4 ms·

So, I, in California, buy something from Amazon, which pays Fedex to ship it from out of state to me. Fedex pays "gas taxes" in CA, and other CA taxes too[1].

by cagey 15y ago

So, I, in California, buy something from Amazon, which pays Fedex to ship it from out of state to me. Fedex pays "gas taxes" in CA, and other CA taxes too[1]. If Fedex ships my pkg by air, there are at least additionally airport fees/taxes. Since Fedex is not going bankrupt, it seems Amazon is at least paying Fedex enough to offset these expenses, so Amazon is in effect, through Fedex, paying these CA taxes (the same ones that in-state B&M stores would be paying for shipping a purchase to me, or that I would be paying if I bought an item at a local B&M store and transported it in my own motor vehicle). Now, in my understanding, the purpose of these taxes is to pay for the "services" CA is providing to the taxpayer (in this case, Fedex, and, indirectly, Amazon). For a shipper, "services" would include construction and maintenance of (and bureaucratic overhead associated with) the roads, bridges, airports, etc. But in your opinion Amazon is skating on their responsibility and should in addition charge sales tax to the customer (apparently for additional "services provided by the state" not covered by the above)? What are these additional services Amazon is receiving (in this transaction) from CA that are not being paid for via [[the above-mentioned]] taxes? [1] http://www.dmv.ca.gov/vehindustry/mcp/mcpfaq.htm#what http://www.dmv.ca.gov/vehindustry/mcp/mcpfaq.htm#what [[edit]]

dkrich 15y ago
I'm not making any judgment about whether Amazon is "skating on their responsibility." I'm just trying to explain to people who are misunderstanding that states CAN CHARGE SALES TAX. This case has nothing to do with whether the state can charge a retailer a sales tax. They can. There is no doubt about that. The issue here is that the law, as written, was unconstitutional. Further, those who are claiming that brick and mortars consume a state's services but online retailers do not are wrong. This notion that retailers pay shippers who pay taxes makes zero sense.

by cagey 15y ago

dkrich 15y ago

I'm not making any judgment about whether Amazon is "skating on their responsibility." I'm just trying to explain to people who are misunderstanding that states CAN CHARGE SALES TAX. This case has nothing to do with whether the state can charge a retailer a sales tax. They can. There is no doubt about that. The issue here is that the law, as written, was unconstitutional. Further, those who are claiming that brick and mortars consume a state's services but online retailers do not are wrong. This notion that retailers pay shippers who pay taxes makes zero sense.