet on site which charged no sales tax. Would shopping there also constitute tax evasion?

 

[Scott_Lafrance]

In the Apologist’s forum today, Michelle Arnold answered a question on the possible sinfulness of avoiding sales tax by saying: “Deliberately choosing to avoid paying legitimate expenses is a form of dishonesty and stealing, petty though the expense might be.” The question involved a food order placed as take-out (tax exempt) but intended to be eaten at the restaurant (which would have been taxed).

The law today exempts most interstate purchases from sales tax unless the business has a presence in the recipient’s state. So, I can go to the local Barnes & Noble and buy a book for full list price and pay a sales tax on it, or I can order it from Amazon for maybe 1/3 off, and pay no sales tax to boot. I would never have thought there was a moral problem with that, but now I wonder . . . .

There is absolutely no moral compunction forbidding you from being frugal with your resources. We are required to do it. As long as what you do is LEGAL, then its ay-okay.

 

[ChinaDad]

Scott_Lafrance:
I LOVE the “Sola Scriptura Problem” error!!

I say we through of our money up into the air, and what the government wants they keep.

Seriously, maybe it’s just me, but when we’re talking about taxes and sin, I don’t quite see what the two have to do with one another. The government does not govern my sin, and they do not have any jurisdiction as it relates to my sin. If I don’t pay the taxes the government says I should, it may be illegal, and it may be immoral in the realm of sociey, but not paying taxes I don’t in any way, shape, or form believe is a sin.

“Give to God what is God’s, and give to Ceasar what is Ceaser’s.” Have I missed something?

 

[melensdad]

My neighbor who is retired military can (and does!) simply drive to the Air Force base located right here in the city, do his grocery shopping at the base exchange and pay no sales tax at all. Is he thereby guilty of evading sales taxes by not shopping at the local grocery stores?

States often exempt military & ex-military from some taxes, it is not evading if the state allows it.

And when I was employed by the federal govt, we had a small retail outlet on site which charged no sales tax. Would shopping there also constitute tax evasion?

Ditto above.

Again, the state has the right to tax what & who it wishes, it also has a similar right to offer some courtesy exemptions to specific classes of people (federal employees, military, legislators, etc).

You keep arguing apples-vs-oranges. The law is still the same. You are required by law to pay the tax your state requires you to pay. Just because one person in your state may be legally exempted for cause does not mean that you are exempted.

ChinaDad:

Seriously, maybe it’s just me, but when we’re talking about taxes and sin, I don’t quite see what the two have to do with one another. . .

No it is not just you. Many people don’t understand the tax laws or even the concept. I would suspect the “sin” part comes in when you willfully and intentionally do not pay a legal tax. That would be akin to stealing from the government.

“Give to God what is God’s, and give to Ceasar what is Ceaser’s.” Have I missed something?

I think so. There is noting inherantly immoral about a “sales” tax or a “use” tax, both are legal taxes in virtually every state. Therefore if you choose to evade the tax willfully then you are obviously not giving to Caesar what is Caesar’s. In fact you are clearly stating you will not give to Caesar what is rightfully (legally/morally) his.

SEMI-DISCLAIMER: I don’t pretend to agree with tax laws that I explain. I just explain them. I probably should point out that when I am asked to testify on tax issues, I typically explain to the legislators how their tax will NOT bring in the revenue they expect, how it will be willfully thwarted by tax payers, and where/how the taxpayers will spend their money to evade the taxes. I see what many here are saying, it is, however, illegal to do what many here suggest.​

 

[Transformer]

You pay taxes (‘use’ or ‘sales’) to your home state, not to the out of state mail-order or internet company. Your home state is the one the levies the tax, it is the entity with the taxing authority on internet sales. Consequently your argument about owing $0.00 tax dollars is legally wrong. Very clearly legally wrong.

Please understand that the USA is a republic of individual states in the eyes of the federal law. Each state has the authority and the right to levy its own taxes and set its own requirements. Similarly, no state has the authority to levy taxes against citizens of a different state when the sales transactions are occurring out of state (internet sales). So N.H. tax laws only affect N.H. residents.

Your argument is simply trying to justify a wrongful action. You are using illogical statements and you are misinterpreting existing LEGAL tax laws.

Oh no; my post must not have been clear. No, I meant for my example to be a New Hampshire citizen buying online, or a citizen of some ficticious state which doesn’t collect a use tax buying online, not a citizen of Ohio or another state buying online from New Hampshire. If what you say about use and sales tax is totally correct, then you’re certainly right; an Ohioan buying from New Hampshire online is still legally and morally obligated to pay.

I meant to assert that if a Catholic’s home state does not require a use tax or a tax of any kind on online purchases, then it would not be immoral for that Catholic to shop online specifically to avoid paying taxes on the item bought. Would you agree with that?

 

[melensdad]

Transformer. . . I misunderstood your earlier post. I understand what you are writing now. It is probably my fault because I have looked at so many of these posts I may have assumed too much.

That said, I think you and I are in total agreement about the laws and the morality of paying the tax.

I meant to assert that if a Catholic’s home state does not require a use tax or a tax of any kind on online purchases, then it would not be immoral for that Catholic to shop online specifically to avoid paying taxes on the item bought.

Realize that very few states, I know of New Hampshire and from posts here probably Oregon, do not require the payment of sales/use taxes. So for the residents of the other 48, they would be due on internet/catalog/mail-order/etc purchases. Even if someone says it is “tax free” it really is not tax free to the folks in the 48 states we are talking about because the “use” tax would apply.

People get mixed up because of the confusion between Federal and State laws.

 

[rlg94086]

Jim, I believe that almost everyone is UNINTENTIONALLY evading taxes. I don’t believe that all are engaging in sin. For example if you are not intentionally buying to evade taxes, or if you inadvertantly don’t pay all of the ‘use’ tax then I would suggest that is not a sin.

May I add, that I feel great animosity toward you for having brought my error to light. I would have survived just fine in my ignorance.

BTW…now, I will have to physically avoid buying non-taxed items online or from Oregon. I hate paperwork! Tracking what I bought tax-free is really a pain in the behind.

 

[BobP123]

BTW…now, I will have to physically avoid buying non-taxed items online or from Oregon. I hate paperwork! Tracking what I bought tax-free is really a pain in the behind.

Wouldn’t it be easier just to vote for those that promise to raise our taxes upfront? That way we’d feel so much better.

 

[melensdad]

May I add, that I feel great animosity toward you . . .

In my first post in this thread I did point out that I can sometimes be a blunt jerk . . . I guess I bring out the best in people when I act that way

 

[ChinaDad]

Wouldn’t it be easier just to vote for those that promise to raise our taxes upfront? That way we’d feel so much better.

 

[rlg94086]

In my first post in this thread I did point out that I can sometimes be a blunt jerk . . . I guess I bring out the best in people when I act that way

Hey! You left out my smilies…I don’t really feel animosity toward you. Although, I still would have been happier in my ignorance.

 

[RobHom]

Yes, NYS has that also (what ticks me is that they say that if you answer no in consecutive years, you up your chances of an audit … gee, sorry–I really DON’T shop on-line … now how am I supposed to prove a negative?)

Thats an easy one…or should be If one has nothing to hide, and since pretty much all on line purchasing is done via credit card, simply drop 12 months worth of credit card statements for each credit card you have on the auditor’s desk, smile real big and say: Knock yourself out. Probably be done in two minutes or less.

 

[RobHom]

But you have to define what really belongs to Ceasar in the first place. Supposedly in capitalist countries, property belongs to the individuals and not government taxing bodies. Yet in the U.S. one is taxed on his property by the local governments and it is taken away from him if he fails to pay the taxes. Has one have the freedom NOT to pay his tax? I don’t think so. Thus it doesn’t become a moral issue as there is no free will involved, but I’m sure to get some disagreement here.

Yes, the property is owned by the individual, however the taxes are collected to pay for the use of the infrastructure (supposedly) and since it is a given that taxes are obligatory through the law and well noted on “closing statements”…the “freedom” not to pay taxes is obviously not real. Ahhh, here is the rub…generally speaking I agree with you that its not a moral issue, but that it could become one is: One sets out with the intent to not pay taxes, or makes significant effort to have property “artificially devalued” to knowingly and wrongfully reduce the taxes…or schemes to evade taxes altogether.

 

[melensdad]

generally speaking I agree with you that its not a moral issue, but that it could become one is: One sets out with the intent to not pay taxes, or makes significant effort to have property “artificially devalued” to knowingly and wrongfully reduce the taxes…or schemes to evade taxes altogether.

Very well said. The INTENT is the issue.

rlg94086:

Although, I still would have been happier in my ignorance.

Sad fact is we all probably would be much happier if I had kept my mouth closed and not pointed out the laws