[Dan Cooper]

Are you saying that an Amazon Marketplace seller located in California can no longer sell through Amazon?

I think that Amazon Marketplace sellers already collect sales tax for the state that they are in, including California.

What California is contending is that because Amazon had affiliates in California (basically web sites that steer people to Amazon to make a purchase) that Amazon has a physical presence in California and therefore had to collect sales tax on all sales to California residents. Amazon severed all ties with the affiliates in California, removing the state's justification.

[giotto]

What California is contending is that because Amazon had affiliates in California (basically web sites that steer people to Amazon to make a purchase) that Amazon has a physical presence in California and therefore had to collect sales tax on all sales to California residents.

Thank you. For some reason, probably because it makes no sense whatsoever, I couldn't get a handle on what this law meant. The only people in California making money on the Amazon sales in question are the affiliates. So only affiliates should have to pay tax. How does Amazon's affiliation get transmuted into physical presence in California? The overreaching audacity of this is breathtaking.

[giotto]

I forgot to mention this: You wrote, “I think that Amazon Marketplace sellers already collect sales tax for the state that they are in, including California.” So what’s to stop the lawmakers from making the same claim about Marketplace sellers as affiliates, namely that their physical presence in CA means Amazon should pay tax on all sales to CA residents? Will Marketplace sellers be next on the chopping block?