Skip to comments.Amazon fights California sales tax requirement
Posted on 07/02/2011 3:46:49 PM PDT by tflabo
Saying it won't force California customers to pay sales tax on their Internet purchases, Amazon.com is severing ties with 10,000 small businesses and individuals here who funnel shoppers to the online bazaar through their websites.
The defiant action came hours after Gov. Jerry Brown signed legislation that would have required Amazon to start collecting a 7.25% base tax on online purchases
(Excerpt) Read more at latimes.com ...
Awh!! The libs are fighting among themselves! What’s the matter? They don’t like paying ‘their fair share’?
Rats NEVER think that there could be a negative reaction to their actions.
“This is a significant hit on our revenues and our profits,” said Loren Bendele, chief executive of the company, which has 80 employees. Bendele said the action would cost the company 15% to 20% of its business, and probably require him to lay off workers.
ARE YOU LISTENING BROWN/OBAMA?!?!
Way to go minimizing the problem there, LA Times. The number of affiliates affected has been widely reported to be 25,000 rather than 10,000.
I wonder how many of those Amazon partners are just one desktop computer heavy and can setup outside California with an apartment and a DSL connection.
People are tired of paying for entitlements. Soon SS will be gone. Then what will the old folks do?
They will have to go to work like the rest of us. Or create their own job/business.
I don’t want to be perceived as anti-Amazon. I shop with them far more than I do any brick or mortor.
But if the sales tax code in Cal requires collection of sales tax on internet purchases...is this out of line? (I guess I could look it up, but I don’t have the time or inclination.)
They are not fighting it. They are simply going to stop doing what the state has decided to tax.
no. but then Amazon has every right to stop doing what the state has decided to tax.
The old folks, as you call us....will demand all the SS money taken out of our wages, plus interest.
“But if the sales tax code in Cal requires collection of sales tax on internet purchases...is this out of line? (I guess I could look it up, but I dont have the time or inclination.)”
There are court cases on point about both what constitutes a “nexus” requiring out-of-state companies to collect tax and regarding subsidiaries & taxation as well. All of these court cases seem to back Amazon, not CA. CA’s new code goes against established court precedents.
Grow a brain and get the hell out of the rathole...make it happen...
I would guarantee by these small buisnesses losing access to Amazon that they will be laying their employees off because of the hit they will take from it.Dumb dumb move on the states part!
They most certainly have the right to discontinue doing business in Cali. They may well do the same in Texas, sadly.
So many businesses are fleeing heavily tax laden states, I see their point.Even though sales tax is a pass thru to the state and not profit. I can’t imagine the nightmare it would be for a company like Amazon to keep track and remit sales tax in every state. I look at Texas sales tax laws and my head explodes.
From Amazon’s standpoint...I would relocate. My question is this..if it is legal under the Cal sales tax code to force collection of sales tax...why would they not? Or should all internet sales in Cal be ignored for sales tax income?
Thank you for your answer.
So this is a change in past Cal sales tax requirements?
I’m not sure what a nexus is. Is it like a grandfather clause?
Wow! More cars on the road polluting the environment with drivers wasting gasoline and time.
Amazon did shut down Texas distribution centers after the state began trying tax out of state orders distributed through them. Including a big one in my town with the resulting loss of jobs.
They don’t have to stop doing business in Kalipornia or Texas to avoid these particular taxes. In Kalipornia they just stop allowing thousands of associates to sell on their site and in Texas they closed their brick and mortar warehouses.
It seems Amazon would be open for a standardized Federal sales tax to be collected but having to collect sales taxes based on variable rates across the nation could be a logisitics headache. Ca. rakes in multiple billions in tax revenues and still they mismanage it all. Why feed that fat beast any more $$.
“I don’t think they’re (Amazon) a particularly good corporate citizen,” said Darnell, who like other affiliates was cut off by Amazon. “We all live in the system and contribute to the state...”
Exactly, Mr Artiste. Keep bowing to the state. And Amazon is trying to save their millions of customers from paying up to 10% more on purchases. To do it, because of this twisted double-taxation law, they had to cut off a relatively tiny percentage of affiliates, most of whom will not be severely impacted.
Amazon had a choice: screw our customers or screw the government. I think they made the right choice and a gutsy one.
Very few companies will give them a job. From the age of 55 onwards, experience and work ethic may be very high but opportunities for employment are very low. Perhaps a Walmart greeter or McDonalds 'barista'.
Gov. Perry Vetoes Internet Tax Bill
I cant believe Tx would even consider this nonsense...
The only customers subject to the tax would be the California customers. Those of other states would not be taxed.
We have had a law like this in Tennessee for ever.
I knew that Amazon had discussed pulling their warehouses out of Texas. I didn’t realize it had happened.
I am not a lawyer nor do I play one on TV but I think the difference is the fact one state can not impose a tariff on another state.
Which explains why Amazon can get around this by dropping relations with business within the state and just sell direct from outside the state.
Perhaps someone who knows the law better can explain it better.
You are not understanding the issue (and believe me I can see why with the mess California has made). This is NOT about the already existent law requiring sales tax on internet purchases that are in the same state. This is a NEW law signed by Brown that ADDS a tax to these affiliates or behind-the-scenes suppliers and manufacturers who might happen to be located in California. Those sales previously were not taxed, and to avoid adding the tax Amazon cut the relationship with those dealers. You know the folks I mean, everything from a Mom and Pop jewelry maker to a 500 employee widget seller. These folks sell thru Amazon as well as other sources.
They way I've heard it, a long ago Supreme Court decision says yes, it is out of line.
When did you have your lobotomy - or can you remember?
I surely understand that Amazon would be pro-Fed sales tax.
I would actually favor it..if it replaced income tax. Wow, the “poor” would have some skin in the game.
But I don’t see it happening in the immediate future.
I think there is mismangement on all levels, Federal..State, County and City.
Start with the premise that all taxes are "out of line" and continue your research from there.
Darn skippy...from one oldster to another!
“The old folks, as you call us....will demand all the SS money taken out of our wages, plus interest.”
You bloody damn right we will.
For most of my working life I paid the maximum amount every year into SS as demanded by a confiscatory law. I and others never received one cent interest on those monies. If we had, at retirement we would have had a much larger payout than the government thieves which took it will ever pay out with the so called benefits.
There are times I almost fly into a blind rage when I hear some freak say my monthly SS check is an entitlement. Placing it into the same category as a inner city baby factory, or a 3rd or 4th generation welfare parasite creep.
I many be old, but not so damn old as to not rise up and have one last fight left in me.
Yeah, you just do that.
Depending on when you starting collecting I'd wager that you've already gotten that and more.
That was my question...is it a new law.
if you mean CA. I’d have to move to it first.
Get used to it, grow a thick skin, there are plenty of people here who castigate us as welfare recipients. I like "Dale Reed's answer on an earlier thread today about S.S., Suck it up, im a greedy bastard!!! I believe I'll start using that one myself.
It wasn’t until the yacht building industry had been completely destroyed when they repealed it.
Major thread drift...but I have to answer...
What is collected, by force, really doesn’t have anything to do with what is received. A promise was made..and should be upheld. If I had the cash given to this Ponzi scheme during my working life, with interest and invested..even in a bank...you my Friend would not have an ax to grind.
I sincerely regret that you are at the bottom of the pyamid. But it had to happen. Gripe at the government that squandered the funds. And from what I read..they are trying to fix the problem...sure they are.
Technically how can CA make Amazon collect the taxes? What’s the state gonna do, shut down the internet? I guess it could confiscate Amazon shipments once they crossed a border into the state. But then Amazon could counter by shipping stuff in “plain brown wrappers”.
I'm guessing the 25,000 figure is closer to the truth since a lot of things you can buy on line is either coming out of California or New Jersey because (I'm taking an educated guess here) of the ocean ports in those two states. Basically a lot of stuff coming into the country through those two states, probably a lot of ware houses in those two states, near the ocean ports.
I’ve been collecting SS for about five years. I’ve payed into it, at the maximum rate, all my working life. Just think what I could have done with that money if the government didn’t demand I pay into the system. Now they are threatening to stop it? I don’t think so.
Way to go, Jerry!
The stupidity of democrats never ceases to amaze.
Since Amazon affiliates have absolutely nothing to do with product handling, their proximity to ocean ports is entirely irrelevant.
Amazon affiliates post advertising links on their websites. They then get commissions from Amazon based on sales coming to Amazon through those websites.
“I dont want to be perceived as anti-Amazon. I shop with them far more than I do any brick or mortor.
But if the sales tax code in Cal requires collection of sales tax on internet purchases...is this out of line? (I guess I could look it up, but I dont have the time or inclination.)”
Amazon does not have to collect sales tax in California. They never have.
The bill just passed in California is one of those affiliates bills that attempts to pretend like amazon (and other online retailers) have a physical presence in the state just because they have these online advertising affiliates who have web sites that funnel traffic to amazon, when otherwise, said online retailers do not have a physical presence.
About a half dozen states, including North Carolina, Illinois and Colorado have passed similar bills, with the result that several thousand small businesses in those states were destroyed when amazon (and others) responded by dumping all affiliates in those states. The net result was a loss of state tax revenue in every case since the destroyed businesses no longer had any income on which to pay state taxes.
The California Rats know all of this, so they know that their bill will destroy thousands of California businesses and reduce state tax revenues. I guess passing the bill must simply be political grandstanding for their ignorant constituents and that the price of thousands of destroyed businesses and lost state tax revenue is worth the price.
Simple solution for Amazon and others: forego a tiny amount of revenue from affiliates to restore the status quo of no physical presence, thereby saving their customers several hundred millions of dollars.
I wish more corporations had the balls to stand up to the fascists rather than playing patty-cake with them, thinking that will save them from being eaten in the long run, because anyone who has studied the history of the last hundred years would know better.
Social Insecurity: Don’t Rely on the Government
Here is the scale of the problem - (I know Amazon is a "liberal" leaning company). I live in NH - there is not sales tax in NH. I sell new stuff on E-bay. E-bay is a company based in San Jose CA. If I someone from CA is the highest bidder on by product, and I ship it to CA, then I am liable to collect the sales tax for the State of California.
If CA deems that I do not remit the sales tax properly, than I have to defend myself in the CA court system.
The Constitution of the United States has a clause in Section 10 of Article I that states
No State shall, without the Consent of the Congress, lay any Imposts or Duties on Imports or Exports, except what may be absolutely necessary for executing it's inspection Laws: and the net Produce of all Duties and Imposts, laid by any State on Imports or Exports, shall be for the Use of the Treasury of the United States;
In the SCOTUS case Brown vs. Maryland of 1827, Justice John Marshall said that the Imports included imports from one state to another. He was following James Madison who in his Notes on the Debates of the Constitution explained that this was one of the main reasons for scrapping the Articles of Confederation for a new Constitution so the States could no longer tax article brought from other states.
This case was overturned in 1868 by Justice Miller in Woodruff v. Parham whose opinion was as devoid of logic as Dred Scott or Roe v. Wade, and has led to a complete mess regarding who can and cannot regulated interstate commerce.
Justice Thomas asked to revisit Woodruff in his dissent in CAMPS NEWFOUND/OWATONNA, INC. v. TOWN OF HARRISON ET AL. 1997.