[Matt McWilliams]

Great news! It's dead!

From the PMA just now:

An agreement was reached today on HB 1193: the inclusion of affiliates establishing nexus will be removed from the bill entirely. HB1193 will now become a bill solely focused on collecting use tax, and nothing to do whatsoever with affiliates.

Congratulations Colorado...well done. You all are a GREAT example of how to fight this!

[Daniel M. Clark]

On a related note, Senator Brophy posted this on Twitter:

The amdt to cut affiliates out of CO Net taxes passed this morning in Approps. U R no longer collateral damage in war on Amazon

That's great and everything, I'm really happy for all my friends in Colorado.

But a "war" on Amazon? Is that really what these guys are framing it as now? The state government of Colorado is declaring war on a company that doesn't reside within its borders? Seriously?

[simcat]

Great news, if affiliates are indeed let off the hook!

[MichaelColey]

Big companies are evil and should have to pay. (I'm not saying I agree or trying to turn it into a political statement, but that's the thinking of many.)

[Gary-AvantLink]

This is huge. Now the tide is generally against states passing these Affiliate tax laws. Congrats to CO Affiliates, and to all Affiliates!

[Alan Hamilton]

Congratulations to all of my fellow Coloradans for the huge effort we all put out in getting our legislators to listen, better understand and protect affiliates in Colorado! I hope other affiliates in other states will learn from what we did in Colorado and finally believe that indeed you CAN affect change.

Special thanks to Jen Goode, Jeannine Crooks, Rebecca at PMA and our COMA organization for a job well done. WTG Colorado!

[Alan Hamilton]

Originally Posted by Daniel M. Clark

On a related note, Senator Brophy posted this on Twitter:That's great and everything, I'm really happy for all my friends in Colorado.

But a "war" on Amazon? Is that really what these guys are framing it as now? The state government of Colorado is declaring war on a company that doesn't reside within its borders? Seriously?

Well Dan, it goes like this: If you understand the makeup of the Colorado House and Senate, you understand how and why they do what they do.

[mr_jones]

Originally Posted by Daniel M. Clark

On a related note, Senator Brophy posted this on Twitter:That's great and everything, I'm really happy for all my friends in Colorado.

But a "war" on Amazon? Is that really what these guys are framing it as now? The state government of Colorado is declaring war on a company that doesn't reside within its borders? Seriously?

Senator Brophy had tongue (firmly planted) in cheek. You had to have been there

[Daniel M. Clark]

Originally Posted by mr_jones

Senator Brophy had tongue (firmly planted) in cheek. You had to have been there

Cool, thanks for explaining that

Alan, I know, I've seen plenty of tweets and posts that are positioning this thing as "those dirty Democrats", which I can't really argue with in many cases because in many states, it's very much along party lines. But I'm a Democrat and I fight these bills. It saddens me that people in my own party are so short-sighted and ignorant about things like this, and I wish it didn't have to be presented as a partisan thing. Here in New Mexico, Democrats voted to table the bill, despite it being drafted by a Democrat.

And I'm really, really not trying to start a political discussion here. Let's just say that I'm disappointed in some members of my party, and we're not all like that

[delsol]

Here is the PMA article:

http://www.performancemarketingassociation.com/blog/2010/02/08/colorado-advertising-tax-is-dead/

[affninja]

Great work Colorado! Providing inspiration and ammunition for other states involved in this battle.

[lintlin]

Congrats on the positive outcome, you Coloradoans (??) did a great job of pulling lots of different sectors and interests together to make a stand. Fantastic!

[Greg Rice]

This is great news. Awesome work by those who spent so much time and effort on this!

[Alan Hamilton]

Originally Posted by lintlin

Congrats on the positive outcome, you Coloradoans (??) Fantastic!

The "native" expression is Coloradans but the new generation moving from other areas are sneaking in the Coloradoans thing too, so either way.

Daniel, good objective post. When something is wrong, it is wrong regardless of who is behind it. Bravo!

Now if only the Broncos can win SuperBowl 45. :-)

[redtagdeals]

Delsol should be congratulated too. He did a lot of work writing letters and calling those legislators. Good job everyone.

[Trust]

What does all that stuff on the bottom mean - http://performancemarketingassociation.com/documents/SAH_2-8-10.pdf

Starting at Summary of Legislation, can't copy and paste that. The first paragraph? Where they're talking about non exempt affiliate and $10,000 a year. They're talking about physical promotion, not electronic right?

Also the exempt affiliate is one that utilizes electronic media to a degree greater than 80 percent to solicit business to the retailer.

Don't understand all the legalese.

[delsol]

That's the old fiscal note that came with the original bill. I guess they do not update those during this type of change.

[Chuck Hamrick]

As a Colorado ex-patriot I am glad that this has been killed. Got an email from the state looking for a tech person to fill a job they have had trouble filling. Was going to offer that to any affiliate who lost their livelihood if the bill passed.

Would like to see a summary of what everyone involved did to get this result, would be an inspiration for other states. Perhaps someone could start a new thread?

[Trust]

Originally Posted by delsol

That's the old fiscal note that came with the original bill. I guess they do not update those during this type of change.

It has a Feb 8th date on it and says it replaces the fiscal note dated January 29, 2010.

Can others reread the whole thing just to make sure, I don't understand most of it.

[Angel Djambazov]

Trust, my read is that a non exempt affiliate is one who solicits through other than electronic means and for who electronic means of solicitation makes up less than 80% of their income.

Congratulations to Colorado affiliates for their hard work in getting the language in.

I do think, however, that some merchant education will be required, since the term "affiliate" is still in the bill, in order to keep risk adverse merchants from terminating their affiliates needlessly.

[nsusa]

I hope we get some confirmation from Amazon and Overstock that they will not terminate. I have shifted a lot of resources around - away from Amazon - and will keep doing so for the time being until this is all a done deal.

[Trust]

Originally Posted by Angel Djambazov

Trust, my read is that a non exempt affiliate is one who solicits through other than electronic means and for who electronic means of solicitation makes up less than 80% of their income.

Congratulations to Colorado affiliates for their hard work in getting the language in.

I do think, however, that some merchant education will be required, since the term "affiliate" is still in the bill, in order to keep risk adverse merchants from terminating their affiliates needlessly.

Alright, yeah there is a lot of affiliate marketing talk in the bill, also talking about New York, RI, NC. But it does say "applies only to affiliate marketing when a Colorado based individual, such as a religious leader or club president, orally and publically encourages a group of individuals to participate in an affiliate marketing relationship........"

Hopefully the merchants interpret this right.

[delsol]

Originally Posted by redtagdeals

Delsol should be congratulated too. He did a lot of work writing letters and calling those legislators. Good job everyone.

Thanks, I did my max for 5 days (litterally sleep 2/h per night). It was a survival instinct (couldn't sleep anyway so might as well send emails and call them all).

My guess, is that we owe a special "thank you" to the 2 large Colorado affiliates firms and their lawyers. Apparently they were able to leverage the fact that the Colorado legislature did not want to go after onilne affiliates but rather the retailers using their presence in the state to push the products of others (SportsAuthority & Amazon?).

[nsusa]

Originally Posted by Chuck Hamrick

Would like to see a summary of what everyone involved did to get this result, would be an inspiration for other states. Perhaps someone could start a new thread?

Let me see ...

- Sent out roughly 175 personally addressed emails to senators and representatives: check
- Spent 12+ hours at the State Capitol: check
- Testified (even though I never planned to): check
- Sent a lot of polite "thank you" (butt kissing) emails to politicians: check
- Posted to my blog about this issue: check
- Wrote about it on my local community website to mobilize people: check
- Replied via comments on other people's blogs: check
- Lost income due to doing political work: check
- Barely slept for a few days: check

Anyway - it's not what a single individual did, but what we were able to do as a group. I think the main thing is to make such efforts a coordinated event. The earlier the affiliates in other states get organized, the bigger and more effective the response to politicians will be.

Christoph

[MasterLinker]

Does anybody know what the status of this type of legislation is in other states so we can focus our efforts on those states now that Colorado has been accomplished?