The Marketplace Fairness Act

Born in 1823, John Sherman was going to change how the United States economy worked. His name is part of a very important act; the Sherman Antitrust Act. this disbanded all monopolized corporations and said price discrimination and interlocking doctorates are prohibited. Though this act was very crucial, many people took advantage. As a result of this another act had to be passed. A legislation that could strengthen the Sherman Act and take down all the trust. An act that could would not take the government time and money to trust bust the fraud businesses, but to take the responsibility of each individual in a business. Although pricing fixing and exclusive dealings were addressed in the Sherman Act, there needed to be another antitrust act to establish and extend the unfair business practices during the 19 century era.

There are different reforms being proposed to help fix America’s healthcare system that is dialing many Americans daily. Many Americans are finding themselves unable to pay the hefty sum, it takes to take care of themselves. There are two types of markets that could potentially solve America’s health insurance dilemma. These market reforms are called perfect competition or free market reform, and Affordable Care Act.

Miller, R. L. R., Cross, F. B., & Jentz, G. A. (2013). Business law: Alternate edition: text and summarized cases: legal, ethical, global, and e-commerce environment. Mason, Ohio: South-Western Cengage Learning.

In 1890, the United States Congress passed the first Anti-Trust Law, called the Sherman Act, in an attempt to combat anti trusts and as a “comprehensive charter of economic liberty aimed at preserving free and unfettered competition as the rule of trade.” (The Antitrust Laws). Twenty four years later in 1914, Congress passed two more Anti-Trust Laws: the Federal Trade Commission Act, which created the Federal Trade Commission whose aim is to protect American consumers, and the Clayton act, which fills in any loopholes in the Sherman Act. Ultimately, these three Anti Trust Acts regulate three core problems within the market: restricting the creation of cartels, restricting the “mergers and acquisitions of organizations which could substantially lessen competition”, and prohibit the creation of monopolies in the market (“The Antitrust Laws”).

Michigan has adopted the Antitrust Reform Act. Mich. Comp. Laws Ann. § 445.774a. The Act allows employers to obtain agreements , protecting their reasonable competitive business interests by prohibiting employment with competitors. Id. But the agreement must be reasonable “as to its duration, geographical area, and the type of employment or line of business.”Id. To be reasonable, a restrictive covenant must “‘protect against the employee’s gaining some unfair advantage in competition with the employer, but not prohibit the employee from using general knowledge or skill.’” Coates v. Bastian Brothers, Inc, 276 Mich. App. 498, 741 N.W.2d 539  (2007) If the agreement is found to be unreasonable, a court may “limit the agreement to

Since consumer transactions that take place on social media web sites often cross state lines, the Federal Government has developed and passed laws that can best control these transactions. There are many Federal regulations in place to provide consumers with protection when they participate in transactions via social media sites. These regulations range from taxation on goods, restrictions on state laws restricting interstate commerce, and protection of electronic fund transfers. These laws are growing in importance as more and more consumers choose to transact business via social media sites. A consumer should be aware of their rights and responsibilities before engaging in e-commerce. The E-Sign Act provides consumer and business protection by allowing contracts to be signed without paperwork by using the click-wrap agreement, and the Federal Trade Commission has several protections in place for purchases made online for more than $25. There are many different regulations put forth by the Federal government, but there are many ways a consumer can develop safe practices when engaging in internet transactions. This includes using reliable, reputable companies to purchase from, using secured browsers, understanding terms and conditions prior to purchase and finally keeping records of all transactions. Next I will examine

In the 1992 decision, Quill v. North Dakota, the U.S. Supreme Court ruled that retailers are exempt from collecting sales taxes in states where they have no physical presence, with physical presence defined by example such as a store, office, or warehouse. The specifics of this case deal with a catalog mail-order company, however, the ruling has been far reaching and has been applied to all remote sellers, including online retailers. The Court stated requiring companies to comply with the varied sales tax rules and regulations of 45 states and some 7,500 different local taxing jurisdictions would burden interstate commerce.

The purpose of this report is to clarify how to account for a more than 2% shareholder S Corporation Owners’ Health insurance from a payroll perspective, in light of the Affordable Care Act (ACA) marketplace reforms. Additionally, for the small business S corporation; is it possible to assist employee’s with health insurance premiums without running afoul of marketplace reforms? The internet is rampant with conflicting advice on these seemingly simple questions. The most recent guidance from the IRS (notice 2015-17) is more of a reprieve on penalties, rather than guidance. Additionally, the June 30, 2015 deadline for reprieves has passed; which has accountants and taxpayers waiting for additional “guidance” while sorting out

Quill limits states from imposing state taxes on a seller who does not have “substantial nexus” in a given state. “Substantial nexus” amounts to some form of physical presence in the state with varying thresholds jurisdiction by jurisdiction. Representative Jim Sensenbrenner (R-WI) introduced the No Regulation Without Representation Act of 2017 (“NRWRA”) to protect businesses from unnecessary burden and cost of collecting and remitting sales and use taxes in states in which, at most, a seller has a de minimis physical presence. Most state taxing jurisdictions recognize that it is impractical to require individual consumers to accrue and remit use tax on purchases they make online from sellers with no nexus in the state. In an effort to capture what is considered lost tax revenue, states have developed nexus standards that can directly or indirectly challenge Quill, such as affiliated nexus and click-through nexus. Ultimately, the Quill decision is beneficial to today’s businesses and a hindrance to state taxing jurisdictions; as commerce increasingly shifts to the online marketplace, states are left in the cold regarding transaction tax revenue they relied on from brick-and-mortar establishments.

In Maine, where the state(Maine) prohibited the importation of live baitfish to protect fisherman from parasites and other species. Maine’s law was not unconstitutional, as it did not put a burden on interstate commerce. The court held that the limitation imposed by the commerce clause on state regulatory power was not absolute and that states had the authority under their police powers to regulate matters of legitimate local concern. The Maine statute served a legitimate purpose that could not be served by non-discriminatory alternative. In this case, becoming the “cutting edge” and “hip cool” state does not allow business and individuals to purchase the internet would defeat the state's purpose of being the “hip cool cutting edge” state. Allowing individuals and companies to purchase the PA internet would serve the purpose of raising state revenue. PA is a part of the tri-state area; therefore, students, commuters, visitors, and everyone who is not a resident of PA will not be able to gain access. The PA regulation will evidentially work against the state of PA.

It does not exempt sales made on the Internet from taxation, as these may be taxed at the same state and local sales tax rate as non-Internet sales, just like mail order sales. The Act did not repeal any state sales or use tax. It has been thrice extended by the United States Congress since its original enactment. " ("Internet tax freedom," 2011)

Retail sales taxes are one of the best ways to collect tax revenue. If the tax rates are high in one state, then a consumer can shop online to avoid excessive sales taxes in another state. This is why many states are pushing Congress to adopt legislation to make all online retailers pay sales-tax regardless of their state of operation. Sales taxes through internet transactions have become a hot topic in the political arena, and there are plenty of politicians who are in agreement of collecting taxes from the internet including Alabama. Economically there are some states that are losing a great deal of tax revenue because certain businesses that are out-of-state are not required to collect sales-tax. According to William T. Lundeen and Tracy D. Williams (2002), “Congress cannot alter the protections provided by the Due Process Clause” (p. 18). Therefore, the Supreme Court ruled on this issue in 1992, saying that out-of-state tax collectors cannot force retailers to pay taxes.

Football has seen itself undergoing a paradigm shift in the past decades. As European football grew into the gigantic monolith it is today, an inflow of money found its way into the coffers of the Union des Associations Européennes de Football (UEFA). The Financial Fair Play (FFP) regulations were initiated in principle to create a level playing field between clubs owned by business tycoons and those who are a bit more moderate in comparison. It is a sad sight that today, European club football is in truth, nothing short of an oligopoly of about ten clubs. This distorts the competitive balance not only among them, but among leagues all over Europe. Even though the FFP has been roped in to prevent this there have been widely publicized doubts over its claims of causing a harmonised and tighter regulation for all European clubs. It might be ineffective owing to its incompleteness, plausible inefficacy and humungous costliness. Even though the regulations are welcome with regards to controlling debt, hopes that it will make football more ethical and competitive, are foolhardy. Only time will tell as to how the ‘beautiful game’ will respond to FFP and how ‘fair’ and effective it really is.

On the other side of the issue, the liberals or pro side on Internet taxation mainly use logos arguments to get their point across. Many state leaders are frustrated that collection of taxes on mail-order transactions has been banned and do not want to lose another source of revenue such as the Internet. David Coursey, an Internet industry analyst argues that, “If e-commerce is to grow, it needs to pay its own way before we wake up one morning and realize that communities have lost big chunks or their precious local tax dollars” (Internet Taxation par. 33). This could all be a

Sales tax is one of the most conversed topics and in the national spotlight frequently. States have been struggling to gain a hold on internet sales and the related tax liabilities. Sales tax policy is an intriguing subject and the current internet revolution is pushing discussion of sales taxes to the forefront. This has caused a high level of distress held by business leaders, bureaucrats, and politicians in the field of sales tax. The current goal and focus on sales tax policy is that a more rational sales tax compliance environment can be developed.