Quote from: jmw74 on March 31, 2014, 05:00:14 PM

Quote from: AnonyMint on March 31, 2014, 04:20:47 PM

Quote from: jmw74 on March 31, 2014, 04:11:26 PM

Quote from: AnonyMint on March 31, 2014, 04:03:36 PM

BS. That was sales tax and Amazon collected it directly on checkout. It was no hassle at all.

No. Look it up. They didn't collect state sales tax for years. For example they started collecting CA state sales tax in 2012.

States argued that (if Amazon had a physical presence in the state) but this was disputed because it violates the interstate commerce clause and the States only got their way by getting Amazon to deduct the taxes.

We are not talking about an ambiguous issue like that. The IRS has made it very clear what the culpability is.

In many states, residents were required by law to track and report their Amazon purchases for tax purposes. It did not stop people from using Amazon. Are you really trying to dispute this?

Yes I am disputing it because it was state law versus the Constitution. And it was a change from the long standing hands off policy on all mail order that crossed state lines. Nobody took it seriously because they know the state is impotent and there was no tracking of everything back then. Certainly the states don't have the ability to track what is happening on the internet.

Also sales taxes are not personal income taxes. They are ad valorem. The only people that get prosecuted over sales taxes are the merchants, not the consumer.

And besides that was a long time ago and the USA has morphed significantly of recent.

Quote from: jmw74 on March 31, 2014, 05:00:14 PM

I just gave you a counterexample where a similar burden was ostensibly placed on people and they just didn't care. The market decided the Amazon product was compelling enough to either track their purchases or risk the consequence of not reporting them.

If you want to tell me some crucial difference between tracking Amazon purchases and tracking bitcoin purchases, go ahead.

You built a strawman. Then you get all pompous on me.

The difference is that when the IRS talks, people dread their fucking April 15. And they don't need to add a Schedule D to that, when there is no compelling reason to. And they don't know what a Schedule D is any way.

When someone says, make sure you file your Schedule D, they will say shit I don't need no Bitcoin.

Bitcoin is not 1/100 as compelling as a currency as getting their goodies from Amazon. Your strawman you see.

That is as a currency. Now as a speculation for investment, those who are up for that won't be deterred by capital gains. They want capital gains. I was talking about the impact on the masses of this tax ruling and the effect it will have on sentiment being negative for while until something turns attention back to the "to the moon" theme that is Bitcoin entire reason to exist.

Quote from: jmw74 on March 31, 2014, 05:00:14 PM

As for my software qualifications and your rant about going to prison for not paying a few hundred bucks in taxes: I just took you off ignore *today*, I regret it already.

Instead of ad hominem useless comment how about actually telling me why you are qualified?

I actually made software for the mainsteam (1 million of them twice) and supported them over the phone and email.

If you want to put me on ignore, just do it. What is this fucking political BS every time you disagree with my right to express my thoughts?

The software issue is you don't understand how even what seems simple to you, is not simple for the masses. That is why I asked what kind of experience you have in the industry.