Delcampe Is Officially Run By Morons

This may be a situation where Delcampe, being based in Belgium, did not believe that the Supreme Court ruling would apply to them since they are outside the USA (and perhaps even their legal advisors in Belgium felt the same way) and now push has come to shove with certain states being adamant about it, and so Delcampe pull the plug until they either figure out a solution or decide that the market in the USA is not worth the bureaucratic oversight. Delcampe's main market is Europe, and in the end it may decide that USA market isn't worth the cost.

In the end this whole issue, if pushed on enough retailers outside the USA, could very well end up at the World Trade Organization to be reviewed, because it is creating a whole new set of potential barriers to business between the USA and other member states. I really don't believe the Supreme Court meant to allow states to tax international commerce in this way, but since the ruling did not set limits the states have run with the ball to get the most they can.

That is questionable but may be the issue. This is a typical American way of looking at things. I do not see how a US buyer ordering stamps from Stanley Gibbons in London or consigning a lot for auction by a British auction house held in Great Britain constitutes a transaction 'occurring' in the USA. Belgium has never applied to become part of the USA. With Delcampe being based in Belgium and the web not having a physical location, there is a good argument the transaction takes place in Belgium or the EU, especially if the servers of Delcampe are located there.

If I understand correctly, they have something like 30+ staff. And I doubt they employ someone with knowledge of US state fiscal legislation. Secondly, this might involve having to exchange personal details of sellers and buyers. If one of them is a EU citizen, it, absolutely, is forbidden if not covered by a mutual tax treaty. And most European tax laws date from before the invention of the stone tablets. It is unlikely such mutual treaties will cover internet sales. A lawyer might tell you if it would be allowed if covered by a treaty. I, strongly, doubt it.

This: https://simplyvat.com/us-sales-tax-basics/

Again, that is a typical American way of looking at the world. American law is not applicable in the EU. It may even be contrary to EU regulations.
"Making a certain amount of sales in a US State" would involve Delcampe having to submit personal data of a seller to that State. That, likely, violates EU privacy laws. Only the seller can submit personal data or must allow Delcampe to do so.

When I dealt with North American trade policy, I had colleagues who spent their lives dealing with the malign effects of US extraterritoriality. It's a perennial problem.

Actually, that is the typical way American POLITICIANS look at the world:

"Whatever money or influence I can glean for my office/lobbyists/constituency, I will legislate it no matter how tenuous the basis or connection."

If buyer is in my state, tax the transaction.

If seller is in my state, tax the transaction.

If seller has any physical locations (regardless of type of facility: administrative offices, warehouses, sales/marketing offices) to my state, tax the transaction.

If the platform/venue the transaction occurred on has any offices or presence in my state, tax the transaction, even if neither buyer nor seller have any nexus.

If an entity has a website where orders are taken, and the data center for the webhosting company is located in my state, tax the transaction.

If the Internet Service Provider of either the buyer, seller, or platform, has any offices or functionality in my state, tax the transaction.

If the parcel travels through my state, tax the transaction.

If buyer or seller ever heard of my state, tax the transactrion.

If 2 + 2 = 4, tax the transaction.


[Yes, these are increasingly absurd, but you get my point...]


Fun fact: a number of years ago the university I worked for opened a single one-room student recruiting office in San Francisco. Because of this, all of a sudden we had to start collecting and remitting California state sales tax on EVERY transaction any university entity made anywhere to California residents. Heads rolled due to the unanticipated costs (both direct and administrative) and impact of this decision across the entire system.

Perhaps it should be...
Actually, that is the typical way ALL POLITICIANS look at the world:

Don

No, it wouldn't. Delcampe would do what every other seller does: mark that an item as sent to X state, and the tax collected was Y. If at the end of each quarter the aggregate tax collected from buyers in X state hits that state's threshold, remit the funds as a lump sum to that state. There's no personal data shared to that state.
But if you insist that somehow Delcampe's remittance of say, $162,914.87 in sales tax to my state has somehow also supplied my state with my personal information, then Delcampe can make it part of its ToS, that by creating or keeping an account Americans consent to such sharing.

The concern, as I understand it, is not that American buyers data is being shared were Delcampe to set up an ebay-style system, but also non-American seller's data would be shared with American tax officials, which in EU law is a HUGE no-no without explicit consent of the individual seller on the platform itself.

So when do we think this might also happen to HipStamps / Hip Postcards? As far as I know they don't collect U.S. state sales taxes either. Doesn't the APS list there?

Looks like most American sellers and buyers will be forced back to ebay and other domestic online venues.

In the end I have to believe that Delcampe took a look at revenue from sellers in the affected States vs cost of compliance and made a decision. I think it is fairly obvious that this week's announcement was hurried due to some unexpected enforcement event or government threat that occurred.

Given that we the people elect these politicians, they don't appoint themselves, we can't entirely distance ourselves from responsibility for their actions. An ongoing mystery why voters continuously complain about them and then vote them back in. My opinion is lack of quality choices and so if you want to vote you are constantly dealing with the "lesser of two evils" scenario. That and the fact that in a highly divided ideological society people will vote for anything that has the correct Party letter after it's name.

"To look at this another way, if the EU suddenly passed a law requiring overseas retailers, including USA-based ones, to start collecting VAT on all sales to citizens of the EU and remitting them to their respective countries every three months (since different EU members have different VAT rates), how many American retailers, especially smaller ones, might decide that selling their goods to EU customers is not really worth the hassle."

I think ebay is already collecting sales tax on my sales to Australia.

That wouldn't happen until EU customs got rid of "VAT back" schemes for tourists first.


There is absolutely no reason to do this. Again, states are only interested in the money in aggregate; California doesn't give a **** if all the buyers are in Los Angeles and none in Sacramento, or Düsseldorf vs. Hamburg.