[pokerturkey]

I'd like to start a discussion where we can talk about possible legal workarounds based on our analysis of the actual text of the new law.

After reading the text a couple of things jumped out at me.

First, if you read 6203 (c)(5)(A), (B), and (C), it seems to imply that unless a California affiliate is engaged in "direct or indirect solicitation specifically targeted at potential customers in this state," the new law doesn't apply. Does this mean if my website isn't specifically targeted at California users, the law doesn't apply?

Second, I noticed that affiliates are no in way responsible for collecting any taxes. The only points where affiliates are mentioned are where we're being used as a way to created a legal "nexus" for California to tax Amazon.

Does anyone else see interesting things from this language? Any possible workarounds?

[La_Valette]

Originally Posted by pokerturkey

I noticed that affiliates are no in way responsible for collecting any taxes. The only points where affiliates are mentioned are where we're being used as a way to created a legal "nexus" for California to tax Amazon.

Does anyone else see interesting things from this language? Any possible workarounds?

That's not a workaround... that's precisely the problem.

[Convergence]

Originally Posted by pokerturkey

...if you read 6203 (c)(5)(A), (B), and (C), it seems to imply that unless a California affiliate is engaged in "direct or indirect solicitation specifically targeted at potential customers in this state," the new law doesn't apply. Does this mean if my website isn't specifically targeted at California users, the law doesn't apply?

Has a hint to what some NY merchants put in their TOS regarding direct solicitation of NY residents and having affiliates sign/acknowledge "no direct targeting".

Suspect there are merchants out there that will end up challenging that part.