CNN News: 美南達(dá)科他州計(jì)劃增設(shè)電商銷售稅

Today’s show starts with a pair of significant cases in front of the U.S. Supreme Court.

今天的節(jié)目從美國(guó)最高法院的兩起重要案件開始。

The first involves part of a federal law that concerned immigrants to the U.S. It said that people who came to the country legally but who were not American citizens could be deported if they’ve been convicted of crimes of violence. Both the Obama and Trump administrations supported the law when it came to a legal immigrant from the Philippines who was convicted twice of home burglary in California.

第一個(gè)涉及到聯(lián)邦法律，涉及到美國(guó)的移民。聯(lián)邦法律表示，合法移民但非美國(guó)公民的人如果被判犯有暴力罪，就應(yīng)被驅(qū)逐出境。在來自菲律賓的一名合法移民，在加州被判兩次入室盜竊的事件中，奧巴馬和特朗普兩屆政府都支持這項(xiàng)法律，

At first, a lower court ruled that his convictions amounted to a crime of violence. But the man’s lawyers appealed the decision, arguing their client wasn’t given notice that his crimes would result in deportation, and that the "crimes of violence" part of the law wasn’t clear enough.

起初，下級(jí)法院裁定其罪行等同于暴力犯罪。但該男子的律師對(duì)這一判決提出上訴，稱其當(dāng)事人沒有注意到自己的罪行將導(dǎo)致被驅(qū)逐出境，因?yàn)榉傻?ldquo;暴力犯罪”部分還不夠清楚。

In a 5-4 ruling, the Supreme Court decided the law was too vague to be constitutional because Congress didn’t define what exactly would qualify as a violent crime. So, in this case, the immigrant from the Philippines won’t be automatically deported.

在一項(xiàng)5-4的裁決中，最高法院裁定該法律太過模糊，不能成為憲法，因?yàn)閲?guó)會(huì)沒有明確界定什么是暴力犯罪。因此，在這種情況下，來自菲律賓的移民不會(huì)被自動(dòng)驅(qū)逐出境。

The ruling is limited though. Experts say the government can still deport legal immigrants convicted of obvious violent crimes like murder.

但這項(xiàng)裁決是有限的。專家表示，政府仍然可以驅(qū)逐被判犯有明顯暴力罪行如謀殺的合法移民。

The second case involves sales tax in the Internet. Oftentimes, when you buy something online in the U.S., you don’t have to pay sales tax, unless you’re buying from Amazon itself, which charges it in most states, or if you’re shopping at a retail company that has a physical store in your state.

第二個(gè)案例涉及到互聯(lián)網(wǎng)上的銷售稅。通常，當(dāng)你在美國(guó)網(wǎng)上買東西的時(shí)候，不必繳納銷售稅，除非你是在亞馬遜上購(gòu)買，這在大多數(shù)州是收費(fèi)的，或者你在一家有實(shí)體店的零售公司購(gòu)物。

South Dakota wants this changed. It says states are missing out on billions of dollars in e-commerce taxes when people don’t pay them online, and it wants companies that sell more than $100,000 worth of goods in a year to collect taxes for South Dakota.

南達(dá)科他州想要改變這一情況。它說，人們?cè)诰€購(gòu)物，但是不支付電子商務(wù)稅，國(guó)家就會(huì)失去數(shù)十億美元的電子商務(wù)稅，而且它希望在一年之內(nèi)銷售價(jià)值超過10萬(wàn)美元的商品的公司來為南達(dá)科他州征收稅款。

But many smaller businesses like ones that sell on eBay don’t want to be forced to collect taxes. They say they’ll lose thousands of they have to charge sales tax and that the different taxes that states and cities have are too complicated to keep up with. The Supreme Court’s decision on this is expected to come at around the beginning of summer.

但許多像eBay這樣的小公司不希望被迫收稅。他們表示，這將會(huì)損失成千上萬(wàn)的顧客，因?yàn)樗麄儽仨氄魇珍N售稅，而各州和城市所征收的不同稅都過于復(fù)雜，無法跟上。最高法院的這一決定預(yù)計(jì)將在夏季初開始。