in terms of hard infrastructure, everything has already been paid for. There's no 'state-provided' street or sidewalk on which this business is taking place, nor a state-built thoroughfare upon which a consumer has to travel to visit a store. Yes, the US gov't invented the internet, but for at least the last dozen years every iota of bandwith on which our (consumer's) signals travel is paid for commercially, and the costs passed down to either we the consumers (through our ISPs) or the businesses (through their providers)
You are correct sir! The datacenters hosting the websites selling you products online are floating in the sky, not a building on a public road. Similarly, the warehouses from which these products are shipping and the offices housing the people who run and manage the company are floating in the sky. There are no trucks that ship the products to you on public roads because physicists have perfected teleportation, but are currently only licensing it to online retailers.
whatever actual physical location a business has somewhere, the services that they consume (fire, police, etc.) from the government are already paid for in their property taxes.
This appears to be an argument against all sales tax rather than merely against online sales taxes, by saying that everything can be paid for from property tax. One might argue that it would be a more regressive tax, because in a store (online or brick-and-mortar) selling luxury or high-end products the ratio of the value of the annual transactions to the value of the property would be much higher for luxury items. It would also make the progressive exceptions to sales tax on groceries that many (all?) states implement very complicated to lay out in the property tax code.
Self-evidently there's no need for police services for the sorts of store loss-prevention actions (shoplifters, etc) for internet stores.
Yes, no crime or theft ever took place in a shipping warehouse, or on the roads that shipments travel on, but brick-and-mortar stores are wretched hives of scum and villainy (/sarcasm). Maybe there are different levels of crime, but at most that would suggest a sales tax discount for online sales, not elimination.
In short, simply because the government needs money, and can take it, doesn't mean we need to tolerate it blithely like sheep.
In 22 of the 50 states (according to Wikipedia), internet sales are already taxed as a "use tax" but many people do not report it on their state tax return, essentially committing tax fraud. Having online retailers collect the tax is simply a more effective way of collecting an existing tax, at least in those 22 states.
To put the government's argument quite simply: The states and counties had a source of tax revenue with which to provide government services. Parts of this revenue were lost due to online shopping that goes untaxed. The level of services that the taxpayers want from the government is mostly unaffected. The choice is then to collect more taxes in some other way, cut government services, or go into debt. It's so easy to say that government is wasteful and spending should be cut, but it's incredibly hard to run an organization the size of the government efficiently and the government does do a lot of useful things for us that wouldn't happen without taxes.