During an interview with Mobile radio FM Talk 106.5's "The Jeff Poor Show," State Sen. Greg Albritton (R-Range) discussed potential changes to Alabama's Simplified Sellers Use Tax (SSUT).
Implemented in 2016, the tax allows eligible out-of-state sellers to collect and remit a flat 8% tax on online sales to residents. It replaces local taxes with a single, state-collected rate, with revenue distributed 50% to the state and 50% to local governments.
According to Albritton, while certain municipalities have expressed disagreement with the tax in its current form, it has been of great benefit to the state.
"We made this deal back in 2016, and it was a good deal for everybody," Albritton said. "There were some issues that didn't get completely resolved. But now we've been here for 10 years or more. It's doing very well. Now we have controversies over what should be done and what the municipalities and counties could or should not do. That's for the counties and cities to make that determination. But as far as the SSUT and that plan is working very well."
Rather than overhauling the SSUT as requested in a recent lawsuit filed by multiple municipalities, Albritton called for "adjustment and adaptation" to address a "change in the marketplace."
"What they're describing is a change in our society, a change in the marketplace. The state didn't do that," Albritton explained. "The people have done that, and private industry has done that. That's not bad, that's just the way things occurred. We're going to have to adjust to that, and the municipalities are going to have to adjust to that, because the people have changed. That doesn't mean that we overhaul all of our means of collecting revenue and such."
The legislator argued that if law enforcement in various portions of the state requires a pay raise, it falls upon local governments to raise taxes.
"If they need to pay their police, then they need to have the tax base to pay the police," stated Albritton. "That's not the state's responsibility. The marketplace has changed."
Albritton added one qualifier he believes could force the state to act on the SSUT.
"If there was a reduction in revenue, we may have a basis to address this. But there has not been a reduction in revenue, if they're taking in double the money, and on top of that, they're getting the SSUT, which they could not collect and cannot collect from the state. Where's the harm?" asked Albritton.
To connect with the author of this story or to comment, email [email protected].
Don't miss out! Subscribe to our newsletter and get our top stories every day.
