OEM Online Honda Parts Sites

My 91 Civic is due for some new ignition wires. I started
checking OEM online Honda parts places that I have used in
the past. Shipping seems to have shot through the roof. From
reports here and some other shopping, I have become vaguely
aware that dealerships increasingly offer parts online at
discounted internet prices. So I googled for {online OEM
Honda parts [my state]}. The second hit yielded a dealership
five miles from me selling prices as competitive as I have
seen at Majestic and San Leandro Honda (long-time online
dealers), but of course without the shipping charge. I get
to pay sales tax, but I am obliged to do so anyway even with
online purchases.

"Elle" > wrote in message
...
> My 91 Civic is due for some new ignition wires. I started checking OEM
> online Honda parts places that I have used in the past. Shipping seems to
> have shot through the roof. From reports here and some other shopping, I
> have become vaguely aware that dealerships increasingly offer parts online
> at discounted internet prices. So I googled for {online OEM Honda parts
> [my state]}. The second hit yielded a dealership five miles from me
> selling prices as competitive as I have seen at Majestic and San Leandro
> Honda (long-time online dealers), but of course without the shipping
> charge. I get to pay sales tax, but I am obliged to do so anyway even with
> online purchases.

If you buy online from a supplier who does not have a "business nexus" in
your state, they can't collect sales tax from you any you're not "obliged"
to pay it

Inigo Lopez de Loyola wrote:
> "Elle" > wrote in message
> ...
>> Honda (long-time online dealers), but of course without the shipping
>> charge. I get to pay sales tax, but I am obliged to do so anyway even with
>> online purchases.
>
> If you buy online from a supplier who does not have a "business nexus" in
> your state, they can't collect sales tax from you any you're not "obliged"
> to pay it

Bzzzzzzzzzzt! Wrong answer! At least it is in all the states where I
have a passing knowledge of their revenue act and that's a couple dozen.

Just to make sure though, why don't you make a couple of large on-line
purchases from some firms that don't have the business presence or nexus
in your state? Then, tally up your receipts and call your state revenue
department and tell them you purchased goods in a foreign state for use
in your home state but didn't pay any taxes. See what they say about
that. I'm sure they'll be more than happy to send you the appropriate
reporting form.

Granted, it's an honor system in 99% of the cases but just because it's
an honor system does not mean you are not obliged to pay the tax.

OTOH, those that don't report it are probably at 101%<g>

Elle wrote:
> My 91 Civic is due for some new ignition wires. I started
> checking OEM online Honda parts places that I have used in
> the past. Shipping seems to have shot through the roof. From
> reports here and some other shopping, I have become vaguely
> aware that dealerships increasingly offer parts online at
> discounted internet prices. So I googled for {online OEM
> Honda parts [my state]}. The second hit yielded a dealership
> five miles from me selling prices as competitive as I have
> seen at Majestic and San Leandro Honda (long-time online
> dealers), but of course without the shipping charge. I get
> to pay sales tax, but I am obliged to do so anyway even with
> online purchases.

no you're not. if your supplier doesn't have a presence in your state,
your online purchases are federally exempt. simply factor that into
your purchase decision and if it makes sense, order from a supplier
outside your state and save the tax.

Say What? wrote:
> Inigo Lopez de Loyola wrote:
>> "Elle" > wrote in message
>> ...
>>> Honda (long-time online dealers), but of course without the shipping
>>> charge. I get to pay sales tax, but I am obliged to do so anyway even
>>> with online purchases.
>>
>> If you buy online from a supplier who does not have a "business nexus"
>> in your state, they can't collect sales tax from you any you're not
>> "obliged" to pay it
>
> Bzzzzzzzzzzt! Wrong answer! At least it is in all the states where I
> have a passing knowledge of their revenue act and that's a couple dozen.
>
> Just to make sure though, why don't you make a couple of large on-line
> purchases from some firms that don't have the business presence or nexus
> in your state? Then, tally up your receipts and call your state revenue
> department and tell them you purchased goods in a foreign state for use
> in your home state but didn't pay any taxes. See what they say about
> that. I'm sure they'll be more than happy to send you the appropriate
> reporting form.

not for online transactions - the supremes nixed that.
http://www.cbpp.org/12-13-99tax.htm



>
> Granted, it's an honor system in 99% of the cases but just because it's
> an honor system does not mean you are not obliged to pay the tax.
>
> OTOH, those that don't report it are probably at 101%<g>

jim beam wrote:
> Say What? wrote:

>> state for use in your home state but didn't pay any taxes. See what
>> they say about that. I'm sure they'll be more than happy to send you
>> the appropriate reporting form.
>
> not for online transactions - the supremes nixed that.
> http://www.cbpp.org/12-13-99tax.htm

Jim, please re-READ what you have quoted. It's pretty clear but you do
have to read and understand what their ruling was. I stand by my
original post.

Quote from your link, above:

Who Will Remit Sales Taxes on Internet and Mail-Order Sales?

The vitality of the sales tax as a critical state and local government
revenue source has been eroded in recent years by the rapid growth in
mail-order and Internet sales. Sales taxes are due on mail-order and
Internet purchases just as they are on purchases in stores.(1) But a
large majority of the sales taxes due on mail-order and Internet
purchases made by individual consumers and a significant share of the
taxes due on purchases made by businesses are effectively uncollectible.
States and localities are unable to collect these taxes because the
Supreme Court has prohibited states from requiring mail-order and
Internet merchants to charge the customer for the tax and remit it to
the customer's state unless the merchant has a physical presence or
"nexus" within the state's borders. This means that although an Internet
merchant like Amazon.com presumably has customers in every or nearly
every state, it can only be required to collect sales tax from customers
in its home state of Washington and a handful of other states in which
it has built warehouses or stationed personnel.

If the seller does not charge and remit the tax, laws require customers
of Internet and mail-order companies to pay the state and local sales
tax directly to their home states. However, compliance with this
self-remittance requirement is almost non-existent in the case of
individual consumers and is spotty in the case of businesses that make
purchases from Internet, mail-order, and other "remote" sellers. The
combination of weak tax compliance by purchasers and a sharply limited
tax collection obligation on the part of remote sellers is eroding the
sales tax base of state and local governments

Say What? wrote:
> jim beam wrote:
>> Say What? wrote:
>
>>> state for use in your home state but didn't pay any taxes. See what
>>> they say about that. I'm sure they'll be more than happy to send you
>>> the appropriate reporting form.
>>
>> not for online transactions - the supremes nixed that.
>> http://www.cbpp.org/12-13-99tax.htm
>
> Jim, please re-READ what you have quoted. It's pretty clear but you do
> have to read and understand what their ruling was. I stand by my
> original post.
>
> Quote from your link, above:
>
> Who Will Remit Sales Taxes on Internet and Mail-Order Sales?
>
> The vitality of the sales tax as a critical state and local government
> revenue source has been eroded in recent years by the rapid growth in
> mail-order and Internet sales. Sales taxes are due on mail-order and
> Internet purchases just as they are on purchases in stores.(1) But a
> large majority of the sales taxes due on mail-order and Internet
> purchases made by individual consumers and a significant share of the
> taxes due on purchases made by businesses are effectively uncollectible.
> States and localities are unable to collect these taxes because the
> Supreme Court has prohibited states from requiring mail-order and
> Internet merchants to charge the customer for the tax and remit it to
> the customer's state unless the merchant has a physical presence or
> "nexus" within the state's borders. This means that although an Internet
> merchant like Amazon.com presumably has customers in every or nearly
> every state, it can only be required to collect sales tax from customers
> in its home state of Washington and a handful of other states in which
> it has built warehouses or stationed personnel.
>
> If the seller does not charge and remit the tax, laws require customers
> of Internet and mail-order companies to pay the state and local sales
> tax directly to their home states. However, compliance with this
> self-remittance requirement is almost non-existent in the case of
> individual consumers and is spotty in the case of businesses that make
> purchases from Internet, mail-order, and other "remote" sellers. The
> combination of weak tax compliance by purchasers and a sharply limited
> tax collection obligation on the part of remote sellers is eroding the
> sales tax base of state and local governments
>

what part of:
"...because the Supreme Court has prohibited states from requiring
mail-order and Internet merchants to charge the customer for the tax and
remit it to the customer's state unless the merchant has a physical
presence or "nexus" within the state's borders" is unclear?

jim beam wrote:
> Say What? wrote:
>> jim beam wrote:
>>> Say What? wrote:
>>
>>>> state for use in your home state but didn't pay any taxes. See what
>>>> they say about that. I'm sure they'll be more than happy to send
>>>> you the appropriate reporting form.
>>>
>>> not for online transactions - the supremes nixed that.
>>> http://www.cbpp.org/12-13-99tax.htm
>>
>> Jim, please re-READ what you have quoted. It's pretty clear but you
>> do have to read and understand what their ruling was. I stand by my
>> original post.
>>
>> Quote from your link, above:
>>
>> Who Will Remit Sales Taxes on Internet and Mail-Order Sales?
>>
>> The vitality of the sales tax as a critical state and local government
>> revenue source has been eroded in recent years by the rapid growth in
>> mail-order and Internet sales. Sales taxes are due on mail-order and
>> Internet purchases just as they are on purchases in stores.(1) But a
>> large majority of the sales taxes due on mail-order and Internet
>> purchases made by individual consumers and a significant share of the
>> taxes due on purchases made by businesses are effectively
>> uncollectible. States and localities are unable to collect these taxes
>> because the Supreme Court has prohibited states from requiring
>> mail-order and Internet merchants to charge the customer for the tax
>> and remit it to the customer's state unless the merchant has a
>> physical presence or "nexus" within the state's borders. This means
>> that although an Internet merchant like Amazon.com presumably has
>> customers in every or nearly every state, it can only be required to
>> collect sales tax from customers in its home state of Washington and a
>> handful of other states in which it has built warehouses or stationed
>> personnel.
>>
>> If the seller does not charge and remit the tax, laws require
>> customers of Internet and mail-order companies to pay the state and
>> local sales tax directly to their home states. However, compliance
>> with this self-remittance requirement is almost non-existent in the
>> case of individual consumers and is spotty in the case of businesses
>> that make purchases from Internet, mail-order, and other "remote"
>> sellers. The combination of weak tax compliance by purchasers and a
>> sharply limited tax collection obligation on the part of remote
>> sellers is eroding the sales tax base of state and local governments
>>
>
> what part of:
> "...because the Supreme Court has prohibited states from requiring
> mail-order and Internet merchants to charge the customer for the tax and
> remit it to the customer's state unless the merchant has a physical
> presence or "nexus" within the state's borders" is unclear?

I saw it but kept on reading which, apparently, you did not.

What part of...

"Sales taxes are due on mail-order and Internet purchases just as they
are on purchases in stores."

and

"If the seller does not charge and remit the tax, laws require
customers of Internet and mail-order companies to pay the state and
local sales tax directly to their home states. However, compliance
with this self-remittance requirement is almost non-existent in the
case of individual consumers and is spotty in the case of businesses
that make purchases from Internet, mail-order, and other "remote"
sellers.." is unclear to you?

Remember, if you will, that the OP said that he had no obligation to pay
the tax himself. He is obliged to pay it. As you have pointed out, the
merchant selling to him is NOT required to collect it unless they have a
physical presence or nexus in his state. The synopsis of the USSC
decision also points out that the tax which is due is "effectively
uncollectable," I said as much in my post.

Say What? wrote:
> jim beam wrote:
>> Say What? wrote:
>>> jim beam wrote:
>>>> Say What? wrote:
>>>
>>>>> state for use in your home state but didn't pay any taxes. See
>>>>> what they say about that. I'm sure they'll be more than happy to
>>>>> send you the appropriate reporting form.
>>>>
>>>> not for online transactions - the supremes nixed that.
>>>> http://www.cbpp.org/12-13-99tax.htm
>>>
>>> Jim, please re-READ what you have quoted. It's pretty clear but you
>>> do have to read and understand what their ruling was. I stand by my
>>> original post.
>>>
>>> Quote from your link, above:
>>>
>>> Who Will Remit Sales Taxes on Internet and Mail-Order Sales?
>>>
>>> The vitality of the sales tax as a critical state and local
>>> government revenue source has been eroded in recent years by the
>>> rapid growth in mail-order and Internet sales. Sales taxes are due on
>>> mail-order and Internet purchases just as they are on purchases in
>>> stores.(1) But a large majority of the sales taxes due on mail-order
>>> and Internet purchases made by individual consumers and a significant
>>> share of the taxes due on purchases made by businesses are
>>> effectively uncollectible. States and localities are unable to
>>> collect these taxes because the Supreme Court has prohibited states
>>> from requiring mail-order and Internet merchants to charge the
>>> customer for the tax and remit it to the customer's state unless the
>>> merchant has a physical presence or "nexus" within the state's
>>> borders. This means that although an Internet merchant like
>>> Amazon.com presumably has customers in every or nearly every state,
>>> it can only be required to collect sales tax from customers in its
>>> home state of Washington and a handful of other states in which it
>>> has built warehouses or stationed personnel.
>>>
>>> If the seller does not charge and remit the tax, laws require
>>> customers of Internet and mail-order companies to pay the state and
>>> local sales tax directly to their home states. However, compliance
>>> with this self-remittance requirement is almost non-existent in the
>>> case of individual consumers and is spotty in the case of businesses
>>> that make purchases from Internet, mail-order, and other "remote"
>>> sellers. The combination of weak tax compliance by purchasers and a
>>> sharply limited tax collection obligation on the part of remote
>>> sellers is eroding the sales tax base of state and local governments
>>>
>>
>> what part of:
>> "...because the Supreme Court has prohibited states from requiring
>> mail-order and Internet merchants to charge the customer for the tax
>> and remit it to the customer's state unless the merchant has a
>> physical presence or "nexus" within the state's borders" is unclear?
>
> I saw it but kept on reading which, apparently, you did not.
>
> What part of...
>
> "Sales taxes are due on mail-order and Internet purchases just as they
> are on purchases in stores."
>
> and
>
> "If the seller does not charge and remit the tax, laws require
> customers of Internet and mail-order companies to pay the state and
> local sales tax directly to their home states. However, compliance
> with this self-remittance requirement is almost non-existent in the
> case of individual consumers and is spotty in the case of businesses
> that make purchases from Internet, mail-order, and other "remote"
> sellers.." is unclear to you?
>
> Remember, if you will, that the OP said that he had no obligation to pay
> the tax himself. He is obliged to pay it. As you have pointed out, the
> merchant selling to him is NOT required to collect it unless they have a
> physical presence or nexus in his state. The synopsis of the USSC
> decision also points out that the tax which is due is "effectively
> uncollectable," I said as much in my post.

in other words, you're arguing against yourself. well done.

"jim beam" wrote

>> Remember, if you will, that the OP said that he had no obligation to pay
>> the tax himself. He is obliged to pay it. As you have pointed out, the
>> merchant selling to him is NOT required to collect it unless they have a
>> physical presence or nexus in his state. The synopsis of the USSC
>> decision also points out that the tax which is due is "effectively
>> uncollectable," I said as much in my post.

> in other words, you're arguing against yourself. well done.

You'd make a good lawyer.

;-)