On 10/30/2007 03:43 PM, Dan Bergan wrote: > On 10/30/07, Mike Heins <suppressed> wrote: >> Quoting Dan Bergan (suppressed): >>> On 10/30/07, Dan Bergan <suppressed> wrote: >>>> On 10/30/07, Mike Heins <suppressed> wrote: >>>>> Quoting Dan Bergan (suppressed): >>>>>> On 10/16/07, Dan Bergan <suppressed> wrote: >>>>>>> I'm having an issue where negative sales tax amounts are computed. >>>>>>> The issue arises when there is a discount on the entire order, and the >>>>>>> products in the cart are nontaxable. >>>>>>> >>>>>>> A detailed description and potential solution is here: >>>>>>> http://www.icdevgroup.org/pipermail/interchange-users/2007-May/047410.html >>>>>>> >>>>>>> This issue was also found here (with no resolutions): >>>>>>> http://www.icdevgroup.org/pipermail/interchange-users/2005-September/043923.html >>>>>>> >>>>>>> Is this a bug? It doesn't seem like a negative sales tax should be valid. >>>>>>> >>>>>> Back in May, Carl had what looks to be a good solution for this >>>>>> problem, which I am going to implement for my installation (see >>>>>> below). >>>>> It is unclear if it should be a bug at all. If you wanted to implement >>>>> refunds, you would need negative tax. >>>>> >>>>> The bigger problem would seem to be the negative amounts. >>>>> >>>>> In any case, I have set up the ability to exclude negative tax >>>>> amounts with: >>>>> >>>>> Pragma no_negative_tax >>>>> >>>>> That is in the latest CVS. >>>>> >>>> Mike - >>>> >>>> Ahh... refunds -- I hadn't thought of that! :-) >>>> >>>> For refunds, the taxable sales amount would be negative, so the tax >>>> would calculate as a negative. In the case above (non-taxable >>>> products with a discount), the taxable amount should still be zero >>>> (not negative). >>>> >>>> I currently don't use Interchange for refunds, but that doesn't mean I >>>> never will! So, I think I'll have to ponder this some more and dig >>>> deeper into the code. >>>> >>> I think this might be more of a question about sales tax law. Should >>> a ENTIRE_ORDER discount reduce the taxable amount? >> Without doubt. >> >>> The only mention I have found when searching sales tax documents are >>> coupons for individual items, and percent off of all items. In the >>> case of ENTIRE_ORDER the actual sale prices of the individual items do >>> not change, so my client reports that number to their state as the >>> taxable amount. My client treats this type of discount like a gift >>> certificate -- it is applied after the tax is calculated. >> That is simply wrong. The user is over-paying taxes. > > in Ohio, that may not be the case: > http://64.233.167.104/search?q=cache:sJHJL5Jp2KEJ:tax.ohio.gov/divisions/legal/documents/02ST_Opinion020004_TMZ.pdfl&hl=en&ct=clnk&cd=6&gl=us > (google cache of a tax commissioner judgment pdf...) > > >>> Of course, this is just my client, in one state and in the US. >>> >>> Would it work to have a catalog variable to determine if an >>> ENTIRE_ORDER discount should be applied pre-tax or post-tax? >> It won't ever be applied post-tax on my watch. >> >> If the order total is reduced, the tax is reduced. A gift-certificate >> is pre-purchased, and is paid for. >> > I haven't yet determined how Iowa (my client's state) applies their > law. But, Connecticut's formula makes a lot of sense: > http://www.ct.gov/drs/cwp/view.asp?A=1529&Q=395904 > > The ENTIRE_ORDER discount is split proportionally among each item, > then each item's taxablility is determined to figure the total sales > tax. This would fix the problem of a negative tax being calculated > for nontaxable items. The consumer is neither overpaying nor > underpaying taxes. It would seem to make sense to me to allow this to be configurable, even state-by-state (a column in the state table) so that IC will have the ability to better adapt to different tax laws in different areas. I would propose allowing the use of special subs that can be picked from the state and/or country tables with a few defaults. That would allow customization for whatever weird taxation laws someone may come across (that we don't anticipate). Peter _______________________________________________ interchange-users mailing list suppressed http://www.icdevgroup.org/mailman/listinfo/interchange-users
Mail converted by mhonarc 2.6.15
This archive provided courtesy of JSW4.NET, Internet Hosting Services for Small Business.