I would much rather have the courts contain New York's avarice and not outrageously extend the business principle of the necessity of a nexus of physical location before any taxing(sales) privilege exists. It isn't the payment, it is the caprice and confusion this will create - that's the big problem. But, if you want to play that way, I'm sure my state would like to tax the sale of any stocks & bonds recommended to anyone in my state by businesses in New York to boost our state revenue.

from http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tax-free_shopping >

"The focus on use tax collection has increased because the U.S. Supreme Court has placed significant hurdles in the path of state efforts to collect sales taxes on transactions in other no-tax or lower-tax jurisdictions. In National Bellas Hess, Inc. v. Department of Revenue of the State of Illinois and Quill Corp. v. North Dakota, the Court concluded that the Commerce Clause and Due Process Clause of the U.S. Constitution require that there be a nexus between the taxing state and the vendor of goods or services, in the form of a physical presence. This has been interpreted to apply to both catalog sales and out of state sales over the Internet. States are thus prohibited from collecting sales taxes on so-called remote transactions because to do so would unconstitutionally burden interstate commerce."

Amazon - thank you for standing up and being today's Ablative Surface on American Justice.