<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
		>
<channel>
	<title>Comments on: NH Retailers Not Required to Enforce Sales or Use Tax Collection for States Outside NH</title>
	<atom:link href="http://rattelaw.com/2009/12/04/nh-retailers-not-required-to-enforce-sales-or-use-tax-collection-for-states-outside-nh/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://rattelaw.com/2009/12/04/nh-retailers-not-required-to-enforce-sales-or-use-tax-collection-for-states-outside-nh/</link>
	<description>Small Business and Real Estate Law for New Hampshire and Maine</description>
	<lastBuildDate>Tue, 20 Apr 2010 13:59:02 +0000</lastBuildDate>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=2.9</generator>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
		<item>
		<title>By: Merrill Clark</title>
		<link>http://rattelaw.com/2009/12/04/nh-retailers-not-required-to-enforce-sales-or-use-tax-collection-for-states-outside-nh/comment-page-1/#comment-237</link>
		<dc:creator>Merrill Clark</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Mon, 07 Dec 2009 14:20:01 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://rattelaw.com/?p=294#comment-237</guid>
		<description>Hi Chris,

That is indeed great news for New Hampshire businesses.

In a previous business I owned a few years ago, the State of Maine came after me to collect several years of &quot;Maine sales tax&quot; that I supposedly should have collected and forwarded to them to the tune of almost $8,000 plus penalties and interest.  Ouch!

Unfortunately for me, rulings like this didn&#039;t exist and I didn&#039;t have the resources to fight the Sate of Maine.

Oh well, expensive lessons learned I guess.

Maybe we can fight the State of Maine to get my money back retroactively plus interest and penalties.

Yeah right...

Thanks for the good info.
Merrill</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Hi Chris,</p>
<p>That is indeed great news for New Hampshire businesses.</p>
<p>In a previous business I owned a few years ago, the State of Maine came after me to collect several years of &#8220;Maine sales tax&#8221; that I supposedly should have collected and forwarded to them to the tune of almost $8,000 plus penalties and interest.  Ouch!</p>
<p>Unfortunately for me, rulings like this didn&#8217;t exist and I didn&#8217;t have the resources to fight the Sate of Maine.</p>
<p>Oh well, expensive lessons learned I guess.</p>
<p>Maybe we can fight the State of Maine to get my money back retroactively plus interest and penalties.</p>
<p>Yeah right&#8230;</p>
<p>Thanks for the good info.<br />
Merrill</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Chris_Ratte</title>
		<link>http://rattelaw.com/2009/12/04/nh-retailers-not-required-to-enforce-sales-or-use-tax-collection-for-states-outside-nh/comment-page-1/#comment-231</link>
		<dc:creator>Chris_Ratte</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sat, 05 Dec 2009 18:51:38 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://rattelaw.com/?p=294#comment-231</guid>
		<description>Thanks for the update, Steve. It&#039;ll be interesting to see what happens next in this story.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Thanks for the update, Steve. It&#8217;ll be interesting to see what happens next in this story.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Steven Feinberg</title>
		<link>http://rattelaw.com/2009/12/04/nh-retailers-not-required-to-enforce-sales-or-use-tax-collection-for-states-outside-nh/comment-page-1/#comment-230</link>
		<dc:creator>Steven Feinberg</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sat, 05 Dec 2009 17:54:09 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://rattelaw.com/?p=294#comment-230</guid>
		<description>Chris,

There is further news relative to this post, ie., that on October 12, 2009 The Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court refused to allow the Department of Revenue to create and then to enforce retroactively new interpretations of tax rules that significantly harm law-abiding businesses and individuals.

See http://www.taxhistory.org/taxbase/stnmagsample.nsf/ConNavLink/0054STN0138-0001?OpenDocument

We&#039;re all glad about New Hampshire&#039;s response to the original case, but I believe New Hampshire businesses avoided another dart as a result of the Massachusetts court decision to tell the Mass Department of Revenue to back off!

Thanks,
Steve</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Chris,</p>
<p>There is further news relative to this post, ie., that on October 12, 2009 The Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court refused to allow the Department of Revenue to create and then to enforce retroactively new interpretations of tax rules that significantly harm law-abiding businesses and individuals.</p>
<p>See <a href="http://www.taxhistory.org/taxbase/stnmagsample.nsf/ConNavLink/0054STN0138-0001?OpenDocument" rel="nofollow">http://www.taxhistory.org/taxbase/stnmagsample.nsf/ConNavLink/0054STN0138-0001?OpenDocument</a></p>
<p>We&#8217;re all glad about New Hampshire&#8217;s response to the original case, but I believe New Hampshire businesses avoided another dart as a result of the Massachusetts court decision to tell the Mass Department of Revenue to back off!</p>
<p>Thanks,<br />
Steve</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>
