The state of Delta has passed a law that states âthe use taxcollection obligation applies to any business that enters into anagreement with any person in Delta for a fee or other considerationin exchange for that person directly or indirectly referringpotential purchasers of that businessâs product by an internetbased link or an internet website accessible in Delta tocustomers.â X Corporation has a website in Delta accessible by itscustomers in the state and pays a fee to the company in Deltamaintaining the website. X Corporation sells $10,000 worth ofproduct to customers in Delta. It has no physical presence inDelta. Is X Corporation liable for use tax collection in Delta?Why? Is so, what arguments might X Corporation make against theimposition of the collection obligation? How do you think this willbe decided considering the Supreme Court decision in Quill?
The state of Delta has passed a law that states âthe use taxcollection obligation applies to any business that enters into anagreement with any person in Delta for a fee or other considerationin exchange for that person directly or indirectly referringpotential purchasers of that businessâs product by an internetbased link or an internet website accessible in Delta tocustomers.â X Corporation has a website in Delta accessible by itscustomers in the state and pays a fee to the company in Deltamaintaining the website. X Corporation sells $10,000 worth ofproduct to customers in Delta. It has no physical presence inDelta. Is X Corporation liable for use tax collection in Delta?Why? Is so, what arguments might X Corporation make against theimposition of the collection obligation? How do you think this willbe decided considering the Supreme Court decision in Quill?
