Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
Yes, I realize that entirely, but that's not the issue. The issue is that Amazon's business model is based on tax evasion. They have a physical presence in California because their Kindle product is manufactured there, and they have a distribution center in Texas, so in both cases, they are required to collect sales taxes, but are refusing to do so.
Another problem is that they are making it more difficult for local businesses to stay in business. If Amazon ends up winning this battle, I would like to see Texas and California eliminate their sales taxes entirely so that local businesses can at least compete with Amazon. The states can then raise their income and/or property taxes to make up the difference.
Soon they will be doing this in Mexico , if the price is right . I guess government will have to live with less , sooner or later .
It could be a smart move or a bad move... New York is the only state that I can think where Amazon collects sales tax but there may be more... it all depends on what Amazon does with Texas, if its the same thing as California then Perry is an idiot... if it is the same thing as New York then Perry is smart... Consumers however will be the overall losers but at the same time, they are paying the sales tax like they are suppose to...
The problem is when states try to enforce these rules simply because Amazon has affiliate marketers in that state. Having affiliate marketers is not the same thing as having a physical presence. It's more akin to buying advertising.
This not only impacts Amazon, it impacts every other business (small, med, large) that does business on the web using affiliates. It also impacts the affiliates themselves (who are most often small business owners just trying to make a living) because merchants like Amazon (and other small, med, large businesses on the web who use affiliates) will simply drop the affiliates in that state as opposed to collecting the sales tax.
So now the states still don't get the tax, plus these lose the income tax from the affiliates in that state because now you have just put a small business owner out of business or you have severely compromised their ability to make a living.
Affiliates do not process orders. They do not collect payments. And Amazon is not the only company who uses affiliates. Affiliates simply advertise the merchants and receive a fee if someone buys something. For example, if City Data puts an Amazon banner at the top and you click on it and buy something directly from Amazon- is your state entitled to income tax from Amazon because City Data is located in your state?
So this issue is a lot bigger than "oh big bad Amazon is hurting local businesses because so many people shop there and they don't want to follow the rules".
Is there any reason, or law, Amazon should be forced to collect taxes, for the state, from consumers of that state, when Amazon does not have a presence in that state?
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
