The more incoherent and buzzword-filled the better. It’s like they don’t listen to themselves speak.
I don’t even understand what they’re talking about.
If I understood it correctly, this is actually simpler than most SovCit insanity. Taxes are owed on the transaction, but they’re owed to the government, which represents the people, aka you, personally, so you can tell them to just not charge the taxes and file the zeroed out receipt with their tax returns to prove that they already paid the taxes to you personally by not charging you.
I can follow that logic even if it’s not true, but then they stretch it to zeroing out the cost of the item, not just the taxes, if I read it right. They don’t want no taxes, they want free stuff.
Yeah I don’t get that leap either but I did my best.
I think they’re trying to say that they demand that the store issues a new receipt where any tax amount is deducted, the “zeroed out” comment. It seems like they think that the business will then use the receipt to get some sort of refund on the tax at the end of the month and then pass that refund back to Dingbat
None do
They’re mad that they got taken to court over a credit default, so they’re trying to come up with some mental gymnastics to get out of it.
Even if this was true, where do you think the money the refund would come from. Oh yeah, TAXES.
