Sales-tax debate is more than a century old

It's quite likely that the era of not charging state and local sales tax on Internet purchases is about to end.

The nub of the legal arguments, pro and con, has been, up to now, something called a "nexus." A retailer has one if you live in a state where the online retailer has a store.

Now the U.S. Supreme Court has ruled that states -- and, maybe, cities and counties -- can require sales tax collection regardless of a retailer's "nexus."

This whole business about taxing online purchases -- a multibillion-dollar deal -- would seem to be a creation of the electronics-connected world we live in.

In fact, the debate about taxing certain purchases has been stewing for well over a century. Really? You mean someone invented the Internet before Al Gore?

Well, sort of.

In 1872, Montgomery Ward, a national mail-order enterprise, issued its first catalog. Most of you of a certain age remember well the bulky catalogs from Montgomery Ward and from Sears, which came along with its version in 1894.

But it was, apparently, the catalog issued by Bloomingdale's by Mail, in 1896, that set off the still festering debate about what can and cannot be taxed. Some sharp-eyed bureaucrat in the Pennsylvania revenue department realized, way back then, that items sold by mail order were not generating state sales tax. The legal back-and-forth started in earnest, spilling over, a century later, to the age of online purchases.

Stop and think a minute.

Think of the U.S. Postal Service as the Internet. At one time the post office handled most of the communications, public and private, of the entire nation. It reliably delivered letters and packages at a reasonable cost. Slower than the Internet, yes. But consistently effective nonetheless.

And think of those thick mail-order catalogs as Amazon.com. Virtually anything you could think of purchasing could be found in a catalog, including all the materials to build a house. There are several Sears house-kit structures in Cape Girardeau and surrounding towns.

And think of the handy index in those catalogs as search engines. Scanning a catalog index would quickly lead prospective consumers to the items they wanted. Or young boys to the lingerie section -- a practice most mothers frowned upon. Some diligent moms even ripped that part of the catalog right out of its binding. Nowadays, popular entertainers wear less that that. On purpose. In public.

The key difference between mail-order purchases and online purchases is volume. Yes, mail-order merchandise was a significant factor, but online merchandise amounts to way more volume and, hence, way more sales-tax revenue at stake.

People like to complain about taxes. But the fact is taxes fund the things we want and depend on.

When we drive down a highway, we take for granted that the bridge built with tax dollars won't collapse. We assume that when the dial 9-1-1 we will get the help we need. We don't think twice about drinking water from tax-funded municipal water systems -- many of which are the source of high-priced bottled water with fancy brand names.

Let's face it: All levels of government with taxing authority are going to get the money they need one way or another. If the Supreme Court had ruled that online sales were universally exempt from sales tax, I guarantee our cities and counties and states would find other tax sources to fund the things we want.

Yes, we will still complain about taxes. Sometimes our concerns make sense. Sometimes they don't.

A level playing field regarding sales-tax collections makes sense. The Supreme Court may have, finally, resolved a century-old conundrum.

Joe Sullivan is the retired editor of the Southeast Missourian.