4 ms·
The user named "X-Istence" here on Hacker News said it best[1] "Because the user that is receiving the item is tax dodging Amazon should be punished?" [1] htt
by calloc 15y ago
The user named "X-Istence" here on Hacker News said it best[1]
"Because the user that is receiving the item is tax dodging Amazon should be punished?"
[1] http://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=2761847 http://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=2761847
- nostromo 15y agoAnd Amazon really won't really feel any pain. Only Californians are being hurt by this in terms of lost jobs, lost income, and lost income tax revenue.
- fleitz 15y agoThe only beneficiary to this is states that don't have this tax condition so that current affiliates incorporate there. Incorporate out of state, file an S-corp election, get some mail forwarding services out of state, done. CA will not lose any rev, jobs or anything. The whole thing is a giant exercise in paperwork and a few hundred dollars of barrier to entry.
- calloc 15y agoJust because Amazon is a large corporation doesn't mean it won't hurt them to have to figure out the tax laws for all the different counties/cities/and state level. Not only that, but why should Amazon be forced to file taxes in 50 states. How does this ruling affect other much smaller companies? If I had an affiliate program would I now have to start taking money according to California tax law even-though I am located in Arizona?
- nostromo 15y agoI don't think I made my point clear, I agree with you -- CA's actions don't make sense.