New every Two ripoff

"Proconsul" <nospam@nospam.com> wrote:

>
>"Steven M. Scharf" <scharf.steven@linkearth.net> wrote in message
>news:f2j7c.31865$%06.30131@newsread2.news.pas.earthlink.net...
>|
>| "Steven J Sobol" <sjsobol@JustThe.net> wrote in message
>| news:fZWdnaGf4eHUNcHdRVn-jg@lmi.net...
>| > SL <shel99@noway.com> wrote:
>| > > upgrade which would make the phone 0.00, except for the sales tax
>| > > based on the 399.00 cost (another ripoff)
>| >
>| > I don't think so. You *always* have to pay tax based on the pre-rebate
>| > price, and it doesn't matter what the item is. State taxation
>departments
>| > get pissy if merchants don't properly collect sales tax.
>|
>| The rip-off is not paying tax on the pre-rebate price, it's paying tax on
>| the MSRP of the handset. No other product has this requirement (that I am
>| aware of). Paying tax on a $400 on handset that you pay $100 for (and get
>| $100 rebate on later), is a scam. It's as if they would charge you tax on
>| the MSRP of a car that you paid $5000 under MSRP on.
>
>Don't blame Verizon for this practice......
>
>IF you won a 50,000 Mercedes in Vegas, you'd have to pay sales tax on the
>full amount - it's that way for everything. Tax is irrelevant when compared
>to what you paid under this "deal". You must pay the tax on MSRP even if
>Verizon gave you the phone for free.....
>
>Write your Congresscritter - apologize to Verizon for whacking them
>unfairly.....

You've mixed together a whole bunch of unrelated things. First of all,
if you win a car in Las Vegas, you will not be paying any sales tax.
You will (1) pay Federal and State income tax (in most states) and (2)
a tax EQUAL in the amount to the car sales tax when registering the
car, but it's not sales tax.

Second, US Congress has nothing to do with sales tax practices of
States.

 

Proconsul <nospam@nospam.com> wrote:

> Don't blame Verizon for this practice......
>
> IF you won a 50,000 Mercedes in Vegas, you'd have to pay sales tax on the
> full amount - it's that way for everything. Tax is irrelevant when compared
> to what you paid under this "deal". You must pay the tax on MSRP even if
> Verizon gave you the phone for free.....

If you win a 50,000-dollar car, you *also* have to tack the entire $50K onto
your 1040. (I think. I know that's why the California and Ohio lotteries
won't let you redeem instant tickets worth more than $599 - if they pay more
than $599 to an individual in any given year they are required to report the
payment to the IRS and that the winner must pay income tax on the amount
won.)

--
JustThe.net Internet & New Media Services, Apple Valley, CA PGP: 0xE3AE35ED
Steven J. Sobol, Geek In Charge / 888.480.4NET (4638) / sjsobol@JustThe.net
Domain Names, $9.95/yr, 24x7 service: http://DomainNames.JustThe.net/
"someone once called me a sofa, but i didn't feel compelled to rush out and buy
slip covers." -adam brower * Hiroshima '45, Chernobyl '86, Windows 98/2000/2003

 

"Proconsul" <nospam@nospam.com> wrote in message
news:Q%L7c.36$_U.16@lakeread05...
>
> "Steven M. Scharf" <scharf.steven@linkearth.net> wrote in message
> news:f2j7c.31865$%06.30131@newsread2.news.pas.earthlink.net...
> |
> | "Steven J Sobol" <sjsobol@JustThe.net> wrote in message
> | news:fZWdnaGf4eHUNcHdRVn-jg@lmi.net...
> | > SL <shel99@noway.com> wrote:
> | > > upgrade which would make the phone 0.00, except for the sales tax
> | > > based on the 399.00 cost (another ripoff)
> | >
> | > I don't think so. You *always* have to pay tax based on the pre-rebate
> | > price, and it doesn't matter what the item is. State taxation
> departments
> | > get pissy if merchants don't properly collect sales tax.
> |
> | The rip-off is not paying tax on the pre-rebate price, it's paying tax
on
> | the MSRP of the handset. No other product has this requirement (that I
am
> | aware of). Paying tax on a $400 on handset that you pay $100 for (and
get
> | $100 rebate on later), is a scam. It's as if they would charge you tax
on
> | the MSRP of a car that you paid $5000 under MSRP on.
>
> Don't blame Verizon for this practice......
>
> IF you won a 50,000 Mercedes in Vegas, you'd have to pay sales tax on the
> full amount - it's that way for everything. Tax is irrelevant when
compared
> to what you paid under this "deal". You must pay the tax on MSRP even if
> Verizon gave you the phone for free.....
>
> Write your Congresscritter - apologize to Verizon for whacking them
> unfairly.....
>
> PC
>
>

That is so stupid and silly. If you buy something at a store on sale you pay
tax on WHAT YOU PAY. I have absolutely positively never ever seen a sale
where you have to pay tax on the item for MORE than it sells for.

 

Steven J Sobol <sjsobol@justthe.net> wrote:

> If you win a 50,000-dollar car, you *also* have to tack the entire $50K onto
> your 1040. (I think. I know that's why the California and Ohio lotteries
> won't let you redeem instant tickets worth more than $599 - if they pay more
> than $599 to an individual in any given year they are required to report the
> payment to the IRS and that the winner must pay income tax on the amount
> won.)

Actually, thinking about it, I'm not sure that "also" is the right word,
although when you win prizes (in a casino, on a game show, in the state
lottery, etc.) you and the entity giving you the prize have to report winnings
of over $599 per year.

--
JustThe.net Internet & New Media Services, Apple Valley, CA PGP: 0xE3AE35ED
Steven J. Sobol, Geek In Charge / 888.480.4NET (4638) / sjsobol@JustThe.net
Domain Names, $9.95/yr, 24x7 service: http://DomainNames.JustThe.net/
"someone once called me a sofa, but i didn't feel compelled to rush out and buy
slip covers." -adam brower * Hiroshima '45, Chernobyl '86, Windows 98/2000/2003

 

"Andrew White" <nospamers@allowed.at.all.net> wrote in message
news:tr4v50tpu6i9sur9u2k5aoiok1qiknl7ru@4ax.com...
| "Proconsul" <nospam@nospam.com> wrote:
|
|| >"Steven M. Scharf" <scharf.steven@linkearth.net> wrote in message
| >news:f2j7c.31865$%06.30131@newsread2.news.pas.earthlink.net...
| >|
| >| "Steven J Sobol" <sjsobol@JustThe.net> wrote in message
| >| news:fZWdnaGf4eHUNcHdRVn-jg@lmi.net...
| >| > SL <shel99@noway.com> wrote:
| >| > > upgrade which would make the phone 0.00, except for the sales tax
| >| > > based on the 399.00 cost (another ripoff)
| >| >
| >| > I don't think so. You *always* have to pay tax based on the
pre-rebate
| >| > price, and it doesn't matter what the item is. State taxation
| >departments
| >| > get pissy if merchants don't properly collect sales tax.
| >|
| >| The rip-off is not paying tax on the pre-rebate price, it's paying tax
on
| >| the MSRP of the handset. No other product has this requirement (that I
am
| >| aware of). Paying tax on a $400 on handset that you pay $100 for (and
get
| >| $100 rebate on later), is a scam. It's as if they would charge you tax
on
| >| the MSRP of a car that you paid $5000 under MSRP on.
| >
| >Don't blame Verizon for this practice......
| >
| >IF you won a 50,000 Mercedes in Vegas, you'd have to pay sales tax on the
| >full amount - it's that way for everything. Tax is irrelevant when
compared
| >to what you paid under this "deal". You must pay the tax on MSRP even if
| >Verizon gave you the phone for free.....
| >
| >Write your Congresscritter - apologize to Verizon for whacking them
| >unfairly.....
|
| You've mixed together a whole bunch of unrelated things. First of all,
| if you win a car in Las Vegas, you will not be paying any sales tax.
| You will (1) pay Federal and State income tax (in most states) and (2)
| a tax EQUAL in the amount to the car sales tax when registering the
| car, but it's not sales tax.

Please - nit-picking isn't a good substitute for sound methods of
discussion. The guiding principle remains that you MUST pay tax on a "free"
phone or a "free" car.....it's not something to whack Verizon about. This
forum is cluttered with childish and idiotic complaints about
Verizon....this one was just too much!

| Second, US Congress has nothing to do with sales tax practices of
| States.

No, but it has everything to do with the U.S. Tax Code. I should have
included your State Representative. As you said yourself, these sorts of
taxes can be Federal, State or a mix of the two - and the principle remains
clear...it is NOT Verizon's fault if you have to pay tax on a phone you get
on a "deal".

Happy nit-picking.....

PC

 

"Steven J Sobol" <sjsobol@JustThe.net> wrote in message
news:sNWdnS8WGdC7PcLdRVn-sA@lmi.net...
| Proconsul <nospam@nospam.com> wrote:
|
| > Don't blame Verizon for this practice......
| >
| > IF you won a 50,000 Mercedes in Vegas, you'd have to pay sales tax on
the
| > full amount - it's that way for everything. Tax is irrelevant when
compared
| > to what you paid under this "deal". You must pay the tax on MSRP even if
| > Verizon gave you the phone for free.....
|
| If you win a 50,000-dollar car, you *also* have to tack the entire $50K
onto
| your 1040. (I think. I know that's why the California and Ohio lotteries
| won't let you redeem instant tickets worth more than $599 - if they pay
more
| than $599 to an individual in any given year they are required to report
the
| payment to the IRS and that the winner must pay income tax on the
amount
| won.)

You are correct - but the principle remains intact, i.e., the taxes paid for
a Verizon deal are NOT Verizon's fault.....

PC

 

"Steven J Sobol" <sjsobol@JustThe.net> wrote in message
news:9YOdnXtf0tXKK8LdRVn-ig@lmi.net...
| Steven J Sobol <sjsobol@justthe.net> wrote:
|
| > If you win a 50,000-dollar car, you *also* have to tack the entire $50K
onto
| > your 1040. (I think. I know that's why the California and Ohio lotteries
| > won't let you redeem instant tickets worth more than $599 - if they pay
more
| > than $599 to an individual in any given year they are required to report
the
| > payment to the IRS and that the winner must pay income tax on the
amount
| > won.)
|
| Actually, thinking about it, I'm not sure that "also" is the right word,
| although when you win prizes (in a casino, on a game show, in the state
| lottery, etc.) you and the entity giving you the prize have to report
winnings
| of over $599 per year.

Also correct......

PC

 

"Peter Pan" <Marcs1102NOSPAM@Hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:c3o8lo$29ude5$1@ID-190045.news.uni-berlin.de...
|
| "Proconsul" <nospam@nospam.com> wrote in message
| news:Q%L7c.36$_U.16@lakeread05...
| >
| > "Steven M. Scharf" <scharf.steven@linkearth.net> wrote in message
| > news:f2j7c.31865$%06.30131@newsread2.news.pas.earthlink.net...
| > |
| > | "Steven J Sobol" <sjsobol@JustThe.net> wrote in message
| > | news:fZWdnaGf4eHUNcHdRVn-jg@lmi.net...
| > | > SL <shel99@noway.com> wrote:
| > | > > upgrade which would make the phone 0.00, except for the sales tax
| > | > > based on the 399.00 cost (another ripoff)
| > | >
| > | > I don't think so. You *always* have to pay tax based on the
pre-rebate
| > | > price, and it doesn't matter what the item is. State taxation
| > departments
| > | > get pissy if merchants don't properly collect sales tax.
| > |
| > | The rip-off is not paying tax on the pre-rebate price, it's paying tax
| on
| > | the MSRP of the handset. No other product has this requirement (that I
| am
| > | aware of). Paying tax on a $400 on handset that you pay $100 for (and
| get
| > | $100 rebate on later), is a scam. It's as if they would charge you tax
| on
| > | the MSRP of a car that you paid $5000 under MSRP on.
| >
| > Don't blame Verizon for this practice......
| >
| > IF you won a 50,000 Mercedes in Vegas, you'd have to pay sales tax on
the
| > full amount - it's that way for everything. Tax is irrelevant when
| compared
| > to what you paid under this "deal". You must pay the tax on MSRP even if
| > Verizon gave you the phone for free.....
| >
| > Write your Congresscritter - apologize to Verizon for whacking them
| > unfairly.....
| >
| > PC
| >
| >
|
| That is so stupid and silly. If you buy something at a store on sale you
pay
| tax on WHAT YOU PAY. I have absolutely positively never ever seen a sale
| where you have to pay tax on the item for MORE than it sells for.

Be careful who/what you label silly and stupid - in this case, you are dead
bang wrong.....

What we were discussing has nothing whatsoever to do with a "sale" in a
retail store. Rebates and other "reductions" are routinely taxed at the full
amount in many venues....

PC

 

"Proconsul" <nospam@nospam.com> wrote in message
news:7RR7c.1881$_U.895@lakeread05...
>
> "Peter Pan" <Marcs1102NOSPAM@Hotmail.com> wrote in message
> news:c3o8lo$29ude5$1@ID-190045.news.uni-berlin.de...
> |
> | "Proconsul" <nospam@nospam.com> wrote in message
> | news:Q%L7c.36$_U.16@lakeread05...
> | >
> | > "Steven M. Scharf" <scharf.steven@linkearth.net> wrote in message
> | > news:f2j7c.31865$%06.30131@newsread2.news.pas.earthlink.net...
> | > |
> | > | "Steven J Sobol" <sjsobol@JustThe.net> wrote in message
> | > | news:fZWdnaGf4eHUNcHdRVn-jg@lmi.net...
> | > | > SL <shel99@noway.com> wrote:
> | > | > > upgrade which would make the phone 0.00, except for the sales
tax
> | > | > > based on the 399.00 cost (another ripoff)
> | > | >
> | > | > I don't think so. You *always* have to pay tax based on the
> pre-rebate
> | > | > price, and it doesn't matter what the item is. State taxation
> | > departments
> | > | > get pissy if merchants don't properly collect sales tax.
> | > |
> | > | The rip-off is not paying tax on the pre-rebate price, it's paying
tax
> | on
> | > | the MSRP of the handset. No other product has this requirement (that
I
> | am
> | > | aware of). Paying tax on a $400 on handset that you pay $100 for
(and
> | get
> | > | $100 rebate on later), is a scam. It's as if they would charge you
tax
> | on
> | > | the MSRP of a car that you paid $5000 under MSRP on.
> | >
> | > Don't blame Verizon for this practice......
> | >
> | > IF you won a 50,000 Mercedes in Vegas, you'd have to pay sales tax on
> the
> | > full amount - it's that way for everything. Tax is irrelevant when
> | compared
> | > to what you paid under this "deal". You must pay the tax on MSRP even
if
> | > Verizon gave you the phone for free.....
> | >
> | > Write your Congresscritter - apologize to Verizon for whacking them
> | > unfairly.....
> | >
> | > PC
> | >
> | >
> |
> | That is so stupid and silly. If you buy something at a store on sale you
> pay
> | tax on WHAT YOU PAY. I have absolutely positively never ever seen a sale
> | where you have to pay tax on the item for MORE than it sells for.
>
> Be careful who/what you label silly and stupid - in this case, you are
dead
> bang wrong.....
>
> What we were discussing has nothing whatsoever to do with a "sale" in a
> retail store. Rebates and other "reductions" are routinely taxed at the
full
> amount in many venues....
>
> PC
>
>

I suggest you go back and take an accounting class. You usually pay tax on
the amount paid at the time of purchase. If the rebate is included in the
retail price, you pay tax on the actual amount you pay, while there are
rebates that you can send in after the fact and get money back, you pay tax
on the full amount before rebate.

All I can say, is that if you are stupid and foolish enough to actually pay
MORE sales tax on an item you buy in a store on sale....

In case you haven't noticed, verizon stores are a retail store, (hint, they
are called retail outlets).

While they do give deals on phones, if you get a 1 or 2 year contract, guess
what, look at your bill, you are getting taxed every month for the life of
the contract. So you pay sales tax up front on the full amount, and then you
pay sales tax again every month.

I think we should organize a codicil to the tea party, and sink freighters
full of verizon phones in Boston harbor.

What happens in states like Alaska and New Hampshire that don't have sales
tax?

 

"Peter Pan" <Marcs1102NOSPAM@Hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:c3ots5$2auk18$1@ID-190045.news.uni-berlin.de...
|
| "Proconsul" <nospam@nospam.com> wrote in message
| news:7RR7c.1881$_U.895@lakeread05...
| >
| > "Peter Pan" <Marcs1102NOSPAM@Hotmail.com> wrote in message
| > news:c3o8lo$29ude5$1@ID-190045.news.uni-berlin.de...
| > |
| > | "Proconsul" <nospam@nospam.com> wrote in message
| > | news:Q%L7c.36$_U.16@lakeread05...
| > | >
| > | > "Steven M. Scharf" <scharf.steven@linkearth.net> wrote in message
| > | > news:f2j7c.31865$%06.30131@newsread2.news.pas.earthlink.net...
| > | > |
| > | > | "Steven J Sobol" <sjsobol@JustThe.net> wrote in message
| > | > | news:fZWdnaGf4eHUNcHdRVn-jg@lmi.net...
| > | > | > SL <shel99@noway.com> wrote:
| > | > | > > upgrade which would make the phone 0.00, except for the sales
| tax
| > | > | > > based on the 399.00 cost (another ripoff)
| > | > | >
| > | > | > I don't think so. You *always* have to pay tax based on the
| > pre-rebate
| > | > | > price, and it doesn't matter what the item is. State taxation
| > | > departments
| > | > | > get pissy if merchants don't properly collect sales tax.
| > | > |
| > | > | The rip-off is not paying tax on the pre-rebate price, it's paying
| tax
| > | on
| > | > | the MSRP of the handset. No other product has this requirement
(that
| I
| > | am
| > | > | aware of). Paying tax on a $400 on handset that you pay $100 for
| (and
| > | get
| > | > | $100 rebate on later), is a scam. It's as if they would charge you
| tax
| > | on
| > | > | the MSRP of a car that you paid $5000 under MSRP on.
| > | >
| > | > Don't blame Verizon for this practice......
| > | >
| > | > IF you won a 50,000 Mercedes in Vegas, you'd have to pay sales tax
on
| > the
| > | > full amount - it's that way for everything. Tax is irrelevant when
| > | compared
| > | > to what you paid under this "deal". You must pay the tax on MSRP
even
| if
| > | > Verizon gave you the phone for free.....
| > | >
| > | > Write your Congresscritter - apologize to Verizon for whacking them
| > | > unfairly.....
| > | >
| > | > PC
| > | >
| > | >
| > |
| > | That is so stupid and silly. If you buy something at a store on sale
you
| > pay
| > | tax on WHAT YOU PAY. I have absolutely positively never ever seen a
sale
| > | where you have to pay tax on the item for MORE than it sells for.
| >
| > Be careful who/what you label silly and stupid - in this case, you are
| dead
| > bang wrong.....
| >
| > What we were discussing has nothing whatsoever to do with a "sale" in a
| > retail store. Rebates and other "reductions" are routinely taxed at the
| full
| > amount in many venues....
| >
| > PC
| >
| >
|
| I suggest you go back and take an accounting class. You usually pay tax on
| the amount paid at the time of purchase. If the rebate is included in the
| retail price, you pay tax on the actual amount you pay, while there are
| rebates that you can send in after the fact and get money back, you pay
tax
| on the full amount before rebate.
|
| All I can say, is that if you are stupid and foolish enough to actually
pay
| MORE sales tax on an item you buy in a store on sale....
|
| In case you haven't noticed, verizon stores are a retail store, (hint,
they
| are called retail outlets).
|
| While they do give deals on phones, if you get a 1 or 2 year contract,
guess
| what, look at your bill, you are getting taxed every month for the life of
| the contract. So you pay sales tax up front on the full amount, and then
you
| pay sales tax again every month.
|
| I think we should organize a codicil to the tea party, and sink freighters
| full of verizon phones in Boston harbor.
|
| What happens in states like Alaska and New Hampshire that don't have sales
| tax?

It appears that your wire and harness are too tight, Peter Pan.... You
might also consider having your lithium dosage adjusted...

You just don't "get it". Taxes on MSRP are ROUTINELY charged and paid on
items like discounted phones Verizon sells....on "Prizes" won by any
means.....and, you may find one day, you'll pay taxes on things like a
company car over a certain price where it's "value" is considered to be
income.

As for Verizon, you pay tax on the PHONE when you buy it, deal or no deal.
You pay tax monthly on the service - apples and oranges.....!

Now, calm down and quit while you're behind. Verizon is simply following the
law - if you don't like the law, bitch to those who make the laws and leave
Verizon out of the discussion...

PC

 

"Proconsul" <nospam@nospam.com> wrote in message
news:JcT7c.2597$_U.1801@lakeread05...
<snip>
>
> It appears that your wire and harness are too tight, Peter Pan....
You
> might also consider having your lithium dosage adjusted...
>
> You just don't "get it". Taxes on MSRP are ROUTINELY charged and
paid on
> items like discounted phones Verizon sells....on "Prizes" won by any
> means.....and, you may find one day, you'll pay taxes on things like
a
> company car over a certain price where it's "value" is considered to
be
> income.
>
> As for Verizon, you pay tax on the PHONE when you buy it, deal or no
deal.
> You pay tax monthly on the service - apples and oranges.....!
>
> Now, calm down and quit while you're behind. Verizon is simply
following the
> law - if you don't like the law, bitch to those who make the laws
and leave
> Verizon out of the discussion...
>
> PC
>
>

First off in New York there is a tax on usage of a company car over a
certain amount. (The gas, repairs and tires and the like must be paid
by the company or Government office) it called a perk.

Secondly when you refer to Verizon having to tax for this and that, I
have a true story that I have just went through with Verizon
corporate.

The State of New York has a cellular telephone contract with Verizon
and in that contract it clearly is printed out that when we receive
service each agency and political sub division will fill out its name,
address, type of service and equipment it needs and its tax exempt
number. Please remember this is stated in the contract.

Now after years of service on 30 lines etc. (remember we have set
these accounts up per mutual contract provision above) we get a letter
in the mail that states " You have until such a date to submit the tax
exempt certificates and if we do not receive them by this date Verizon
is required by law to place you back on the tax lists"

I called the toll free number for this representative in the tax
compliance unit and she said Verizon is required to have that
information, yada yada yada. I explained we are the State of New York
and we don't pay State or Federal taxes per law. And that we would not
be complying with Verizons request since on page 8 of the NYS and
Verizon contract it clearly states our status.

She then mumbled something about Verizons lawyers, at this juncture I
told her to please have them contact us I am sure we would wipe the
floor with them since we regulate and tax them. And the law they are
quoting is NYS Tax code. Just wanted to let you know that just because
they say they have the right to do it does not actually mean they are
doing it right.

Oh had a nice call from a supervisor who stated to disregard the
letter and the account was all correct as it should. I did however
send a Adobe version of the contract via email to them and now they
have seen the light. Ha ha

Elector

 

Proconsul <nospam@nospam.com> wrote:

> No, but it has everything to do with the U.S. Tax Code. I should have
> included your State Representative. As you said yourself, these sorts of
> taxes can be Federal, State or a mix of the two - and the principle remains
> clear...it is NOT Verizon's fault if you have to pay tax on a phone you get
> on a "deal".

The US Tax Code regulates the collection of sales tax by the states?

--
JustThe.net Internet & New Media Services, Apple Valley, CA PGP: 0xE3AE35ED
Steven J. Sobol, Geek In Charge / 888.480.4NET (4638) / sjsobol@JustThe.net
Domain Names, $9.95/yr, 24x7 service: http://DomainNames.JustThe.net/
"someone once called me a sofa, but i didn't feel compelled to rush out and buy
slip covers." -adam brower * Hiroshima '45, Chernobyl '86, Windows 98/2000/2003

 

"Steven J Sobol" <sjsobol@JustThe.net> wrote in message
news:d_adnfvbs8oS7f3dRVn-uQ@lmi.net...
| Proconsul <nospam@nospam.com> wrote:
|
| > No, but it has everything to do with the U.S. Tax Code. I should have
| > included your State Representative. As you said yourself, these sorts of
| > taxes can be Federal, State or a mix of the two - and the principle
remains
| > clear...it is NOT Verizon's fault if you have to pay tax on a phone you
get
| > on a "deal".
|
| The US Tax Code regulates the collection of sales tax by the states?

No, it regulates paying income tax on "perks", etc., such as company cars,
"free" cars that you win, etc. I've already said that I should have
mentioned state legislators - you know exactly what the quoted words
mean....

The POINT was, and is, that Verizon isn't responsible or deserving of all
this vitriol for merely following the law.....

Anyone who doesn't like the law should work with their elected
representatives, both Federal AND State.....

Enough of this pointless ragging....already!

PC

 

>
> As for Verizon, you pay tax on the PHONE when you buy it, deal or no deal.
> You pay tax monthly on the service - apples and oranges.....!
>
> Now, calm down and quit while you're behind. Verizon is simply following
the
> law - if you don't like the law, bitch to those who make the laws and
leave
> Verizon out of the discussion...

He is right. VZW could fix this. If they didn't subsidize the
phones and charged full price for them they it would be clear
what you are paying sales tax on.

I think the situation is a bit more subtle and involved.
VZW (or any of the providers) has nothing to do with it and
certainly they would like nothing better than not to have to
charge you the full tax on subsidized phones.

I remember back when you used to get a free cell phone
when signing for service (truely free and no tax). Then there
was something about having to charge ($1) for it.

States generally levy sales tax on retail goods. No tax
on wholesale goods. In general something is wholesale if its
being bought to be resold. Retail is when its sold to the consumer.
This is generally determined by the buyer having some sort of
license. My friend is a general contractor and can buy stuff at
the the building supply store without paying tax. I buy stuff at
the same store but I do pay tax.

So I would guess the cellular providers are resellers for the
cell phones? Have Cellular phones been special cased? I could
imagine the states seeing that millions of dollars of retail product
was getting into consumer hands with no sales tax being paid to
the state and plugged the hole with special legislation. Is this what
happened?

You can go to a VZW store and simply purchase a phone without
a plan. You pay full price for it and you pay tax on the actual price
paid. You can get a subsidy on the phone if you sign a contract for
service. The service is *not* priced differently depending on whether
you get a phone (subsidized) or not. So the tax you pay on the price
of the service does not differ if you get a subsidized phone or not.
So I'm guessing that the argument is that if you get a subsidized phone
and don't pay tax on the full price the retail sales tax has been
circumvented. ??

-Quick

 

In article <WZl7c.32254$%06.32060@newsread2.news.pas.earthlink.net>,
Steven M. Scharf <scharf.steven@linkearth.net> wrote:
>Cellular phones are treated differently. The stores sell the phone with a
>discount off an MSRP, contingent upon activation; they never collect the
>actual amount of money of the MSRP and then get reimbursed later from the
>manufacturer.

This is position of the state of California, paraphrased from their
WEB site:

The product being sold is a combination of the phone plus service for some
period. The phone part is taxable, the service isn't. Your first couple
of monthly payments are actually paying off the difference between the
MSRP of the phone and the upfront price you paid for the phone. So you
really ARE paying (over several months) the full price of the phone,
and thus are responsible for sales tax on the MSRP.

A really creative interpretation.....