Amazon's position on state sales tax is unfair and unethical

[somone]

http://www.slate.com/id/2299051

Amazon Wants To Save You Money
Should shoppers care that its position on state sales tax is unfair and unethical?
By Farhad Manjoo

There are two powerful arguments in the tax debate between Amazon.com and the state of California. On the one hand, there's simple fairness. For years, online retailers—which weren't required to collect sales tax on purchases from Californians—have enjoyed a huge advantage over physical stores, which must collect sales tax.A $1,000 TV from your local Best Buy costs about $1,100 with tax; at Amazon, it costs exactly $1,000. Technically, residents who purchase stuff from out-of-state online stores must pay a "use tax" on the merchandise on their annual tax return, but almost nobody does that. Late last month, California Gov. Jerry Brown signed a bill that forces large online retailers to collect taxes from residents. The government estimates that the legislation will bring in more than $1 billion a year in revenue. Tax proponents also argue that the law will let the state's businesses compete against online stores, thereby creating local jobs.

And then there's the other side of the argument: ARE YOU KIDDING, YOU WANT TO RAISE MY PRICES, WTF???

Millions of Californians, myself included, love shopping at Amazon because it's cheap and convenient. Now the state wants to make it slightly less cheap. Even though I agree with the fairness argument intellectually, I feel an instant aversion to my prices going up. The Amazon loophole—the ability to buy that TV for not a dollar more than its sales price—motivates many of my purchases, and I'd really hate for it to go away.

In other words, this isn't an argument between two equally reasonable positions. It's an argument between reason and emotion, between your brain and your gut. Amazon has no intellectually sound arguments against collecting taxes from residents—by all ethical and civic standards, its position is unsound. Instead, Amazon is counting on our emotions prevailing—on loyal, tax-savvy customers like me lashing out at our price-hiking legislators. I worry that there's a good chance Amazon—and people like me—will prevail.

[Scuba]

1. Easy solution....

... end the sales tax, which is inherently unfair to the poor anyway, and implement a progressive capital gains tax.

[Jkid]

2. That's the smart thing to do.

...or implement the sales tax for anything over $100. But that will never happen because some politicians will scream SOCIALISM!

[PoliticAverse]

5. Considering every country in the world (except a handful) have some type of sales/VAT tax ...

I don't see this happening.

[dkf]

3. I see it the opposite way.

It gives the little mom and pop store a way to compete with the big box stores who all have presences in our state and so have state taxes.

[msongs]

4. it is not unethical. it is perfectly legal. not liking it does not make it unethical nt

[daa]

6. Apparently you don't read the constitution any more than repugs

[skepticscott]

7. If you add on the shipping charges

from Amazon for a $1000 TV (which you don't have to pay at Best Buy), then it most certainly does cost you more than $1000.

[xchrom]

8. recommend

[ProgressiveProfessor]

9. It is not a loophole, it is Federal Law

Purchasers from out of state vendors are required to pay Use Tax. It is not the vendor's problem and CA can not legitimately try to use a long arm tactic to force vendors, regardless of size to illegally collect sales taxes for the state when they do not have a nexus there.