For years, states have attempted to assert a sales tax collection responsibility on businesses who have sold across state lines. The more aggressive of those efforts have invariably ended up in the courts. Whether it be the earlier US Supreme Court cases like Miller Bros. v. Maryland, 347 U.S. 340, 344-45 (1954), or National Bellas Hess, Inc. v. Department of Revenue, 386 U.S. 753, 756-57 (1967), or the most significant sales & use tax nexus case to date, Quill Corp. v. North Dakota, 504 U.S. 298 (1992), with sales tax the question of nexus always came down to, “is there a physical presence.”
The question today, more directly, seems to be, “what is physical presence?” Is it simply an independent contractor doing repairs, or a website with a link directing in state customers to an out of state vendor? The answer is of course, “it depends on the state.”
This blog is about connections to taxing jurisdictions and when those connections have risen to the level of “substantial nexus,” as defined by the United States Supreme Court. Sound complicated? It is, but in this blog we have the opportunity to discuss your situation and individual facts, explore the alternatives, and if possible, answer the question, “will the state say that I have nexus?”
Other recent “Sales Tax Nexus” posts by John Daly:
- Independent Contractors - Establish or Maintain a Market?
- Main Street Fairness?
- Nexus Perplexus... How States View Physical Presence