Date post: | 26-Dec-2015 |
Category: |
Documents |
Upload: | brent-robertson |
View: | 216 times |
Download: | 2 times |
Workshop Goals
Provide broad overview of streamlined sales tax project
Discuss critical areas of the national Agreement as they pertain to Alaska
Get your input and recommendations about issues and questions important to local governments
History of the Streamlined Sales Tax (SST) Project
Response to U.S. Supreme Court ruling limiting states from requiring remote sellers without nexus to collect use tax
Emphasis on simplification and uniformity of sales and use tax systems
Trade-off for local governments is ability to collect sales tax on remote purchases
History of the SST (continued)
Involvement by 42 states
Supported by NACO, NCSL, NGA, NLC
Governing Board established October ’05
Model Agreement adopted by 20 states
Primary Elements of the SSUTA
State level administration & collection Uniform definitions Uniform tax base (exemptions) Uniform sourcing rules (destination-based) with some
exceptions Uniform tax return for SST taxes Single sales and use tax rate for each jurisdiction Prohibition on tax caps
What does the SSUTA cover?
Taxes outside the sales tax code are excluded from the SSUTA
Doesn’t apply to vending machine sales Uniform sales/use tax rate requirement
doesn’t apply to certain items States can specify their own tax base Changes BOTH intrastate and interstate
(“outside”/electronic) sales tax processes
What About Use Tax?
Use tax not levied in Alaska
SSUTA applies to both sales and use taxes
Required in order to apply to the SST Board
SSUTA applies to both local and remote businesses and would require collection of sales and use taxes (including by AK businesses not currently collecting).
Potential Benefits for State/Local Governments
Increased revenue from e-commerce retailers
Improved climate for local businesses by “leveling the playing field” with on-line retailers
Benefits of simplification include improved sales tax administration, although not as clean as for business community
SSUTA Impact on Governments: What are other states saying?
Taxing at point of delivery vs point of sale a problem for some states (TX, KS) or local governments (WA)
Centralized administration means loss of some local authority (AK, CO, AL)
Costs to local governments not yet sufficiently detailed
Problems with existing member states and achievement of “full” compliance
Local Government Concerns (as voiced by other States)
Loss of revenue for local governments Extensive business lobbying to benefit
particular industries at expense of government sector
Winners and losers, based on going from point of sale to point of use (delivery) system
Loss of local government authority for collection and auditing
Benefits of SSUTA: Business Perspective Voluntary Compliance Retailers
Simplification- Uniformity of: definitions, sourcing rules, tax base, auditing requirements, etc.
Use of technology to ensure accurate collection and reporting, paid for by states
Amnesty for uncollected back taxes Vendor compensation from participating
states for collecting sales tax
National Revenue estimates from electronic commerce
Loss of national sales tax revenue from e-commerce estimated between $21.5-33.7 billion
Online commerce growing at 25% a year
Losses dependent upon population, tax base, tax rate
Cost-Benefit Analysis
No information yet from any participating state
Costs for state participation include SST dues (population-based/total sales tax) + travel
Much more significant costs for streamlining work, on-line filing requirements, administration uniformity (depends on state)
Alaska’s interest in the SST… or, are we interested?
One of the early “alliance states”- focusing on local government issues
Given geographic isolation, significant internet use and on-line purchasing
Potential for increased revenues if sales tax collected on e-purchases
How Much Revenue for Alaska?
SW Alaska Municipal League Economic Geography Study ?
University of TN 2004 Study - Revenue loss Comparisons with small population, rural states and Alaska specific estimates ?
Southwest Alaska- An estimate
Southwest: Aleutians East Borough, Aleutians West Census Area; Bristol Bay Borough; Dillingham; Kodiak Borough; Lake & Peninsula Borough
Data sources: Surveys of households and businesses, origin-destination freight movement analysis, and input-output analysis
“Outside” purchases include internet- not 100% internet sales data
What % of SW Alaska sales were made “outside” ?
Total Household purchases 33.6%
Total Business purchases 46.8%
Combined Total 44.5% OR 347 million
Caveats & Cautions
Figures are for very remote region of AK
Internet purchases included in total outside sales, but not solely e-commerce
Must be very careful about applying these percentages to other regions or communities
Small Population States with State Sales Tax- Useful Comparisons?
Population State Local
Vermont 623,050 6% 1%
North Dakota 636,677 5% 2.5%
South Dakota775,933 4% 2%
Projected Local Revenue Losses from E-Commerce (University TN 2004 Study)
2008 Low High
Vermont 0 0
North Dakota 4.6 M 7.2 M
South Dakota13.3 M 20.8 M
Show Me the Money…Alaska E-commerce losses estimated at 6.2% of total
local general sales taxes
Alaska’s local governments local sales tax revenue of $148.5 million (2003-2004)
Rough estimate of Alaska’s local government revenue loss = $9.2 million
Some Alaska Examples….
City Sales Tax Revenue Loss Estimate
Juneau 30,539,500 1,893,449.
Kenai Pen 14,910,977 924,480.
Ktn Bor 4,071,818 252,452.
Bethel 4,880,743 302,606.
Wasilla 7,135,574 442,405.
Unalaska 6,350,610 393,737.
Kodiak 7,130,691 442,102.
More Caveats and Caution
Relies on high growth assumption for electronic sales
Assumes most electronic retailers DON’T have physical nexus in Alaska
Assumes low collection and remittance of taxes in Alaska from e-commerce purchases
Likely fairly good estimate IF Alaskans shop online more frequently than residents of lower 48 states
Recap- What SSUTA would mean
Form a statewide administrative entity to perform required SSUTA tasks
Adopt common tax base and uniform definitions for all local governments
Agree on deletion of all tax caps
More Requirements….. Pass a use tax in order to be able to apply to
the Governing Board for acceptance
Adopt other, more detailed uniformity requirements of the SSUTA (sales tax holidays, reporting forms, etc.)
Possible Next Steps
Obtain more detailed information on revenue loss estimates for Alaska
Compile information on local government sales tax exemptions and definitions
Convene workgroup of Alaskan communities interested in working on SST/tax simplification
Other Suggestions …… ?
Develop list of questions and issues impacting local communities to guide a process
Review information from other states with active local government voices in the process
Discuss issues with State Department of Revenue