[Rexanne]

This guy rocks:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SzyyX...ure=youtu.be&a

Clears things up pretty well. Bottom line is the interstate commerce tax and TAXATION WITHOUT REPRESENTATION issue that really counts, IMO.

[Rexanne]

Thinking about this a lot and realized:

Affiliates are being threatened, yes. We are very vulnerable but think about the merchants, too. They are equally being strangled by this insanity and shouldn't be collecting taxes for a state where their interests aren't protected. WTF ... it's taxation without representation which has already been fought and cleared up in our freaking constitution many years ago. ARGHHHHHHHHHH

[delsol]

Yes I've still been writting to a few reps. about just voting "no". The bill is terrible for merchants. It's nut.

Here's what I told them:
".../...
This bill could have a very adverse impact on Colorado. I heard some say, stores might simply stop shipping to Colorado customers (some might even stop when they reach $99,999 in Colorado sales). Coloradoans will not be happy if they can't make online purchases.

Please read the first 3 lines of the summary of "Quill Corp. v. North Dakota" court case. This case is the current "law of the land" concerning inter-state "use tax".http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Quill_Corp._v._North_Dakota

I don’t think Amazon is bluffing, it is their current legal right according to the Supreme Court of the United States. At a minimum, to correct this we probably need a federal law.

Amazon is probably only 3% of the internet sale volume in dollars. I'm not sure how medium size businesses can handle such a similar requirement from 49 states. How would our own Colorado online retailers (including Tattered Cover of Denver) react to a similar law in Utah?

The chances of having years of legal expenses and collecting nothing are nearly certain. The reputation of Colorado could also be tarnished. The internet business community is full of young communicative entrepreneurs. Like me, they have read the "Quill Corp. v. North Dakota" summary and might judge our actions as defying simple logic. Colorado might get the image of a retrograde state that gave into irrational behavior when confronted with difficulties.

We should let other states try this, if it works (not likely since it goes directly against the 1992 Supreme Court ruling) then we can do it here for the following budget.

.../..."

Brophy's website:
http://www.gregbrophy.net/

[Gary-AvantLink]

Thanks for posting, Rexanne, I just re-posted to our network blog and I'll be posting it to my personal blog later on tonight as well.

[Alan Hamilton]

Originally Posted by Rexanne

Thinking about this a lot and realized:

Affiliates are being threatened, yes. We are very vulnerable but think about the merchants, too. They are equally being strangled by this insanity and shouldn't be collecting taxes for a state where their interests aren't protected. WTF ... it's taxation without representation which has already been fought and cleared up in our freaking constitution many years ago. ARGHHHHHHHHHH

Unfortunately Rex, it is the nature of the liberal mindset where fiscal matters are involved. Don't cut spending, raise taxes and spend more. Hmmm wonder how that would work for the average family budget? You SHOULD be angry Rex and so should everyone else in every state. Come November, there is something we can all do to get the message out to our state and federal legislators...

[delsol]

wow, house debate on the senate modifed (i.e. affiliate safe)HB-1193:

http://coloradohouse.granicus.com/MediaPlayer.php?view_id=7&clip_id=352

[Stephanie Lichtenstein]

Great video Rexanne thanks for posting it I am going to share it on Twitter and Facebook. Great examples of why the ad tax is harmful.