Chapter 1, Problem 1P

What statement is false? a. A tax on consumption will effectively result in virtually all residents of the State paying the tax. b. A tax on consumption would support savings initiative. c. The consumption tax for purchases of goods or services from foreign sources shall be payable by the buyer. d. Business taxes are usually included in the price of goods and services of the seller but are remitted by the seller to the government. e. All of the statements is correct.

Question: Suppose a state imposes a higher tax on out-of-state companies doing business in the state than it imposes clause if the only reason for the tax is to protect the local firms from out-of-state competition? in-state companies. Is this a violation of the equal protection   Explain your answer thouroughly and in a manner that a person with no prior knowledge of the situation would understand it fully.   For this I need more details all I can answer is .....Yes. The tax would limit the liberty of some persons (out-of-state businesses), so it is subject to a review under the equal protection clause. Protecting local businesses from out-of-state competition is not a legitimate government objective. Thus, such a tax would violate the equal protection clause.

Many states have enacted laws that go even further than federal law to protect consumers. These laws vary tremendously from state to state. Generally, is having laws fair to sellers who may be prohibited from engaging in a practice in one state that is legal in another? How might these different laws affect a business? is it fair that residents of one state have more protection than residents in another state?