Nathan Gisvold, a former small business owner in Nevada, recently sent a letter to the editor of the Las Vegas Review-Journal expressing his concerns with the Senate passed Marketplace Fairness Act. In his letter, Gisvold outlined two reasons why the Marketplace Fairness Act was flawed policy. First, he argued that that the bill violates a core value of the founding fathers: no taxation without representation. “It is true the business is represented at the federal level, but in most cases not the state or local municipality,” said Gisvold. “ Levying tax on commerce with no representation led to the Boston Tea Party and ultimately the U.S. seeking independence.”

In addition, Gisvold explains that, as currently written, the Marketplace Fairness Act will actually tilt the playing field in favor of larger retailers, thereby reducing competition. “Most e-commerce already collects sales tax, since operations save more by reducing shipping costs than by avoiding proxy. Smaller online retail shipping costs are often between 25 and 40 percent of the total order. By having distribution centers in almost every state, the retailer can save substantially more than is offset by collecting sales tax.”

To read Gisvold’s letter, please click here and visit the Las Vegas Review-Journal.