Amazon threatens to cut California affiliates over taxes

[frontpage]

Amazon threatens to cut California affiliates over taxes

"If any of these new tax collection schemes were adopted, Amazon would be compelled to end its advertising relationships with well over 10,000 California-based participants in the Amazon 'Associates Program,'" Paul Misener, Amazon's vice president for global public policy wrote in the letter, dated February 24.

...the U.S. Supreme Court ruled in 1992 that retailers can't be forced to collect sales tax on out-of-state shipments unless they have offices in those states.

[news.cnet.com...]

80 cents out of every one dollar collected in taxes in California goes to pay state worker's salaries, benefits, and pension.

State legislators who get their political donations from state employee unions are trying to pass more taxes to pay the state employees more.

Here are the bills in question.

AB 153 (Skinner - Democrat 14th District)
AB 155 (Calderon - Democrat 58th District)
SB 234 (Hancock - Democrat 9th District)
SB 655 (Steinberg - Democrat 6th District)

[digitalv]

Good - we still have rights in this country, it's about time we exercise them. I applaud any business who has the guts to opt out of doing business with governments that penalize their success.

[frontpage]

The ironic part of this story is that if Amazon does pull out of California, those 10,000 individuals and corporations that currently pay state taxes on their affiliate income to the state --- won't be paying anything in the future.

So in summation, these politicians are going to cause less tax revenue and more unemployment with their actions.

[MLHmptn]

Again, Streamlined Sales Tax initiative solves this. When will these 26 states that are not part of the SST realize that getting a set percentage is better than getting nothing!?

[tangor]

That old "no taxation without representation" kind of thing. Many and Several States have no desire to dabble with Federal Hocus Pocus ala Taxes... Nor any Desire or Need to Compel those Residing Within A State for Failing to Declare a Taxable Purchase Made in Another State or Location.

Long and short, it is not the Seller at fault here, it is the Buyer, who is (in most US locations, and probably a few over seas, too) duty bound to declare "I bought this, it cost this much, and I own this much tax. Here it is."

The Buyers aren't doing their job, and politicians don't really want to hammer those who elect them, so are going after the companies/biz, which are NOT REQUIRED to collect taxes outside their jurisdiction...

Freetards Untie! That's what's brought us to where we are now...and it is not going to change anytime soon.

[RhinoFish]

MLHmptn is right. SST would be a huge amount of revenue for CA, while taxing affs, would be a net loss. Our politicians couldn't be more ignorant. Smacking those who work and live in state (aff tax) versus taxing MANY consumers out of state (SST). No brainer.

[dpd1]

CA just gets worse every year. I'm waiting to get a proper answer, but it looks like the city I'm in is trying to get anybody who sells to also include a tobacco permit/tax for $300 with their biz license, even if you have nothing to do with tobacco.

Not to derail the thread, but does anybody know what the proper way to do sales tax in CA is right now? I don't even think THEY know anymore. I've been told; go by your percentage where you are, and then also told to go by the buyer's percentage where they are. I went by mine before, but they act like that changed now or something.

[MLHmptn]

Being in California you have to collect for every municipality individually. God help you if you haven't been doing this already.

[LifeinAsia]

All the similar bills were vetoed before by Arnold (or killed because the pols knew he would veto them). Now that we have Jerry, I am preparing to pull my Amazon links...

[dpd1]

Being in California you have to collect for every municipality individually. God help you if you haven't been doing this already.

OK, well... #1, that's insane if it's true. #2 Two of their own people said my local rate was OK, one said the general state rate was OK, and one said what you said. So at best, they have no idea what they're doing. My rate is the highest in the state, so if anything... I over paid. So if they have a problem with that, then they really are morons. Luckily I don't have many sales in the state.

[MLHmptn]

I very well know it's insane as I have already been collecting it for years and luckily we were able to code something by zip code on our end to collect it. After seeing Amazon's move I'm about ready to tell the California BOE where to go as we have no sufficient nexus in California either as we are 100% out-of-state with everything.

[LifeinAsia]

After seeing Amazon's move I'm about ready to tell the California BOE where to go as we have no sufficient nexus in California either as we are 100% out-of-state with everything.

You should! Without a nexus, there is absolutely no reason why you should be doing their collections work for them. Especially since they aren't paying you anything to do it.

[dpd1]

I very well know it's insane as I have already been collecting it for years and luckily we were able to code something by zip code on our end to collect it. After seeing Amazon's move I'm about ready to tell the California BOE where to go as we have no sufficient nexus in California either as we are 100% out-of-state with everything.

What's funny is... The highest rates are in the most urban areas, and those areas are most likely do contain most of the businesses. So logic would dictate that they would most likely stand to make more money, by just having people tax everybody based on their own rate where their business lives.