6 ms·

They're clearly doing this because they know the affiliate marketers will complain a lot, and not because there's much of a direct relationship financially.

by leot 15y ago

btilly 15y ago
Not at all. They are doing this because they don't want to get into an unnecessary legal fight which could go either way.
- gte910h 15y ago
  Or do the obscenely complex logic for each of the tens of thousands of jurisdictions each year required to calculate sales tax.
  - jbooth 15y ago
    50 jurisdictions, actually. Less considering that some states don't have sales tax and still more aren't going this route.
    - throw_away 15y ago
      actually there are far more than 50, as many counties and municipalities have their own sales tax rates on top of their state's rate. not only that, but it is far more complex than just one fixnum per jurisdiction as each is able to establish rules on what is taxed and what is not. the prime example is food, where the local laws on what counts as non-taxed food always seem a bit byzantine.
      - jbooth 15y ago
        Thanks, you're completely right. I'd still note that every single national retailer manages to do it ok.
        throw_away 15y ago
        Both national retailers and Amazon probably have the capabilities to do this, but equal protection clause states that you can't single out a single entity with a law. Would you have computing this be a barrier to entry for anyone who wants to sell over the internet? Especially as services and digital goods might also be considered taxable under certain jurisdictions.
        jbooth 15y ago
        I see your point that this could be a problem, but it's also a problem that brick-and-mortar shops have to pay tax while Amazon doesn't, no? Equal protection (or competitiveness) goes both ways.
        throw_away 15y ago
        Neither have to pay the tax, it's just a question of who the state can compel to collect the tax on behalf of customers. The real tax evaders here are the customers, who are required to pay a use tax for out of state purchases. Of course, clamping down on this is political suicide so it doesn't happen. I think the classical argument as to why the brick and mortars have to collect is because they actually see a benefit from the local government in the form of police, fire protection and transportation in a way that Amazon does not (at least not directly).
        btilly 15y ago
        The real tax evaders here are the customers, who are required to pay a use tax for out of state purchases. Of course, clamping down on this is political suicide so it doesn't happen. Actually North Carolina tried to do exactly that. They did a tax audit of Amazon, and tried to get Amazon to turn over records as a part of that which would let them go after state residents for owed sales tax. The case went to court and was settled last February in Amazon's favor. Amazon wound up giving North Carolina detailed records of every item shipped to a North Carolina address, but with all personal identifying information stripped so that North Carolina could not figure out who had purchased what.
    - T-hawk 15y ago
      More than 50 since many counties and cities impose their own sales taxes, on top of whatever the state levy is. There's also the complication of what items are taxable where. Clothing, for example, has seen a recent trend of exemption from sales tax in some jurisdictions. There's also sales tax holidays, where a state or county suspends its sales tax on some categories for a week or whatever to spur consumer spending. Finally, there will be weird corner cases like what happens if an item is bought, then returned at a later date after a change in the sales tax levy? It all becomes very complicated to track and implement for an online system. An entity the scale of Amazon could certainly do it if they want, but it may not be cost-effective.
    - hvs 15y ago
      Chicago has local sales taxes in addition to the state-wide sales taxes. Sales tax is a complicated mess and that's why Amazon doesn't want to get involved. A consistent sales tax across all states (something Amazon is in favor of) would go a long way to make everyone happy (except maybe consumers).
  - scarmig 15y ago
    And yet somehow companies like WalMart and Target manage this terrific feat. It'd be better if there were a unified system of national sales tax. But for a company Amazon's size, it's a laughable idea that it's somehow impossible to do this magnificent feat of implementing a lookup table.* The hard part is keeping things up to date, but a good faith effort to do the previous would get Amazon pretty far. *I worked for a company that is a thousandth Amazon's size in revenues, but it managed to do it for the whole state of California. It genuinely can get complicated--zip codes can cross county lines, for instance--but again, far from impossible, and when this becomes widespread third party solutions will pop up a lot more.
    - tedunangst 15y ago
      I have no idea why you were downvoted. If the dudes running walmart.com can write code to figure out the appropriate sales tax for each item, the dudes at amazon.com should be able to as well.
      - scarmig 15y ago
        Naturally, lots of people are pissed off at this turn of events. For good reason, too--everyone's losing here, including the State, Amazon, consumers, and various developers and start ups. Even the shadowy backers of the legislation (WalMart, Target, etc.) don't win an even playing field, because Amazon still isn't going to pay sales tax. Since many people's livelihoods are very threatened by this frack-up, it's not too surprising that there'll be some itchy fingers.
  - btilly 15y ago
    Not true! Amazon already has all of that obscenely complex logic coded up! Amazon allows third party vendors to sell through Amazon. Amazon knows for each vendor of what states they are resident in, and properly collects sales tax in that company's behalf where that is required.
    - deleted 15y ago
      [deleted]
    - gte910h 15y ago
      And for a select few of those vendors, they do have sales tax modules. For another quantity of people, they just bake sales tax into the cost of the item: http://www.amazon.com/gp/help/customer/display.html/102-8466456-6712928?ie=UTF8&nodeId=468512 http://www.amazon.com/gp/help/customer/display.html/102-8466... Who knows who's calculating the sales tax for the select retailers.
- leot 15y ago
  The rule seems to apply to Amazon principally because it has distribution centers in CA.
  - btilly 15y ago
    Citation needed To the best of my knowledge Amazon has no distribution centers in any states that collect sales tax explicitly because it doesn't want to be forced to collect sales taxes.
    - leot 15y ago
      Every time I order from Amazon the delivery starts in CA almost the same day. Perhaps there's some legal entity funny-business going on to make all of its CA fulfillment not count as such, but what else would you call the place that ships me the package?
      - btilly 15y ago
        Are you sure it starts in CA? I just looked through http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Amazon.com#Fulfillment_and_warehousing http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Amazon.com#Fulfillment_and_ware... and there is no California location listed. I live in California, and I've received lots of packages from Nevada.
        leot 15y ago
        Just went through my email logs of Amazon purchases. One thing I bought from Amazon looks like it started in "City of Commerce", but this was a few days after I purchased it -- perhaps they fulfilled elsewhere and flew it over to be picked up by FedEx in CA?
        btilly 15y ago
        Amazon offers store fronts for third party sellers. The most likely possibility is that that purchase is from such a seller, in which case fulfillment starts from their facilities, not Amazon's. If you are in California, then Amazon should have also collected sales tax on that purchase.
- leot 15y ago
  Why does this need to have anything to do with affiliate marketers? "Associates" need not count as "subsidiaries" or "distribution centers" whatsoever. According to http://www.amazon.com/Locations-Careers/b?ie=UTF8&node=239366011 http://www.amazon.com/Locations-Careers/b?ie=UTF8&node=2... Amazon has subsidiaries in: Cupertino, Lake Forest, San Francisco, San Luis Obispo, Palo Alto, and San Francisco. I also regularly get deliveries that seem to originate within CA, even if Amazon does nor report any fulfillment centers in CA. Let's be honest: Amazon has an unfair advantage over local retailers by not charging sales tax and it's using the loud online voice that its Amazon Associates have to keep things this way.
  - leot 15y ago
    The bill is admittedly stupid in its targeting of the affiliates. But Amazon would qualify as a CA retailer irrespective of the affiliates, according to the actual bill: http://www.aroundthecapitol.com/billtrack/text.html?bvid=20111AB2896ENR http://www.aroundthecapitol.com/billtrack/text.html?bvid=201... ""Retailer engaged in business in this state" specifically includes, but is not limited to, any of the following: (1) Any retailer maintaining, occupying, or using, permanently or temporarily, directly or indirectly, or through a subsidiary, or agent, by whatever name called, an office, place of distribution, sales or sample room or place, warehouse or storage place, or other place of business. "

They're clearly doing this because they know the affiliate marketers will complain a lot, and not because there's much of a direct relationship financially.

by leot 15y ago

They're clearly doing this because they know the affiliate marketers will complain a lot, and not because there's much of a direct relationship financially.

btilly 15y ago

Not at all. They are doing this because they don't want to get into an unnecessary legal fight which could go either way.

gte910h 15y ago
Or do the obscenely complex logic for each of the tens of thousands of jurisdictions each year required to calculate sales tax.
- jbooth 15y ago
  50 jurisdictions, actually. Less considering that some states don't have sales tax and still more aren't going this route.
  - throw_away 15y ago
    actually there are far more than 50, as many counties and municipalities have their own sales tax rates on top of their state's rate. not only that, but it is far more complex than just one fixnum per jurisdiction as each is able to establish rules on what is taxed and what is not. the prime example is food, where the local laws on what counts as non-taxed food always seem a bit byzantine.
    - jbooth 15y ago
      Thanks, you're completely right. I'd still note that every single national retailer manages to do it ok.
      - throw_away 15y ago
        Both national retailers and Amazon probably have the capabilities to do this, but equal protection clause states that you can't single out a single entity with a law. Would you have computing this be a barrier to entry for anyone who wants to sell over the internet? Especially as services and digital goods might also be considered taxable under certain jurisdictions.
        jbooth 15y ago
        I see your point that this could be a problem, but it's also a problem that brick-and-mortar shops have to pay tax while Amazon doesn't, no? Equal protection (or competitiveness) goes both ways.
        throw_away 15y ago
        Neither have to pay the tax, it's just a question of who the state can compel to collect the tax on behalf of customers. The real tax evaders here are the customers, who are required to pay a use tax for out of state purchases. Of course, clamping down on this is political suicide so it doesn't happen. I think the classical argument as to why the brick and mortars have to collect is because they actually see a benefit from the local government in the form of police, fire protection and transportation in a way that Amazon does not (at least not directly).
        btilly 15y ago
        The real tax evaders here are the customers, who are required to pay a use tax for out of state purchases. Of course, clamping down on this is political suicide so it doesn't happen. Actually North Carolina tried to do exactly that. They did a tax audit of Amazon, and tried to get Amazon to turn over records as a part of that which would let them go after state residents for owed sales tax. The case went to court and was settled last February in Amazon's favor. Amazon wound up giving North Carolina detailed records of every item shipped to a North Carolina address, but with all personal identifying information stripped so that North Carolina could not figure out who had purchased what.
  - T-hawk 15y ago
    More than 50 since many counties and cities impose their own sales taxes, on top of whatever the state levy is. There's also the complication of what items are taxable where. Clothing, for example, has seen a recent trend of exemption from sales tax in some jurisdictions. There's also sales tax holidays, where a state or county suspends its sales tax on some categories for a week or whatever to spur consumer spending. Finally, there will be weird corner cases like what happens if an item is bought, then returned at a later date after a change in the sales tax levy? It all becomes very complicated to track and implement for an online system. An entity the scale of Amazon could certainly do it if they want, but it may not be cost-effective.
  - hvs 15y ago
    Chicago has local sales taxes in addition to the state-wide sales taxes. Sales tax is a complicated mess and that's why Amazon doesn't want to get involved. A consistent sales tax across all states (something Amazon is in favor of) would go a long way to make everyone happy (except maybe consumers).
- scarmig 15y ago
  And yet somehow companies like WalMart and Target manage this terrific feat. It'd be better if there were a unified system of national sales tax. But for a company Amazon's size, it's a laughable idea that it's somehow impossible to do this magnificent feat of implementing a lookup table.* The hard part is keeping things up to date, but a good faith effort to do the previous would get Amazon pretty far. *I worked for a company that is a thousandth Amazon's size in revenues, but it managed to do it for the whole state of California. It genuinely can get complicated--zip codes can cross county lines, for instance--but again, far from impossible, and when this becomes widespread third party solutions will pop up a lot more.
  - tedunangst 15y ago
    I have no idea why you were downvoted. If the dudes running walmart.com can write code to figure out the appropriate sales tax for each item, the dudes at amazon.com should be able to as well.
    - scarmig 15y ago
      Naturally, lots of people are pissed off at this turn of events. For good reason, too--everyone's losing here, including the State, Amazon, consumers, and various developers and start ups. Even the shadowy backers of the legislation (WalMart, Target, etc.) don't win an even playing field, because Amazon still isn't going to pay sales tax. Since many people's livelihoods are very threatened by this frack-up, it's not too surprising that there'll be some itchy fingers.
- btilly 15y ago
  Not true! Amazon already has all of that obscenely complex logic coded up! Amazon allows third party vendors to sell through Amazon. Amazon knows for each vendor of what states they are resident in, and properly collects sales tax in that company's behalf where that is required.
  - deleted 15y ago
    [deleted]
  - gte910h 15y ago
    And for a select few of those vendors, they do have sales tax modules. For another quantity of people, they just bake sales tax into the cost of the item: http://www.amazon.com/gp/help/customer/display.html/102-8466456-6712928?ie=UTF8&nodeId=468512 http://www.amazon.com/gp/help/customer/display.html/102-8466... Who knows who's calculating the sales tax for the select retailers.
leot 15y ago
The rule seems to apply to Amazon principally because it has distribution centers in CA.
- btilly 15y ago
  Citation needed To the best of my knowledge Amazon has no distribution centers in any states that collect sales tax explicitly because it doesn't want to be forced to collect sales taxes.
  - leot 15y ago
    Every time I order from Amazon the delivery starts in CA almost the same day. Perhaps there's some legal entity funny-business going on to make all of its CA fulfillment not count as such, but what else would you call the place that ships me the package?
    - btilly 15y ago
      Are you sure it starts in CA? I just looked through http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Amazon.com#Fulfillment_and_warehousing http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Amazon.com#Fulfillment_and_ware... and there is no California location listed. I live in California, and I've received lots of packages from Nevada.
      - leot 15y ago
        Just went through my email logs of Amazon purchases. One thing I bought from Amazon looks like it started in "City of Commerce", but this was a few days after I purchased it -- perhaps they fulfilled elsewhere and flew it over to be picked up by FedEx in CA?
        btilly 15y ago
        Amazon offers store fronts for third party sellers. The most likely possibility is that that purchase is from such a seller, in which case fulfillment starts from their facilities, not Amazon's. If you are in California, then Amazon should have also collected sales tax on that purchase.
leot 15y ago
Why does this need to have anything to do with affiliate marketers? "Associates" need not count as "subsidiaries" or "distribution centers" whatsoever. According to http://www.amazon.com/Locations-Careers/b?ie=UTF8&node=239366011 http://www.amazon.com/Locations-Careers/b?ie=UTF8&node=2... Amazon has subsidiaries in: Cupertino, Lake Forest, San Francisco, San Luis Obispo, Palo Alto, and San Francisco. I also regularly get deliveries that seem to originate within CA, even if Amazon does nor report any fulfillment centers in CA. Let's be honest: Amazon has an unfair advantage over local retailers by not charging sales tax and it's using the loud online voice that its Amazon Associates have to keep things this way.
- leot 15y ago
  The bill is admittedly stupid in its targeting of the affiliates. But Amazon would qualify as a CA retailer irrespective of the affiliates, according to the actual bill: http://www.aroundthecapitol.com/billtrack/text.html?bvid=20111AB2896ENR http://www.aroundthecapitol.com/billtrack/text.html?bvid=201... ""Retailer engaged in business in this state" specifically includes, but is not limited to, any of the following: (1) Any retailer maintaining, occupying, or using, permanently or temporarily, directly or indirectly, or through a subsidiary, or agent, by whatever name called, an office, place of distribution, sales or sample room or place, warehouse or storage place, or other place of business. "