3 ms·

The core issue for me is that placing a sales tax on affiliate clicks is illogical. Lets say a Californian has a website with Amazon affiliate links. I live in

by nhebb 15y ago

The core issue for me is that placing a sales tax on affiliate clicks is illogical. Lets say a Californian has a website with Amazon affiliate links. I live in Oregon, which has no sales tax. I click one of the affiliate links and buy from Amazon, a Washington based company. Why should the sales tax go to the State of California? The sale wasn't made between a vendor or a customer located there. The affiliate earns a commission, which the State of California can charge an income tax on.

econgeeker 15y ago
You're right. However, state's don't really care about logic. They have one hammer: Legislation. Everything is a nail to the legislature.
198d 15y ago
I think you're slightly off here. As I understand it, what these states are trying to do is consider Amazon's independent affiliates a physical presence for Amazon in that state. What that means is that Amazon then becomes responsible for collecting sales tax on items purchased by residents of that state; how they found their way to Amazon and made their purchase isn't relevant. In your example, no sales tax would need to be collected because you're a resident of Oregon and, presumably, Amazon does not have a physical presence there.
- DanLivesHere 15y ago
  This is true, but what the states are trying to do is patent nonsense. True: "[W]hat these states are trying to do is consider Amazon's independent affiliates a physical presence for Amazon in that state." Also true: "[H]ow [a customer] found their way to Amazon and made their purchase isn't relevant." The problem: The two statements are directly at odds with each other.
ChuckMcM 15y ago
You have missed the point I suspect. Amazon doesn't currently charge sales tax to things shipped to California under the exemption that they don't have a presence in California and therefore their commerce is strictly inter-state. California has a new law which effectively creates a de-facto presence if someone who lives in California can be an agent for a sale of something from Amazon. (those are the affiliates) and it is the intention of the state to use the existence of those 'agents' to close the tax loop hole that Amazon is currently exploiting. So when it goes into effect, Amazon terminates its relationship with all affiliates who live in CA(or have their checks sent to California), thus keeping the loop hole open for them, and causing pain to some segment of California voters who may (or may not) be motivated to tell their representative to reverse their stance. You, up in Oregon, don't see a change except that if you bought from someone in California through Amazon before, well you won't be able to do that now. You'll have to go directly to their web site.

by nhebb 15y ago

econgeeker 15y ago

You're right. However, state's don't really care about logic. They have one hammer: Legislation. Everything is a nail to the legislature.

198d 15y ago

I think you're slightly off here. As I understand it, what these states are trying to do is consider Amazon's independent affiliates a physical presence for Amazon in that state. What that means is that Amazon then becomes responsible for collecting sales tax on items purchased by residents of that state; how they found their way to Amazon and made their purchase isn't relevant. In your example, no sales tax would need to be collected because you're a resident of Oregon and, presumably, Amazon does not have a physical presence there.

DanLivesHere 15y ago
This is true, but what the states are trying to do is patent nonsense. True: "[W]hat these states are trying to do is consider Amazon's independent affiliates a physical presence for Amazon in that state." Also true: "[H]ow [a customer] found their way to Amazon and made their purchase isn't relevant." The problem: The two statements are directly at odds with each other.

ChuckMcM 15y ago

You have missed the point I suspect. Amazon doesn't currently charge sales tax to things shipped to California under the exemption that they don't have a presence in California and therefore their commerce is strictly inter-state. California has a new law which effectively creates a de-facto presence if someone who lives in California can be an agent for a sale of something from Amazon. (those are the affiliates) and it is the intention of the state to use the existence of those 'agents' to close the tax loop hole that Amazon is currently exploiting. So when it goes into effect, Amazon terminates its relationship with all affiliates who live in CA(or have their checks sent to California), thus keeping the loop hole open for them, and causing pain to some segment of California voters who may (or may not) be motivated to tell their representative to reverse their stance. You, up in Oregon, don't see a change except that if you bought from someone in California through Amazon before, well you won't be able to do that now. You'll have to go directly to their web site.