Amazon packing again

[UserRemoved]

Amazon packing after South Carolina tax vote | McClatchy

they just left Texas over this...now SC.....52million....lotta money to leave...shows how much this is worth to them.

[JohnnyD]

They're trying to pass a similar law in MA. Will cost me a couple thousand per year if that happens unless I can sell the sites or get a legal LLC established in another state.

[GattaFish]

Originally Posted by JohnnyD

They're trying to pass a similar law in MA. Will cost me a couple thousand per year if that happens unless I can sell the sites or get a legal LLC established in another state.

Delaware...

Guess all these other politicians don't really want people in their state to find Jobs...

[Jim in CT]

I'm confused...Zimmy says that raising taxes on business has no consequences?? If Zimmy is correct, why would Amazon leave South Cariolina? If Zimmy is correct, how can tax hikes hurt business owners like Johnny D?

Hold the phone...could it be, that raising taxes on businesses, is the same thing as raising taxes on people, because it's people who ultimately pay those taxes? And that there can be adverse consequences?

If that's true, then Obama and Zimmy are...wait for it...wrong.

Thank you Johnny D for posting this. Based on my observations, liberals think there is this giant ATM machine out there called "business", and that we can raid this ATM machine with tax hikes whenever we have the urge, and that there are no adverse consequences, presumably because businesses are all rich and they are all evil, and that raising taxes on them cannot possibly impact anyone who is not wealthy and evil.

Liberals also claim that when conservatives like me want policies that HELP people like Johnny D, that we are simply pandering to the wealthy at the expense of sick children.

[JohnnyD]

Originally Posted by Jim in CT

I'm confused...Zimmy says that raising taxes on business has no consequences?? If Zimmy is correct, why would Amazon leave South Cariolina? If Zimmy is correct, how can tax hikes hurt business owners like Johnny D?

To be fair, this isn't necessarily a tax hike - it's a transfer of tax collection/payment responsibility from the citizen to the business. What states are trying to do is pass legislation so that internet companies that have a presence in their state are forced to collect sales tax, as opposed to trusting citizens to pay the sales tax on internet purchases - which almost no one does. This is why when you purchase printer in from Staples.com or Apple.com, you're charged tax. But purchase the same ink from Amazon.com and there's no tax.

Amazon has affiliates that advertise their products in every state for a commission (well, every state that hasn't passed this "local presence" law). Amazon as decided that complete close their Affiliate programs in the states that pass these laws.

There was a company in [I think it was] Illinois that posted over $30 million in revenue last year. The state passed a similar law and the company picked up and moved across the border within the month. You think the millions of tax revenue lost just from that one company will every be made up?

There isn't a single state that has shown increased revenue due to passing these laws. It's a classic case of politicians creating policy about a topic they don't fully understand.

[scottw]

Originally Posted by JohnnyD

There was a company in [I think it was] Illinois that posted over $30 million in revenue last year. The state passed a similar law and the company picked up and moved across the border within the month. You think the millions of tax revenue lost just from that one company will every be made up?

There isn't a single state that has shown increased revenue due to passing these laws. It's a classic case of politicians creating policy about a topic they don't fully understand.

next stop......MEXICO

[Jim in CT]

Originally Posted by JohnnyD

To be fair, this isn't necessarily a tax hike - it's a transfer of tax collection/payment responsibility from the citizen to the business. What states are trying to do is pass legislation so that internet companies that have a presence in their state are forced to collect sales tax, as opposed to trusting citizens to pay the sales tax on internet purchases - which almost no one does. This is why when you purchase printer in from Staples.com or Apple.com, you're charged tax. But purchase the same ink from Amazon.com and there's no tax.

Amazon has affiliates that advertise their products in every state for a commission (well, every state that hasn't passed this "local presence" law). Amazon as decided that complete close their Affiliate programs in the states that pass these laws.

There was a company in [I think it was] Illinois that posted over $30 million in revenue last year. The state passed a similar law and the company picked up and moved across the border within the month. You think the millions of tax revenue lost just from that one company will every be made up?

There isn't a single state that has shown increased revenue due to passing these laws. It's a classic case of politicians creating policy about a topic they don't fully understand.

BUt it essentially is a tax hike, because as you said, almost no one will pay that tax. And if the laws force Amazon to pay the tax, then Amazon will pass that cost on to its customers and employees. In other words, people.

I was trying to make a bigger point about the liberal notion that raising taxes on "business" is less disruptive than raising taxes on "people". I say that's baloney, because a business is an inanimate object, and as such, the business can't cut a check to the IRS. Therefore, a tax on business is ultimately paid for by employees, customers, and owners/shareholders. Those tend to be human beings.

[Pete_G]

Originally Posted by Jim in CT

I'm confused...Zimmy says that raising taxes on business has no consequences?? If Zimmy is correct, why would Amazon leave South Cariolina? If Zimmy is correct, how can tax hikes hurt business owners like Johnny D?

I think you're missing a big part of what this is about, because no one is raising taxes in this situation. There is no tax hike here.

What this is largely about is a big company using its influence to avoid having to collect a tax in order to maintain a price advantage over competitors (local to that state or otherwise) who do have to charge the sales tax due to being a business in that state.

Remember, this is NOT a tax on Amazon - the debate is about the same sales tax that any other business that operates in that state is obligated to collect.

It won't come directly out of Amazon's bottom line; the ONLY hit would be that their price advantage would disappear. Which may (obviously they are convinced...) reduce their sales in that state.

Welcome to playing by the rules everyone else does.

But Amazon believes it's special and shouldn't have to. Cabelas and Bass Pro Shops are famous for same tactic and small businesses have railed against it for years.

[Jim in CT]

Originally Posted by Pete_G

I think you're missing a big part of what this is about, because no one is raising taxes in this situation. There is no tax hike here.

What this is largely about is a big company using its influence to avoid having to collect a tax in order to maintain a price advantage over competitors (local to that state or otherwise) who do have to charge the sales tax due to being a business in that state.

Remember, this is NOT a tax on Amazon - the debate is about the same sales tax that any other business that operates in that state is obligated to collect.

It won't come directly out of Amazon's bottom line; the ONLY hit would be that their price advantage would disappear. Which may (obviously they are convinced...) reduce their sales in that state.

Welcome to playing by the rules everyone else does.

But Amazon believes it's special and shouldn't have to. Cabelas and Bass Pro Shops are famous for same tactic and small businesses have railed against it for years.

Pete G, I agree with everytihng you said EXCEPT when you say this won't necessarily impact their bottom line. Of course it will.

I also agree that a very compelling case could be made that Amazon deserves no special treatment.

My point was this...tax increases on businesses (which this is not) amount to tax increases on people. Many liberals seem to dosagree with that. Many liberals seem to think that you can raise costs on business without effecting any people.

[RIROCKHOUND]

So... Am I understanding it correctly?
Amazon doesn't want to pay the same internet based sales tax that they are supposed to pay, and that a mom and pop online book store in the same state would have to pay? Or am I missing something...

Kind of like if Saltwater Edge had to pay more in taxes on internet orders than say BPS or Cabelas?

[JohnnyD]

Originally Posted by RIROCKHOUND

So... Am I understanding it correctly?
Amazon doesn't want to pay the same internet based sales tax that they are supposed to pay, and that a mom and pop online book store in the same state would have to pay? Or am I missing something...

There technically is no "internet based sales tax" that any company is supposed to pay.

Amazon doesn't actually operate any store fronts in any state. The laws that are being passed (the SC one is a little different) are declaring the affiliates - typically individuals like myself - who advertise their products as "Agents" of the company and saying that those "Agents" mean that Amazon is required to collect state sales tax on internet sales.

In SC, the law (if I'm reading it correctly) is declaring that Amazon's distribution warehouse is evidence that the company operates within state boundaries and should therefore be required to pay the tax. However, you would still have to purchase through the website.

I always come back to the Staples.com case... because they own stores in every state, they have a defined presence and are required to collect sales tax on internet sales just as they would if someone walked into the store. Amazon does not have any physical stores that you can walk into.

These laws have been called "Amazon.com Tax Laws" because they very specifically target Amazon.com's operations and their business model.

Kind of like if Saltwater Edge had to pay more in taxes on internet orders than say BPS or Cabelas?

Saltwater Edge isn't paying any tax that BPS or Cabelas is able to avoid. SWE *collects* sales tax from the consumer and then is required to make quarterly Sales Tax payments to their state government.

[Pete_G]

Originally Posted by Jim in CT

Pete G, I agree with everytihng you said EXCEPT when you say this won't necessarily impact their bottom line. Of course it will.

I was intending to say that jokingly but I forgot to go back and add the sarcasm or the eye roll smiley before pressing "submit reply".

[Pete_G]

Originally Posted by RIROCKHOUND

So... Am I understanding it correctly?
Amazon doesn't want to pay the same internet based sales tax that they are supposed to pay, and that a mom and pop online book store in the same state would have to pay? Or am I missing something...

Kind of like if Saltwater Edge had to pay more in taxes on internet orders than say BPS or Cabelas?

A good example is if Cabelas came to Rhode Island, asked for what Amazon was asking for and got it, despite having a physical location in RI they would NOT have to collect sales tax from someone who placed an Internet or catalog order in Rhode Island.

Some states have allowed this, others have shot it down.

SWE has to collect the sales tax on an Internet sale to someone in RI making us more "expensive" in the eyes of the customer, assuming they aren't going to pay the tax (which almost no one does) for that same purchase that they might make from someone who wouldn't collect that tax.

Or, the other way around, if SWE were to set up a warehouse in South Carolina, we would have to collect sales tax from SC residents even if the package shipped from RI.

Naturally in states where this has occurred, tackle shops got a little bitter about it. And small business in general tends to frown on the Amazon scenario. Even the Tea Party has a hard on about it and some money hungry states are sending back taxes to Amazon.

As JohnnyD mentioned, a Google search for "Amazon tax laws" will fill you in with the details if you want them.

[zimmy]

Originally Posted by Jim in CT

I'm confused...Zimmy says that raising taxes on business has no consequences??

Listen Jim,
Zimmy never said there are no consequences. Also, your simpleton views reflect that you clearly can't understand anything above the third grade level. I hadn't even commented on this thread. Kinda creepy

[zimmy]

Crap, and I thought this was my fault. Friggin anti-business liberals.

"Most Midlands lawmakers supported the exemption, but opposition fanned by a coalition of small merchants, national retailers and Tea Party activists proved insurmountable,"

Read more: Amazon packing after House vote - S.C. Politics - TheState.com

[EarnedStripes44]

The corporation didnt get the government hand out in wanted. So it's leaving. Amazon will find another state/local government to be its handmaiden.

[scottw]

Originally Posted by EarnedStripes44

The corporation didnt get the government hand out in wanted. So it's leaving. Amazon will find another state/local government to be its handmaiden.

that's shocking in a state run by republican corporate shills...

why is this a problem? Amazon has 50 states(57 if you are Obama) and foreign lands to choose from, they are going to chose the best deal for their locations, SC decided that it wasn't for them...you think it's some revelation that businesses negotiate deals in tax structure, utilities and infrastructure in order to move their locations to a given area????

do you walk in to a car dealership and tell them that you are there to pay full price for the car that you want because you don't want a handout from the other dealerships in the area????

a friend of mine was helping negotiate the expansion of a RI business, New Bedford offered this business a big break on water utility which was an important factor, no such offer was made by RI areas under consideration, he moved the facility to NB...does this make him a government handmaiden looking for a handout?...is he a traitor for leaving RI ??? Should other water consuming NB businesses be up in arms????

I wonder how many jobs and how much revenue the "mom and pop" online book shops in SC are providing for the state?
"Company officials immediately halted plans to equip and staff the one million-square-foot building under construction at I-77 and 12th Street near Cayce.
“As a result of today’s unfortunate House vote, we’ve canceled $52 million in procurement contracts and removed all South Carolina fulfillment center job postings from our (Web) site,” said Paul Misener, Amazon vice president for global public policy.
“People who think this is a bluff don’t know Amazon,” Lexington County Councilman Bill Banning said. “Too many other states want them.”

if you want BIG Government providing BIG money to fund all of your BIG programs, mom and pop will only take you so far


I guess what should be most shocking for some is that the evil Amazon with their money and lobbyists couldn't get their greedy corporate welfare deal from a republican governor and legislature who are, of course, shills for greedy corporate America