New DSLR lenses from Nikon
in [Digital Cameras]
|
Prev: Problem solved:
Next: ARGUS - DARPA's All-Seeing Eye
From: Peter on 11 Feb 2010 11:56 "tony cooper" <tony_cooper213(a)earthlink.net> wrote in message news:1298n5l0sgjvjrbr8rm580e0g2lqcd47gq(a)4ax.com... > > What you are referring to is not the rate of tax involved, but the > evasion of tax. If you have a boat in Florida (that is kept/used here > permanently), and don't register that boat in Florida, you are evading > tax. I was referring to the difficulty of enforcement. Similarly, if you purchase a camera on the net and don't pay the sales/use tax on the transaction you may very well be comitting criminal tax evasion. > > You are more likely to be busted by the Marine Patrol than you are the > tax authorities. Also, you are likely to reported by the marina > management. Don't know about marinas in your neck of hte woods, but here, the private ones did little or no reporting, as it waas not in their interest to do such reporting. As to the marine patrol, it depends on the use and registration of the vessel. Why would not e Coast Guard registration be sufficient as a vessel used n interstate commerce. For purposes of this discussion I am referring only to ordinary pleasure craft. There is a wholly different set of rules for commercial boats. > > If you are using your boat in Florida while visiting Florida, you can > do so for 90 days without registering it. Longer than that, you must > register it. > Suppose I take weekly trips to Bimini and stay there for a few days. Do I have an obligation to pay the use tax? >>As to cars? Are there no out of state cars in FL? > > Sure, but if you are visiting Florida you need not register your > automobile in Florida. If you move here, you do, and you will be > charged sales tax if the car was purchased less than six months prior > to your move, but you only pay the difference (if any) from what you > paid in the other state. You must register the auto within 10 days of > moving here if you (a) are employed in Florida, and/or (b) enroll a > child in a Florida school. You must also insure the auto with a > company licensed in Florida (most national companies are) and obtain a > Florida driver's license. > > The gray area is the snowbird who lives in Florida part of the year > and lives in another state the rest of the year. Usually, a retiree. > They can usually get away with not registering the car in Florida > unless they get a ticket or are reported by someone. If they are > stopped by the police for a traffic infraction, and either don't have > a Florida driver's license or Florida license plates, they may have to > prove in court that they are not residents of Florida. > > BTW, these are just Florida rules. Every state has a different set of > rules, and nothing above may pertain to other states. Absolutely true. -- Peter
From: Peter on 11 Feb 2010 12:07 "tony cooper" <tony_cooper213(a)earthlink.net> wrote in message news:jqa8n5150cgkug13kev134nhhp66u75ckh(a)4ax.com... > On Thu, 11 Feb 2010 11:03:46 -0500, "Peter" > <peternew(a)nospamoptonline.net> wrote: > >>"Pete Stavrakoglou" <ntotrr(a)optonline.net> wrote in message >>news:hl17f0$k6o$1(a)news.eternal-september.org... >> >>> A New York State resident is required to pay the difference in sales tax >>> to New York for any item purchased out-of-state. If I buy a camera from >>> a >>> reseller in another state online, they do not charge me the sales tax. >>> I >>> am required by law to pay New York the difference. >> >>You are required to make such a declaraton on your New York Income tax >>return. BTW some retailers such as Amazon, do collect the NY sales tax. > > The general rule is if the seller has a presence (store, outlet, > office) in the state, they must charge sales tax, where applicable, to > sales made to residents of that state. > > Ritz Camera gets around that by having their stores in Florida owned > by one corporation and their online sales entity owned by a different > corporation. > AFAIK Amazon has no presence in NY. Our tax authorities are proactively attempting to encourage online retailers to collect and turn over the sales tax. For several years there have been ongoing negotiations between the various States for an inter-state compact, regarding collection of sales taxes. There are lots of constitutional and business difficulties with such a compact. (most states have lots of problems being paid sales taxes collected by their resident businesses.) Though some inter-state compacts have been working well, at least in the income tax area. -- Peter
From: Peter on 11 Feb 2010 12:16 "Savageduck" <savageduck1@{REMOVESPAM}me.com> wrote in message news:201002110816031393-savageduck1(a)REMOVESPAMmecom... > On 2010-02-11 06:38:53 -0800, tony cooper <tony_cooper213(a)earthlink.net> > said: > >> On Thu, 11 Feb 2010 08:54:21 -0500, "Peter" >> <peternew(a)nospamoptonline.net> wrote: >> >>> "tony cooper" <tony_cooper213(a)earthlink.net> wrote in message >>> news:fqe4n5p6pcaracgq1mssg72d69on6epktu(a)4ax.com... >>>> On Tue, 9 Feb 2010 19:12:40 -0800, Savageduck >>>> <savageduck1@{REMOVESPAM}me.com> wrote: >>>> >>>>> I knew there was going to be a problem when I had lenders lined up >>>>> telling me my home, which I bought in 1993 for $125K was valued at >>>>> over >>>>> $400K and I should benefit from some of that equity. >>>> >>>> How you doing on Homeowner's Insurance? I've been with State Farm for >>>> the 28 years I've been in this house (and also with them on my >>>> previous homes). State Farm has announced a 15% increase for this >>>> next year (starting March 15, for me) and they are petitioning the >>>> legislature for considerably larger increases in the future. They are >>>> also trying to pull out of Florida because of hurricane losses. >>>> >>>> I've got bids from four other insurers, and all of them value my home >>>> at least double what I could sell it for. The rates are based on the >>>> replacement cost and not what the house would bring on the market. >>>> >>> >>> >>> Are they including land in replacement cost? >> >> No. It's clear on all the bids that the land is valued separately. I >> was amazed, in fact, that the land was valued as high as it is >> compared to what I paid for the lots on which the home sits. > > ...and there is the problem for those Californians and Carolina beach > house owners, who live in on risky property. When that hill side, or cliff > home with the million $$$ view slides into the ocean, or into the next > neighborhood, there is no property to rebuild on. Hence the high premiums > or lack of special coverage on those homes. > > In California you also have to deal with the Coastal Commission, which has > banned the construction or repair of protective sea walls and/or > buttresses for those cilff top homes, We have quite a few homes in the > Shell Beach & Pismo Beach areas, where the edge of the cliff is eroding at > a steady rate, eating up the real estate, and threatening and sometimes > destroying the homes. > > The rebuilding of those beach houses destroyed by hurricane beach erosion > back East is another issue which can leave you scratching your head. > Actually, my wallet. I resent subsidizing the lifestyle of these people. the rebuilding is done by the Army Corps of Engineers. then after the dunes are restored and the homes rebuilt, I am not even allowed to walk on the beach I paid for. O.I I can walk on the beach, I am just not allowed to park my car or bicycle anywhere near it, unless I am, or know a resident. I had to beg to get permission to stop and take pictures of an osprey nest. -- Peter
From: tony cooper on 11 Feb 2010 12:37 On Thu, 11 Feb 2010 12:07:11 -0500, "Peter" <peternew(a)nospamoptonline.net> wrote: >"tony cooper" <tony_cooper213(a)earthlink.net> wrote in message >news:jqa8n5150cgkug13kev134nhhp66u75ckh(a)4ax.com... >> On Thu, 11 Feb 2010 11:03:46 -0500, "Peter" >> <peternew(a)nospamoptonline.net> wrote: >> >>>"Pete Stavrakoglou" <ntotrr(a)optonline.net> wrote in message >>>news:hl17f0$k6o$1(a)news.eternal-september.org... >>> >>>> A New York State resident is required to pay the difference in sales tax >>>> to New York for any item purchased out-of-state. If I buy a camera from >>>> a >>>> reseller in another state online, they do not charge me the sales tax. >>>> I >>>> am required by law to pay New York the difference. >>> >>>You are required to make such a declaraton on your New York Income tax >>>return. BTW some retailers such as Amazon, do collect the NY sales tax. >> >> The general rule is if the seller has a presence (store, outlet, >> office) in the state, they must charge sales tax, where applicable, to >> sales made to residents of that state. >> >> Ritz Camera gets around that by having their stores in Florida owned >> by one corporation and their online sales entity owned by a different >> corporation. >> > > >AFAIK Amazon has no presence in NY. I know. I said "generally" because the usual situation where sales tax is collected by the seller is when the seller does have presence. The tax authorities in the states would like to see the exclusion of the requirement of presence, and are therefore pressing for *any* sales being delivered to their state subject to sales tax. They want the Ritz-type of evasion of tax collection eliminated as well as non-evasive tactics where the seller clearly has no presence. Businesses will fight this because it would require them to file in every state where something they sell has been purchased. That's a massive increase in paperwork for them. As the former owner (now retired) of a business that sold to customers in other states, I can personally attest that this would be a major PITA for the business. Each state with a sales tax has a different reporting system, a different set of sales-tax-exempt products, and a different rule for sales-tax-exempt customers. -- Tony Cooper - Orlando, Florida
From: Savageduck on 11 Feb 2010 12:40
On 2010-02-11 09:00:34 -0800, C J Campbell <christophercampbellremovethis(a)hotmail.com> said: > On 2010-02-11 05:57:43 -0800, "whisky-dave" <whisky-dave(a)final.front.ear> said: > >> >> "C J Campbell" <christophercampbellremovethis(a)hotmail.com> wrote in message >> news:2010020913044675249-christophercampbellremovethis(a)hotmailcom... >>> On 2010-02-09 11:36:55 -0800, Alfred Molon <alfred_molon(a)yahoo.com> said: >>> >>>> In article <edWdnTLZJMvSMezWnZ2dnUVZ_u6dnZ2d(a)westnet.com.au>, >>>> no(a)email.com says... >>>>> Who set the Euro pricing??? With the USD at 61% of the UKP that is just >>>>> crazy. >>>> >>>> Japanese and Americans seem to think that Europeans are stupid. >>> >>> Either that or their own tax-hungry governments think they are. America >>> has no VAT. >> >> So what are these taxes that USains have to pay ? > > The US has method of its own for milking the stupid. Why have a VAT, too? The problem in the US is sales tax is a State tax, and in some cases has County and/or city enhancements. If the Federal government should impose a VAT as it is implemented in the EU or UK, there would have to be major rewrites of every State tax code. Bringing a VAT into the mix, could well have the product sitting on the store shelf tagged with a Federal VAT, and a State sales tax added at checkout. Replacing State sales tax with a Federal VAT, would entail building another bureaucracy for assessing, collecting and distributing those revenues. ....and since VAT is a "value added tax" an imported item arriving a port of entry would have the taxed "added value" of the freight costs to move it from port of entry to point of distribution or sale. That would also apply to the cost of transport on domestic products. That could be considerable for some landlocked states. That is unless transport is given a VAT exemption -- Regards, Savageduck |