ddodell@stjhmc.fidonet.org (David Dodell) (07/24/90)
Randyd@microsoft writes: >using the Universal Card. These results do not include tax. Even more >interesting: ATT charged only federal excise tax. Sprint charges state >and local sales tax in addition to the federal excise tax. Since in >this location the state and local sales tax is about 8.7%, ATT starts >off with an 8.7% advantage! Anyone have any idea why this is true, I would think that both would be subject to collecting the same taxes? David St. Joseph's Hospital and Medical Center, Phoenix, Arizona uucp: {gatech, ames, rutgers}!ncar!asuvax!stjhmc!ddodell Bitnet: ATW1H @ ASUACAD FidoNet=> 1:114/15 Internet: ddodell@stjhmc.fidonet.org FAX: +1 (602) 451-1165
Jim Gottlieb <jimmy@icjapan.info.com> (08/02/90)
In article <10063@accuvax.nwu.edu> ddodell@stjhmc.fidonet.org (David Dodell) writes: >Anyone have any idea why this is true, I would think that both would be >subject to collecting the same taxes? I don't know if it applies here, but one difference I have noticed between carriers is that Sprint bills taxes based on the billing address, while AT&T (or at least the local telco, which does our AT&T billing) taxes based on service address. In Los Angeles, which levys an outrageous 10% tax on telecommunications, I know of Sprint customers who rent a P.O. Box outside the city limits and have their bill sent there. We took another approach. We moved all our business to San Diego, as we were paying thousands of dollars in L.A. tax each month and it was on local telco services so a P.O. box wouldn't have helped. I'm surprised there hasn't been more opposition to taxes like this.