Jon,
NOTHING in MGLs states that Interstate Commerce needs MA permits and that "all transactions take place in MA". That is the AG's mis-interpretation of the MGLs.
According to the UCC (Uniform Commercial Code, the legal bible for interstate commerce) as I recall it, interstate transactions take place at the place of sale (usually where it is shipped from) not the place that the buyer is sitting in front of their phone/computer or buyer's residence.
Taking the AG's "ruling" further it would require every out-of-state vendor to get a MA Sales Tax Certificate (even if vendor has no nexus in MA) and collect/pay MA Sales Tax on every transaction here. It was determined a long, long time ago that if a business did not have a nexus in MA, they did not have to collect sales tax here. It then was the responsibility of the buyer to pay the "use tax" themselves.
I do agree with you that a small change in the MGLs could solve the problem, however the legislature has shown no desire in reigning in the "misuse of powers" (with no oversight) of the AG! I was pointing out that nobody can force the AG to re-write his "rulings" and "opinions" as he is answerable to nobody once he is elected.
It's also interesting that yesterday I was told that (allegedly) the AG basically told Glock that they could NOT honor their warranty and replace defective guns!! Anyone tried to do this on another product would be facing the wrath of the AG under Ch. 93A (deceptive practices), but not on guns . . . but he's doing it for our own good!! [roll]