[Daniel M. Clark]

"This is such a typical response from elected officials. Instead of looking to see how they can cut their budget and actually be responsible, they just look at taking more money from the pockets of those who elected them."

Normally, I agree with this, but the budget shortfalls across the nation are largely the result of so much money being moved online. You can only cut things so much. Now, I'm not saying more cuts can't be made, or that every dollar is being spent 100% wisely - but we, as an industry, brag every year about how much more money people are spending online vs. offline than than the previous year. The vast majority of that money is tax-free to the consumer. Online sales taxes need to happen, but the way the states are going about implementing them - by using us - is wrong.

There was a city on Colorado, I think it was Colorado Springs, where they were actually cutting essential services like police and fire because they didn't have the money to cover it. That alone should show how desperate people are right now, and that this isn't just the (unfortunately) usual game of "oh, let's tax 'em while we can because we're greedy politicians".

[Greg Rice]

Originally Posted by Daniel M. Clark

"This is such a typical response from elected officials. Instead of looking to see how they can cut their budget and actually be responsible, they just look at taking more money from the pockets of those who elected them."

Normally, I agree with this, but the budget shortfalls across the nation are largely the result of so much money being moved online.

Sorry but I disagree with this statement. The reason is fiscal irresponsibility. The notion that the government is entitled to money in every possible situation, in this case sales tax, is just BS. Why is the government entitled to charge me money because I buy something? If you make money, they think they're entitled to some of it. If you sell your house, they think they're entitled to money. Buy a car and they charge you a tax AND make you pay more money to drive on the road. You pay income tax all of your life and they want more when you die, so they're even double dipping on that money.

The more they get, the more they think they're entitled to it and, like zombies, we just accept it. We need end the notion our government is entitled to so much money and get them to consider living within their means, like the real world does.

The reason some cities cut police and fire is to get people pissed off and think there is a serious budget issue and agree to hand over even more money. If they "need" to layoff a fireman then they should have first eliminated non-essential services. But what taxpayer would be upset if travel expenses are eliminated? None. If the politician pleaded that they need more travel money, more luxurious trips or more expensive office furnishings nobody would care and they wouldn't hand over their hard earned money. But take away firemen and cops and now people are ready to hand over money.

[loxly]

Originally Posted by mellie

It targets any merchant with any kind of in state connection (direct or indirect representatives...)

Merchants will have to contact a sales and use tax attorney or accountant to decipher the law if and when it becomes final. Still has to get through House.

Very important to get professional counsel and advice on this one. Don't rely on any one's opinion of the scope of this, including legislators or others.

Actually, they specifically said in the reading that we listened to that any merchant shipping products to a Colorado resident needed to notify that purchaser about the use tax. The newspaper said any retailer with over a certain amount of sales to Colorado, so hopefully that is still being negotiated.

Although this bill is a win for affiliates, it may be a lose for online commerce in general. We need to keep tabs on what ends up being the final form and as Mellies says, check with an attorney if it becomes to far reaching.

Moderator Note: Also, let's be sure to keep this conversation focused on the bill and the direct politics of this bill and not get into the territory of general political discussion.

[AffiliateHound]

The burden the bill would place on out-of-state merchants would seem to be a clear violation of the Commerce Clause and like the bill in another state, does not seem to even propose a pretext of an actual nexus between merchants and the state.

If it passes, expect years of litigation.

Originally Posted by Greg Rice

Sorry but I disagree with this statement. The reason is fiscal irresponsibility. The notion that the government is entitled to money in every possible situation, in this case sales tax, is just BS. Why is the government entitled to charge me money because I buy something? If you make money, they think they're entitled to some of it. If you sell your house, they think they're entitled to money. Buy a car and they charge you a tax AND make you pay more money to drive on the road. You pay income tax all of your life and they want more when you die, so they're even double dipping on that money.

The more they get, the more they think they're entitled to it and, like zombies, we just accept it. We need end the notion our government is entitled to so much money and get them to consider living within their means, like the real world does.

The reason some cities cut police and fire is to get people pissed off and think there is a serious budget issue and agree to hand over even more money. If they "need" to layoff a fireman then they should have first eliminated non-essential services. But what taxpayer would be upset if travel expenses are eliminated? None. If the politician pleaded that they need more travel money, more luxurious trips or more expensive office furnishings nobody would care and they wouldn't hand over their hard earned money. But take away firemen and cops and now people are ready to hand over money.

During the last year's budget crisis (and actually ever since he's been in office) arnold der gropenfuhrer has threatened to and has actually cut essential state services including aid to the elderly and disabled and medical care for the poor, not to mention trashing education at all levels including imposing massive tuition increases at the University of California and California State University systems. Well, yesterday, an article in the LA Times reported that last year state agencies spend $45 Million on new cars, $30 Million for office furniture, and $2 Million for off-site meetings and conferences.

[Daniel M. Clark]

You can argue that all taxes are evil as much as you want, but the fact remains: taxes pay for things that benefit our nation and our states and without them, everything goes private. If you really want all our state and federal services run by corporations that have no accountability to the public, by all means, keep arguing for that. God willing, we'll never see that day. The Corporatists have gone too far already.

That's all I'm going to say about this.

[MichaelColey]

Originally Posted by loxly

Moderator Note: Also, let's be sure to keep this conversation focused on the bill and the direct politics of this bill and not get into the territory of general political discussion.

Thanks for the gentile reminder.

[mellie]

You also cannot rely on what a legislator says. The final say will be how the DOR interprets the law.

Far from over.

[Alan Hamilton]

Originally Posted by mellie

You also cannot rely on what a legislator says. The final say will be how the DOR interprets the law. Far from over.

The final say will be what the courts say when and if the law is abused by the DOR (dept of revenue) and oversteps the bounds of our state constitution, which prohibits the levying of any tax without voter consent. (as in an election). That may be the next step if necessary as there are far more than the internet tax issue at stake in CO. Those who sponsored the internet tax fiasco also have 12 other tax increases / new taxes that they are trying to heap on individuals and businesses within our state. They are referred to as the "Dirty Dozen" by those in our legislature who oppose these taxes. So I suspect court challenges may enter the picture at some point.

[MichaelColey]

The DOR interpretation may not be the "final" say, but it'll be a pretty important one since it often takes years for things to work their way through the courts.

[Kevin]

And, technically, the Tax Department in New York here stated affiliates were exempted, but we got dumped by the shovelful anyhow. The fight is not over, no matter where you live.

[delsol]

Final passage of the Colorado HB-1193 bill. It is now a "safe" affiliate bill. Still a loosing proposition for Colorado but whichever way they vote we are safe.
In the last few days, many of us contacted our reps to tell then this and thank them. Some still pointed out that this "new" bill is not good for Colorado (curious to see how they will finaly vote ).

http://www.coloradochannel.net/

The stream should be here:
http://coloradohouse.granicus.com/MediaPlayer.php?view_id=11&event_id=10

[Trust]

So what's happening? I've been reading tweets about this from ShopAtHome -

How Colorado Defeated The Internet Tax

http://www.forbes.com/2010/02/25/colorado-internet-tax-technology-business-intelligence-shopathome.html

Then I read Jen's post about being dropped from Oriental Trading and Terry's Village

[nsusa]

It gets even better - I am still getting email responses from Senators and House Representatives here in CO. Now get this - the chairman of the Senate's Finance Committee emails me in a way that it sounds like she did everything she could to protect affiliates. She is a Democrate and her last email before was totally different. I guess it's called damage control and trying to fool voters ...

[loxly]

The Colorado law as it stands is not just bad for affiliates, it is bad for any online merchant. Interpretation is going to be confusing and what the DOR does with this law is going to have an impact on the way we do business on the internet, not just affecting affliliate marketing.

Amazon et. al. needs to challenge this law ASAP.

[marklt]

Great news, i started as an affiliate a few moths ago, i don't want to start with the wrong foot