Amazon aims to have voters decide on sales-tax law

[xchrom]

http://www.latimes.com/business/la-fi-amazon-referendum-20110712,0,5517762.story

Reporting from Sacramento and Los Angeles—

Escalating its fight to thwart a new levy on Internet purchases, Amazon.com says it will ask California voters to overturn a state law requiring all companies with operations or affiliates here to collect sales tax.

Amazon has refused to collect the 7.25% base sales tax since the law took effect July 1, saying it is unconstitutional. It will seek a referendum vote as early as February, which could ignite an expensive and noisy political battle pitting the deep-pocketed Seattle-based Internet seller against a much larger coalition of brick-and-mortar retailers such as Wal-Mart Stores Inc., Best Buy Co. and Target Corp.

"This is a referendum on jobs and investment in California," said Paul Misener, Amazon's vice president of global public policy in Washington, D.C. "We support this referendum against the recent sales tax legislation because, with unemployment at well over 11%, Californians deserve a voice and a choice about jobs, investment and the state's economic future."

While Amazon has not ruled out filing suit to block the law, as it has in New York, analysts said taking the case directly to voters might be cheaper and more effective than a lawsuit that could be tied up in the trial and appeals courts for years and run up tens of millions of dollars in legal bills.






***note to amazon: go fuck yourself.

[diveguy]

1. I dont see the problem with it

Let the people decide

[xchrom]

3. 'the people' -- with that stupid proposition process -- have fucked w/ california's ability

ability to govern it's self effectively.

there is no good in direct democracy.

[diveguy]

7. WTF are you saying

" ability to govern itself effectively" " there is no good in direct democracy"

The people make up the gov. Not allowing the people to govern is fucking up the democracy. The people of California Should have more input in this decision than the rich politicians.

[ProgressiveProfessor]

22. It is a mixed bag

And before you make yourself look stupid by playing the Prop 13 card, read up on the Gann Initiative (Prop 4) first

[Iggo]

16. Proposition 8.

Google it.

[onehandle]

2. Amazon, with or without tax, has become much more expensive.

They have reduced discounts and are taking advantage of the bad times.

They have discovered that desperate people will still buy when the discount is 11% instead of 25%.

Screw 'em.

[Shagbark Hickory]

11. Well it still appears to consistently have the lowest price on whatever it is I'm looking for.

When they pay for shipping and the shipping rates of course have gone up a lot lately, reducing a discount is certainly understandable.

[Ragnarok]

4. Good!

Let the citizens decide on this. Ultimately, it's their money, their State and their fate. I wish we had ref's more often here!

[xchrom]

6. horse shit -- the ref process is killing cali because assholes like amazon

who have no interest in the welfare of the state -- get citizens to abuse themselves w/ stupidity.

[Ragnarok]

9. Maybe Amazon should...

...just leave? We'd be happy to have them.

[xchrom]

12. Hmmm not keeping up are you?

They did stop their affiliates from doing business - I'm sure they're 'happy' about that.

I have to wonder - you do realize this is not an increase in taxes?

I'm guessing you don't.

[Luminous Animal]

8. So all taxes (including sales tax collected by brick & morter stores) should be

voted on by proposition?

Fucking stupid idea.

[Ragnarok]

10. Who knows?

All is a pretty blanket modifier. If people see the value of voting on something, I certainly wouldn't discourage their decision to lay it out for everyone interested to vote on.

[Luminous Animal]

13. It would make budgeting a nightmare. The state must have a reliable source of income

to maintain infrastructure. You know, silly things like roads, bridges, schools... if the people of the state feel the need to take over the duties of their representatives, why not abolish the state government altogether?

Perhaps we can cede everything over to local government control and allow vast discrepancies between cities, counties, and towns. Marin county can have their lovely parks and paved roads and Yolo can revert back to dirt and wilderness.

[ProgressiveProfessor]

23. How so?

Initiatives rarely if ever go into effect immediately

[Luminous Animal]

27. After all the lawsuits. Are you really going to advocate taxation by ballot?

Prop 13 has been a continuing disaster for this state. Initiatives can kick in as early as they are written.

[ProgressiveProfessor]

31. Prop 13 was a reaction to perception that retired people were being taxed out of their homes

It was Prop 4 that limited the total income stream of government, regardless of source. That has been the real throttle

[Iggo]

30. Proposition 8.

Google it.

[Retrograde]

14. Most of them already are

in California, at least. My county's most recent sales tax increase was put in via a voter proposition, as was last year's parcel tax. The state gets to set income tax levers, IIRC, but other taxes require voter approval (or a clever bureaucrat who can disguise them as a fee).

What Amazon is arguing is that since they have no physical presence in the state they shouldn't have to pay state sales taxes. California is arguing that they have a use tax on the books that pre-dates Amazon and therefore they should. BTW, the bit about no physical presence is a wee bit exaggerated - Amazon's search company A9 is located about 8 blocks from me.

[Luminous Animal]

17. Yes. Counties are allowed to levy above the state level. Counties are not allowed

to legislate less than the state level or eliminate sales taxes altogether.

And again, this is bullshit. The company that I work for must take out a resale license in every state in which we want to do business (that is, ship wine to). We collect the taxes and pay the taxes. What Amazon is arguing is putting a bone-headed ballot initiative on the ballot to dismantle current regulation.

[ProgressiveProfessor]

20. Your company is in a special position since they are selling alcoholic beverages

Most out of state retailers do not do that.

[Luminous Animal]

24. So what? Any business that buys from an out of state business is required to self-report...

That is, if I own a business in California and purchase from an out of state vendor that does not charge sales tax, I am required to report that purchase and pay the sales tax. There is a line on the sales tax report that is titled, "Purchases subject to use tax."

Believe it or not, individuals who purchase from out of state are required to do the same. Recently, California has become more aggressive at auditing individuals; that is, they are sending out exploratory records to individuals asking them to self-report purchases.

So, what do you want it to be? An increase in audits and enforcement against individuals? Or a more efficient infrastructure for collecting taxes. Amazon.com ALREADY collects and pays California sales tax on behalf of themselves and several national affiliates in most states. What they haven't been doing is levying, collecting, and paying sales tax on behalf of their small local affiliates.

[ProgressiveProfessor]

19. Use tax is required of the consumer, not the out of state vendor

The state will lose this one at the polls, and it will gut the effort to enforce it nationwide.

[Luminous Animal]

25. Sales tax is required for anyone that holds a resale license in California. Amazon.com

felt that they had a work around with affiliates. The state says no. Amazon feels they can ride the anti-tax sentiment by putting an anti-tax measure before the voters.

The voters are fools. The state will merely increase their auditing and enforcement divisions and collect the tax AND penalties AND interest. I suspect if Amazon succeeds, the penalties will increase... i.e., "Don't pay the tax on that $5 book? Well, that is a $261 fine."

Just pay your fucking taxes. Don't like the regressive nature of sales tax? Then devote a couple of hours a week working to ensure California adopts more progressive taxes.

[ProgressiveProfessor]

18. Already has been in some cases

[Luminous Animal]

26. And that is worked out fabulously. We went from the crown jewel of public education

to crap.

[ProgressiveProfessor]

32. Local property taxes do not fund local education

that is due to the courts, not Prop 4 or Prop 13

[Luminous Animal]

34. Did I say local?

Yes, the courts ruled that property taxes funding local schools created an inequitable education system. The solution, of course, was to pool property taxes and distribute the funds equitably amongst districts (for ElHi and the college system). The pro prop 13 campaign loved that ruling because they were able to propagandize to the fears of white suburban property owners who didn't want THEIR taxes supporting inner city schools.

[EFerrari]

5. Agreed. FU to Amazon which is killing bookstores

and has no interest in a well funded CA.

[Iggo]

15. oops.

[InvisibleTouch]

21. I'm totally against taxes on internet purchases.

As someone who both buys and sells on the net as a matter of making my living, I think it's asinine. Amazon already "has to" charge tax for shipping to some states and not others. I'd hate to see the trend expand. It would harm everyone who makes a living on the net, but most of all it would hurt those of us who barely survive from month to month. More power to Amazon in their efforts!

[xchrom]

28. see, that's not what it's about.

this is about who pays the taxes that have already been collected -- the small affiliate or amazon.

it's far better for the state if amazon does it.

you can be against taxes, i suppose, but these taxes are already there per state law.

[xchrom]

29. Amazon sales tax battle centers on jobs

http://www.latimes.com/business/la-fi-amazon-war-20110713,0,2902994.story

Reporting from Los Angeles and Sacramento—
A looming California electoral battle pitting powerful Internet retailer Amazon.com against the nation's largest chain stores is expected to be fought on the issue of jobs — with each side saying its position is better for the state's struggling economy.

Officially, the fight is over the sales tax and Amazon's refusal to collect it under a new California law that requires the Seattle company and other Internet-only retailers to do so as long as they have operations in the state.

The company said Monday that it would seek to qualify a referendum for the state ballot that would allow voters to overturn the new law.

But beneath the sales tax dispute is an escalating rivalry between Amazon and bricks-and-mortar retailers, which have seen an increasing portion of their sales go to the Internet.

[xchrom]

33. Amazon Wants To Save You Money

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

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.
Advertisement

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.