<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:wfw="http://wellformedweb.org/CommentAPI/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
	xmlns:slash="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/slash/"
	>

<channel>
	<title>retail tax law Archives - Beasley Direct and Online Marketing</title>
	<atom:link href="https://beasleydirect.com/tag/retail-tax-law/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link></link>
	<description></description>
	<lastBuildDate>Sat, 02 Feb 2019 00:04:00 +0000</lastBuildDate>
	<language>en-US</language>
	<sy:updatePeriod>
	hourly	</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>
	1	</sy:updateFrequency>
	

 
	<item>
		<title>South Dakota versus Wayfair &#8211; The Impact on Retailers by the US Supreme Court Decision</title>
		<link>https://beasleydirect.com/south-dakota-versus-wayfair-retailer-impact/</link>
					<comments>https://beasleydirect.com/south-dakota-versus-wayfair-retailer-impact/#respond</comments>
		
		<dc:creator><![CDATA[Jan Carroza]]></dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Tue, 18 Dec 2018 15:47:56 +0000</pubDate>
				<category><![CDATA[Retail]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Internet Taxes]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Retail law]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[retail tax law]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Retail taxes]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[SD v Wayfair]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[SD vs Wayfair]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[South Dakota versus Wayfair]]></category>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">https://beasleydirect.com/?p=10110</guid>

					<description><![CDATA[<p>South Dakota versus Wayfair explained. Nancy Manzano, Director in the Chief Tax Office of Vertex, Inc., recently discussed best practices for retailers doing business in states without a physical presence. And, the need to adapt tax collection, remittance, increased revenue and transaction documentation, additional state monthly tax returns and new processes. During the Internet Retailer’s [&#8230;]</p>
<p>The post <a href="https://beasleydirect.com/south-dakota-versus-wayfair-retailer-impact/">South Dakota versus Wayfair &#8211; The Impact on Retailers by the US Supreme Court Decision</a> appeared first on <a href="https://beasleydirect.com">Beasley Direct and Online Marketing</a>.</p>
]]></description>
										<content:encoded><![CDATA[<h2><font color="black"><strong>South Dakota versus Wayfair explained. </strong></font></h2>
<p><img fetchpriority="high" decoding="async" src="https://beasleydirect.com/wp-content/uploads/2018/12/Online-sales-tax-on-a-keyboard-and-money.jpg" alt="Online sales tax note on a keyboard with money nearby." width="500" height="333" class="aligncenter size-full wp-image-10123" srcset="https://beasleydirect.com/wp-content/uploads/2018/12/Online-sales-tax-on-a-keyboard-and-money.jpg 500w, https://beasleydirect.com/wp-content/uploads/2018/12/Online-sales-tax-on-a-keyboard-and-money-300x200.jpg 300w" sizes="(max-width: 500px) 100vw, 500px" />Nancy Manzano, Director in the Chief Tax Office of <a href="https://www.vertexinc.com/" rel="noopener" target="_blank">Vertex, Inc.</a>, recently discussed best practices for retailers doing business in states without a physical presence. And, the need to adapt tax collection, remittance, increased revenue and transaction documentation, additional state monthly tax returns and new processes.</p>
<p>During the <em>Internet Retailer’s</em> webinar on October 25, Manzano said the US Supreme Court ruling of June 21, 2018, redefines a <strong><em>virtual storefront as the same as a physical one</em></strong>. This ruling overturned the 1992 <em>Quill Corporation v. North Dakota</em> decision, which prevented states from requiring sales tax collection from businesses without a physical presence in the state. <em>South Dakota versus Wayfair</em> now allows states to continue to set economic thresholds for taxation of sales revenues from out-of-state retailers. Over 20 states currently require tax collection at various levels with various effective dates. South Dakota’s threshold, for instance, allows up to $100,000 in sales or 200 transactions. Many states started enforcing their requirements this Fall and some others will begin January 1, 2019.</p>
<h2><font color="black"><strong>What you should do</strong></font></h2>
<p><img decoding="async" src="https://beasleydirect.com/wp-content/uploads/2018/12/Collect-taxes.jpg" alt="South Dakota versus Wayfair recommendation to collect taxes." width="222" height="154" class="alignright size-full wp-image-10119" /><strong>Recommendation:</strong> The <em>Wayfair</em> decision also impacts U.S. territories, such as the U.S. Virgin Islands and the District of Columbia, so the recommendation is to <em><strong>collect taxes to the lowest jurisdictional level</strong></em>.</p>
<p><strong>Action:</strong> Keep up with the latest changes across states at <a href="https://www.vertexinc.com/south-dakota-v-wayfair-inc-knowledge-center" rel="noopener" target="_blank">https://www.vertexinc.com/south-dakota-v-wayfair-inc-knowledge-center</a>.</p>
<p>Previously, a physical presence was required to establish tax reporting, but the rapid growth of ecommerce and the lack of federal legislation prompted the South Dakota suit.</p>
<p><strong>Watch: </strong>In the meantime, many states have tax rules in effect that are related to cookies, click-through rates and affiliates. Expect those requirements to persist&mdash;as well as possible incentives and amnesty programs. Some states can’t enforce new rules due to pending litigation. Others will be proposing new bills.</p>
<h2><font color="black"><strong>How to stay in compliance with South Dakota versus Wayfair</strong></font></h2>
<p>Going forward, retailers must address calculation of aggregated sales, numbers of transactions, sales tax holidays and thresholds by state and other jurisdictions.  Here are a few suggestions to help you with your compliance.</p>
<ol>
<li>Consider possible product or customer exemptions.</li>
<li>Make sure to register in states with requirements.</li>
<li>File even if there are no sales until unregistration is complete.</li>
<li>Implement automation to accommodate registration and notifications.</li>
</ol>
<p>For help with your e-commerce site implementation and marketing, Beasley Direct and Online Marketing, Inc., can help! <a href="https://beasleydirect.com/contact-us/?consultation=Requested" rel="noopener" target="_blank">Get a free consultation</a>.</p>
<p>Find more case studies and white papers at <a href="https://beasleydirect.com/resources/white-papers" target="_blank">https://beasleydirect.com/resources/white-papers</a>.</p>
<p>By <a href="https://beasleydirect.com/the-beasley-team/" rel="noopener" target="_blank">Jan Carroza</a>, VP of Business Development and Account Management, Beasley Direct and Online Marketing, Inc.</p>
<p>The post <a href="https://beasleydirect.com/south-dakota-versus-wayfair-retailer-impact/">South Dakota versus Wayfair &#8211; The Impact on Retailers by the US Supreme Court Decision</a> appeared first on <a href="https://beasleydirect.com">Beasley Direct and Online Marketing</a>.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
					
					<wfw:commentRss>https://beasleydirect.com/south-dakota-versus-wayfair-retailer-impact/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
			<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		
		
			</item>
	</channel>
</rss>
