Lodmot

The only reason to buy from newegg ever since they got bought out was to not pay tax. Their shipping is terrible, especially how poorly they pack things. I had to stop ordering OEM hard drives from them a few years ago because they were packed with almost no padding and every single one would die in a year or two, and I'm talking high end Western Digital Blacks, not cheap crap. Meanwhile my crappy WD Blues and Seagate Barracudas I bought from Best Buy are still kicking years later. They also pissed me off when I ordered a cpu from them and paid for two day shipping, then ordered an extra stick of RAM for my HTPC in a separate order with free shipping later that day. So of course they put my cpu in with the RAM to ship via garbage Fedex SmartPost and it took two weeks to get my cpu when I paid for 2 day shipping on it.
 
If I'm paying sales tax there is no reason to not go with amazon and have my packages sooner and packed by someone with an above room temperature IQ.

It is all the same money, but It's not like I'm trying to avoid taxes. I would love to see the use tax abolished after this debacle since it just seems so ridiculous, but as long as It's a law I'm not going to actively try and break it. Amazon offer consumers a much more convienent system. Meanwhile Newegg, while not being entirely guilty, still chose that an increase in the cost of business wasn't worth the integrity of their consumers. Their lack of a covienent system coupled with their disregard and willful forfeiting of private data is why I will not be shopping there in the future, which is a completely valid choice on my part as a consumer. I'll vote with my wallet.

That changes the name of the game significantly in my eyes, somewhat lessening Newegg's culpability and placing it back on the State. I think they're talking about this law that was passed in July (linked below) which is super sketchy. It basically says that CT can fine any out of state company that refuses their data requests. It's not really a request if you threaten every company that says no with heavy fines.
 
https://taxnews.ey.com/news/2017-1203-connecticut-drs-mails-notices-to-out-of-state-online-retailers-demanding-sales-records-legislature-subsequently-enacts-penalty-provisions-for-failure-to-comply

I just got off the phone with a Connecticut representative, and as it turns out, they actually DID pass that as a new law unfortunately. ><
The girl I spoke with said that it caught a lot of people off-guard, including her as well. They're hoping this will eventually cause Newegg and other online vendors to start charging use tax to customers now.

Next they'll get Amazon's sales records, Amazon charges state taxes, but not 3rd parties selling on Amazon's platform. 

I've spoken to Newegg representatives twice now over this, both times they claimed that Connecticut passed a new law. When I told them that there was no such law and asked them to cite the specific provision which required them to hand over private sales data, the only useful information they gave me was that someone in upper management told them to say it was a new law.
 
(Also not to side track, but yeah CT is in the dumpster, I plan on moving out after graduation myself. :P)

Actually, from my research I found that there was a 1992 Supreme Court case (Quill Corp vs. North Dakota) in which the court ruled to "effectively prevented states from collecting any sales tax from retail purchases made over the Internet or other e-Commerce route unless the seller had a physical presence in the state."
 
In other words, the State of Connecticut could not force Newegg to either collect sales taxes or to hand over user data, and any new law forcing them to do so would have been a violation of the court ruling. Newegg was under no legal obligation to collect taxes, and in the words of Stephan Kranz regarding possible responses that Newegg could have had to the State's request:
 
That's why Newegg's actions are so egregious, they had every option and every obligation to protect their consumer's data but chose not to, and in doing so violated their own privacy policies. What's even worse is that Newegg lied to their customers about it after the fact in an email. Of course, that's not to say that it wasn't a dick move on the State's part to even request the data, but there could not be anything legally binding about what the State did or requested. If there was anything legally binding about what the state did, then they would be equally to blame.

That's interesting-- that's exactly what the Newegg rep told me during our conversation just now. It sounds to me like one of two things is occurring here:
 
A) Newegg is under the impression that they're not required to charge Connecticut residents use tax, but Connecticut actually wants them to, and at the same time, didn't adequately communicate that requirement to the company until now.
 
B) Newegg really ISN'T required to charge us use tax, and Connecticut is misinterpreting what should be going on in regards to online purchases.
 
In either case, it sounds like both the state and the company of Newegg are confused. Honestly though I think Connecticut is the source of what happened. Our state is really unreasonable and illogical on more than a few issues (this being one of them), and it's part of the reason why I plan on moving outta here. This is something Connecticut should've tackled back in 2014/2015 before more unpaid use tax amounts got placed on customers' shoulders.

1) Willingness and intent are synonymous, I was being redundant for emphasis. 
 
2) Can you provide proof of this "in the small print" statement? I've been combing through their terms & agreements and privacy policies. To my knowledge no such disclaimer exists, so no I don't believe that Newegg has notified me of anything at the time of purchase.

Where? There's no kind of small print in the email confirmation Newegg sends you nor their ToS. 

That's definitely stretching it, you have to prove intent and willingness for it to constitute tax fraud. For an honor system such as Use Tax, intention can almost never be proven, so you can't say it's tax fraud.
 
Evading taxes, even if intentional, is also not theft in any way shape or form. What and from whom are you stealing, your own money from the government? I've often heard the phrase "taxation is theft" but I've yet to hear in any capacity "avoiding taxation is theft."

As they should be pissed,Newegg violated their own privacy policy instead of choosing to tax customers in the future while disregarding the 3 years of past taxes. Use tax based on a trust system isn't fraud though, I doubt most people were going to newegg to purposely avoid taxes.

I want to add that the reason they need to have a disclaimer when voluntarily sharing data is because an action otherwise is in violation of their own privacy policy. The section that deals with government reads:
 
Except their rights were never at risk, it was not required by law, there was no legal process, and there was no judicial proceeding. Newegg lied to their consumers saying that there was a law requiring them to share data so they could be in line with their privacy policy. 

100% agreed. I'd also like to add that if the disclaimer was written for other states other than the four mentioned, I would expect it to have entries for those other states as well.

The only points I'm arguing is that Newegg didn't do their due diligence in informing, being honest with, or protecting their customers. It is their responsibility to have proper disclaimers on their site when applicable and they can be held legally accountable. In a very similar fashion to how Coffee shops have to have a "caution: hot" warning on their cups, Newegg ought to have had a "caution, use tax applies" disclaimer. We're not necessarily in disagreement, and any other inference on your side is misguided.

The problem with things like "use tax" is that I'm sure 99% of people in the US (not exaggerating) have no idea what a "use tax" even means. People buy stuff online all the time and I'm sure 99% of them don't think at all about reporting it. It might technically be "willful tax evasion" but how do you expect the layman to read the whole tax code, or even a tiny amount of it?
 
I know it won't happen because of tax companies lobbying, but you shouldn't be responsible for finding out how much you owe the govt. I get things like reporting income, but keeping track of income is easier than logging every purchase. Keeping every receipt and sale written down is ridiculous. Especially keeping track of purchases online that the store didn't tax you for. This is why you have to pay money to pay more money in the form of hiring tax accountants as a private citizen. 

The information in the article is pretty specific about being for those 4 states only. "Your state" isn't ambiguous at all nor was it meant to be, It's referring directly to the states of CO, LA, VT, and RI.

I agree with this wholeheartedly, the idea that every menial purchase you make (say you bought a video game or whatever in New Hampshire and brought it back to your state) is subjected use tax from your home state - and that anything less than scrupulous record keeping is tax evasion - is ridiculous. 

The whole use tax thing is stupid. I expect to be boned by every purchase I make, if a website doesn't add it automatically I'm not going to think in my head. "I better make sure the government is getting more from me than what they take out of my paycheck." All online shopping sites should be made accountable, us non-business people don't got time for this type of dumb. Nothing is getting better from taxes, its just paying the ding-a-lings with inflated egos over at sit and get rich quick by doing nothing all day hall.
 
*stands up in front of the podium as a politician at a local city hall*
*BREATHS IN DEEPLY*

Why should someone have to pay sales tax to a state they don't even live in? I kinda feel more sorry for the UK that has to pay a 20% value tax.
I'm not sure but it doesn't seem legal that Newegg is putting the tax on the customers when CT isn't listed in the disclaimer.

You're right, it's not Newegg's responsibility to teach their consumers about taxes. But it is on them to either protect consumer data or to alert the consumer that their sales records will be handed over to the state where extra taxes (such as the use tax) may apply. Again, they had these disclaimers for CO, LA, VT, and RI but not CT or any other state. Furthermore when Newegg voluntarily handed over the data they outright lied to their consumer base about what was happening. They claimed that CT passed a new law which required them to forfeit the data, when no such law had been passed. The following is a clip from an email that I received from them:
 

 
Note that they've finally provided a disclaimer on use tax only after lying to the consumer and years after the date of purchase. Newegg is not innocent here, there is no defense for their actions.

You can't willfully avoid something you have had no prior knowledge about. That's like saying small children willfully catch the flu when they have no concept of of germs or hygiene. I'm sure use tax isn't a thing that most people even think about, myself included up until a few days ago. Willingness requires prior knowledge of the action committed, that's basic ethics.