Talk:Direct Marketing Ass'n v. Brohl
 | This article follows the Wikipedia:Manual of Style/Legal. It uses the Bluebook legal referencing style. This citation style uses standardized abbreviations, such as "N.Y. Times" for The New York Times. Please review those standards before making style or formatting changes. Information on this referencing style may be obtained at: Cornell's Basic Legal Citation site. |
 | This article is rated Start-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | ||||||||||||||||||||
| |||||||||||||||||||||
Quill Corp. v. North Dakota and e-Commerce growth
editThe articles states:
This decision had allowed electronic business, including e-Commerce over the Internet, to grow greatly...
I'd be interested in learning the source of the claim that lack of taxes allowed businesses to grow [greatly]. Businesses just pass sales tax onto customers, so taxes do not affect a business in a meaningful way.
Businesses will take on a burden of collecting and reporting sales tax, but it is negligible. In South Dakota v. Wayfair, Inc. the US Supreme Court opined that plenty of software would pop-up to ease the burden of collecting and reporting once sales tax was required for out of state companies.
In fact, companies collecting sales tax that is reported quarterly could even use the money until it is paid to a revenue authority. That's like getting free 90-day loans.
I'm pretty sure these companies would have grown greatly regardless of tax status. Retailers like Amazon have continued its growth even since the 2018 ruling.