Skip to comments.Amazon Halts Associates Program with Califormnia Businesses because Of Gov. Brown (VANITY)
Posted on 06/29/2011 1:31:09 PM PDT by Sneakyuser
I have been an Amazon Associates member for 6 years but no more because of the need of California to try to gain more revenue (without providing services). This email came in this afternoon:
For well over a decade, the Amazon Associates Program has worked with thousands of California residents. Unfortunately, a potential new law that may be signed by Governor Brown compels us to terminate this program for California-based participants. It specifically imposes the collection of taxes from consumers on sales by online retailers - including but not limited to those referred by California-based marketing affiliates like you - even if those retailers have no physical presence in the state. (continued)
No, they didn't pull a scam in Texas. The Texas Attorney General decided to change the rules on sales tax collections for catalog and online sales to treat a distribution center for order shipping fulfillment as if it were a retail store, thereby making millions of dollars of untaxable sales suddenly and retroactively taxable and telling Amazon they had to collect and submit those sales taxes to the state. Amazon responded by closing the distribution center. So this crony action by the AG to do the bidding of the Best Buys and Walmarts and Sears stores destroyed hundreds of jobs.
But then you have to pay postage on top of that. The minus sales tax offsets the postage and allows competition. I have always found Amazon to be a great and responsive vendor.
Thanks to dimocrats in Arkansas, the local libraries just lost their associates status because of this need to tax and spend. The funny part, is that the state is actually taking money away from its public libraries.
Of course like all dimocrats, only money they control is proper money.
Go Amazon. It’s high time we all look at ways to defund the government spenders.
“If store A sells you a book and that book is subject to a sales tax, then if store B sells you a book it too must be subject to the same sales tax.”
But if I buy at store B, and I also have to pay shipping and handling, then I won’t buy from store B.
(Catalog sales have always been not subject to local sales taxes.)
But I do stand by my original post. It is, I believe, mainline conservative thought to feel that all businesses, large and small, be treated the same way.
You are an idiot.
If store A sells you a book and that book is subject to a sales tax, then if store B sells you a book it too must be subject to the same sales tax.
So, if you go on vacation to a state that has a lower tax rate than your home state, will you keep track of all your taxable expenses and then write your state treasury a check for the difference in sales tax on all of your vacation expenses in the interest of that level playing field?
Who gets to determine what's fair? I prefer to deal in right and wrong, not fair and unfair. It's objective versus subjective.
I'll give you that. Good point.
ONLY as long as the catalog company does not have a retail store in that tax jurisdiction. Sears Roebuck catalog sales were always subject to sales tax if there was a Sears store in the state. Same for any other catalog. So if you bought stuff from the Estes Model Rocketry catalog, you would pay sales tax if you were in Colorado, but not in other states. Lands End catalog sales have always been taxable in states where there was a Lands End store (very few states until recently).
You will pony up the difference in taxes...correct!?
Let me ask you a question....Do you believe in states rights?
If store A sells you an item, the store may charge you a state sales tax, a county sales tax, a local sales tax, and any number of other taxes. Basically, the store needs to know only the sales taxes he must charge all customers in his immediate location.
In the USA, there are over 4000 different tax zones. If store B is an on-line retailer, for him to charge you the sales tax for your location, then he would have to know which of the 4000+ different sales taxes to charge you. That's why he does not have to charge you sales tax if you are out of state.
Ugh, not at all. But one thing I've seen in my neck of the woods is special tax breaks going to businesses that locate in special redevelopment areas.
So let's say you own a shoe store and two blocks away there's a special redevelopment area where I build my shoe store. Because of my location, I pay no taxes for 25 years.
I can and will undercut you on price, forcing you out of business. Of course, you can relocate, but good luck selling your building. That's not a level playing field, and I don't see how Amazon is all that different.
Just wondering if you are going to respond to any of the replies..................
In the meantime, there's no "fair" way to collect taxes except at the point of a gun ~ and that's the truth.
Not even John Kerry will pay one penny more than is due.
So if the Walmarts and Best Buys and Targets of the world want to operate under the same sales tax regulations that apply to Amazon and other catalog stores, they should close all of their stores in all stated other than their headquarters and just use online catalogs for all their sales orders.
Absolutely! And for what it's worth, I feel that the 10th Amendment is probably the Amendment that's been trampled on the most.
And I do see the point of the many folks here arguing that taxing on-line vendors would be a paperwork nightmare.
But take a look at my post #34 for another perspective.
The difference is that any small storeowner in America with any sense is also an Amazon affiliate. For the local store owner, Amazon is a wonderful extra revenue stream that in many cases is the difference between survival and failure.
Basically a horse of a different color...