So I was looking for a Class III dealer to transfer a Silencer for me. He said that he has to charge tax for silencer, transfer fee and shipping! WTF is this, the guy sounded nice good transfer fee, but I refuse to pay tax on something I didn't buy in state and Im already paying 200.00 in tax. I don't know if it was a way to push me to silencer shop where he's apart of there new system.

I could see paying tax on the 50.00 and I guess shipping but the rest is a negative. I'm pissed now I'll look for another dealer

Keep shopping.

Just remember a lot of Out-of-State stores will be required to charge MI sales tax starting in October.

Thanks Snyder!

http://www.freep.com/story/news/local/michigan/2015/01/15/michigan-internet-sales-tax/21818805/

The beauty of the free market system is that you can shop around. Just remember that the State feels they are owed the tax. Do you really want to deal with the potential hassle of tax evasion charges?

This is the letter driving the issue...

Virtually every state that collects sales tax is trying to collect from mail orders, phone orders and internet orders. The US Constitution prohibits states from collecting taxes on merchandise that cross their borders, but that isn't stopping the state treasuries from trying.

Some of this can be blamed on some in business community that have argued that out-of-state vendors have an unfair advantage. They've used the "brick and mortar" argument that they own a building inside the state as if the out-of-state vendors somehow exist in thin air. What they really argue for is an unfair business advantage. Every business has the right and the ability to match any deal listed on the web.

They simply don't want to compete. I would be happy to buy any item locally if the business community would match legitimate internet sites for prices. The taxes I would pay in state would be offset by the shipping costs I would avoid.

Government, at every level, is in a perpetual search for new revenue streams. Especially if it doesn't require approval by the voting public. The state, which happens to be Michigan in our circumstance, is simple interpreting existing law to include mail order, internet sales and phone orders. The Supreme Court will have to address this issue, but someone will have to have the financial balls to take it on. The potential costs to every state involved in this pursuit could be devastating, especially if restitution of illegally obtained sales taxes is ordered.

I would ask anyone reading this post to reference their copy of the US Constitution. It makes perfectly clear on two separate occasions that states are banned from collecting taxes on goods crossing their borders.

Thanks for the background.

Can you point to your references in the Constitution?  I'd be curious to show it to a couple tax lawyers I know.

I have my transfers done by a CPA that also has an FFL, the state is requiring that the tax be charged.  Any business not charging the tax is risking the rath of the state.

Article 1, Section 9. ..................No Tax or Duty shall be laid Articles exported from any state.

.......................No Preference shall be given by any Regulation to the Ports of one State over those of another: nor shall Vessels bound to, or from, one State, be obliged to enter, clear, or pay Duties in another state.

Article 1, Section 10...................No State shall, without the Consent of Congress, lay any Imposts or Duties on Imports or Exports, except what may be absolutely necessary for executing it's inspection Laws: and the net Produce of all Duties and Imposts, laid by any State on Imports or Exports, shall be for the use of the Treasury of the United States; and all such Laws shall be subject to the Revision and Controul (sic) of the Congress.

*These sections are part of the Constitution commonly referred to the "Interstate Commerce Clause". It bans states from engaging in economic warfare with each other. It bans protectionism at the borders of each state. While the language is archaic the intent is not. NO STATE HAS THE RIGHT TO TAX GOODS CROSSING THEIR BORDERS FROM ANOTHER STATE! If a state has inspection laws in place they can recover the costs, however, those monies belong to the Treasury of the United States if they do.

Since the vessels that pass through each State nowadays amount to USPS semi-tractors, UPS and FedEx trucks, collecting a tax from the citizen receiving those goods is still a violation of the principles enshrined in this Document.

I hope this helps.

So if this is unconstitutional, why aren't we challenging it?

"We" don't have the financial backing that would be needed to challenge this law. The courts may decide that the tax on internet sales is a violation of the interstate commerce clause, but may or may not require states to reimburse the tax payers for the illegal taking.

A law firm would have to tackle this hoping to receive a healthy percentage of any award. They also risk doing all of the work to get nothing in return. Nothing if they lose, nothing if the courts refuse to award a back pay settlement.

The amount of money at stake is surely enough incentive for an enterprising young firm.  

I'm no constitutional attorney, but I suspect sales taxes and tarifs/duties are different animals in the eyes of the law. If a state is taxing on the basis of sales that would be different than taxing on terms of imports or exports of goods.

Not really. Up until the computer age all states recognized mail and phone orders as not taxable. Now that the world is at out finger tips they're changing their minds.

The volume of increased economic activity that the web generates has them licking their chops.