[Stephanie Lichtenstein]

Hi Everyone,

I wanted to share this message regarding Nevada. This is something the PMA sent out today. Please PM me if you have any questions. Here are some tips on what you can do to get involved if you are in Nevada:

An advertising tax bill has been proposed in Nevada (Item 10 of the Governor’s Proclamation). If this tax passes, we predict over 100 advertisers will terminate their affiliate programs with Nevada publishers.

Our effectiveness in fighting legislation that directly harms the income of affiliates will depend on your support. The PMA will be coordinating a targeted grassroots campaign, and we need help from all Nevada affiliate marketers.

You can learn more about this issue here: http://www.performancemarketingassociation.com/blog/2010/02/18/ad-tax-urgent-help-from-nevada-affiliates/

You can register your support on the PMA site: http://performancemarketingassociation.com/advocateform.html

[REMOVED]

Our strength is in our numbers!

Rebecca Madigan
Executive Director | Performance Marketing Association

[Billy Kay]

Apparently, there are only FOUR known affiliates in NV!!!

Hope our elected officials respond to my yelling the same way Networks and merchants do

[mellie]

There are a few others in Nevada who are also working on it but prefer not to join a Google group and don't want to sign up. They are all emailing and calling their reps. At least one has an upcoming meeting with a legislator.

[Stephanie Lichtenstein]

BK something tells me, I am sure you will make yourself heard...That's why you were one of the first people that came to mind in NV but there are definitely more out there. You stand out

Great Mellie, glad NV affiliates are getting involved. That is what is most important. People do not need to join the Google group in order to participate it is just another way to get information.

Thanks BK and Mellie for your awesome efforts! You guys rock.

[La_Valette]

I was seriously thinking of moving to Nevada - this has really poured cold water over those plans.

Even if the proposal is shot down this time, the fact that it was proposed once makes Nevada a high-risk state in my mind now.

[seaturkey]

There are way more than 4. Many may just be incorporated there because of favorable corporate laws etc. They will all need to step up and help.

[flamingoworld]

Originally Posted by mellie

There are a few others in Nevada who are also working on it but prefer not to join a Google group and don't want to sign up. They are all emailing and calling their reps. At least one has an upcoming meeting with a legislator.

Too bad everyone can't work together since they are all fighting the same issue and have the same goal.

[Haiko de Poel, Jr.]

I agree 100% Connie It makes no sense at all not to open a forum where everyone is instead of redirecting and tweeting everyone to private google groups and to go here and there!

But, at the end of the day, the most important thing is action and that I think we are all encouraged about that so I won't derail the thread anymore

[jimh009]

LOL, I was just about to post a link to the Google NV Group for some posts I just put up. But after Haiko's warning, I'll copy/paste what I just posted on the Google NV Group. I put up two posts:

POST ONE

I found this snippet on the RGJ paper today (Wednesday).
> Gibbons wants to increase mining taxes by $25 million a year by taking away 50 percent of the deductions the industry is allowed to take on its net proceeds tax. Gibbons has also proposed a law change to allow the state to collect sales tax from in-state online vendors that sell goods through Amazon or other similar Web sites.


http://www.rgj.com/section/blogs01?plckController=Blog&plckBlogPage=B...
So exactly what is a "in-state online vendor?" If this murky snippet,
and what little i've seen elsewhere, is any indication - this seems an
attempt to collect sales taxes from businesses/people who live in
Nevada and sell stuff on the Amazon Marketplace/Ebay/etc...


Anyways, while far from clear, this proposal is looking less and less
like your typical "affiliate tax" or "amazon ad tax." Which, at least
for now, is good - since it seems like it will have zero effect on
merchants outside of Nevada.


With some luck everybody will all go home on Sunday night and forget
about everything and anything related to the Internet!

POST TWO

OK, I was thinking and trying to put together the various tidbits of
information I've gleamed through various NV news sources and the
Governors proclamation the past four days.
Perhaps I'm hopelessly optimistic, but I do not think this is your
typical amazon tax or affiliate tax. I've seen nothing so far that
says the State is going to try to collect sales taxes from OUT-STATE
merchants using the "affiliate nexus" type thing other states have
done or are trying to do.


Instead, this is an attempt to collect sales taxes from IN-STATE
merchants who sell stuff online to Nevada residents. Isn't this all
taxed already? After all, when I buy something from Zappos (based in
Vegas), I have to pay tax.


But it isn't that simple, and that little snippet made me realize
that. For example, I can set up a merchant account on Amazon
Marketplace and sell "whatever." IF I use Amazon's fullfillment
services - the product itself is being sold via Amazon, not me. As
Amazon doesn't charge sales tax to NV residents, a NV resident to NV
resident sale is essentially going through without sales tax.
Moreover, if I sold it directly in the marketplace to a NV resident...I would be tasked with paying the tax. But...I suspect many NV online vendors who sell on 3rd party websites don't ever bother doing that.


The same thing holds true for the likely countless Ebay transactions
that are done. I doubt few people selling on eBay from NV to other NV
residents are sending tax payments to the State of Nevada.


Perhaps this is a method by the governor to collect some of these
taxes directly from these third party websites. Thus, instead of
relying on NV residents submitting sales tax to the state, to have the
3rd party websites collect the tax instead.


Additionally, perhaps the governor is also attempting to collect taxes
from in-state merchants who are selling products to people out-of-
state. I've never heard of any state doing that, but...there's always
a first.


Anyways, just some guesses on what might be in the offing.

Originally Posted by Haiko de Poel, Jr.

I agree 100% Connie It makes no sense at all not to open a forum where everyone is instead of redirecting and tweeting everyone to private google groups and to go here and there!

But, at the end of the day, the most important thing is action and that I think we are all encouraged about that so I won't derail the thread anymore

[jimh009]

I suspect EVERY state that has a sales tax is going to be considered a "high risk state" at some point over the next few years. States are desperate for money everywhere, and they'll reach and reach until they get their claws into some. What may be considered a "safe state" today may become a "hot state" tomorrow.

Look on the bright side, though. NV legislature only meets every two years. So if affiliates survive this special session and the regular one next year, we'll have two years free of worry.

Originally Posted by La_Valette

I was seriously thinking of moving to Nevada - this has really poured cold water over those plans.

Even if the proposal is shot down this time, the fact that it was proposed once makes Nevada a high-risk state in my mind now.

[RebeccaMadiganPMA]

The purpose of the PMA google groups per state, is to plan, coordinate and inform people in Nevada who are involved in the grassroots effort to fight the ad tax. The opposition, generally sponsored by retailers and booksellers interest groups, have been following our activities. If we are planning a calling or letter writing campaign, or a visit to the capitol, we don't want the opposition beating us there, or developing positioning directly targeting ours.

Yesterday at the ad tax hearing in Virginia, the head of the opposition sat down in front of me, and showed the sponsoring senator a printed out copy of the PMA post I had written the night before. The content I wrote was an update on the status of the issue, which we always make public. This has happened several times. But the google group is for the team working on the fight, our tactical plays, so we can all communicate with each other.

The recruitment of all the people to attend the hearing, where we were meeting, what we were going to say, who we were going to target, who was on our side and who wasn't, were kept confidential in the Google group, so the opposition wouldn't read it.

[Trust]

As far as that, is there some kind of screening process so the opposition doesn't simply sign up to the Group themselves?

[BlogBonnieBlog]

Seems like this would be a good opportunity for you all to reach out to Zappos. They have a huge affiliate program and also have HQ in Nevada. They'd be able to bring up some stats not only on what happens to affiliates that the state would loose out on, but show how affiliates outside of nevada actually drive revenue INSIDE of nevada when Zappos pays their income tax.

Also, with Affiliate Summit there, maybe we should get a protest of online marketing trade shows (thinking affiliate summit, blogworld, pubcon, etc.) that could threaten to move their shows - why would we want to hold a tradeshow in a non-supportive state? Then you are threatening not only the loss of the affiliate income, but the hotels and travel industry revenue.

There is a guy on twitter (@lasvegasbill) that has a lot of connections in vegas that could be helpful. I'm a few hours away in phoenix.

[MichaelColey]

Originally Posted by RebeccaMadiganPMA

The recruitment of all the people to attend the hearing, where we were meeting, what we were going to say, who we were going to target, who was on our side and who wasn't, were kept confidential in the Google group, so the opposition wouldn't read it.

The Google Groups I've seen so far have all been public. There's no need to pull people away from ABW, and in fact our Forum Rules prohibit people from recruiting for other forums. I'm removing all references to these Google Groups immediately.

If a private forum is needed, we can create one here. Let's create a separate thread in the General Affiliate Tax forum to discuss what is required.

[flamingoworld]

Sadly there are a lot of people who won't come here to post so we still end up with segmented groups.
I understand the not recruiting for other forums, but this is our livelihood here, this is how I feed my family. I don't care where it is as long as everyone can work together and not be petty like some have been. I see the Google Groups as a neutral ground. It isn't PMA and isn't ABW. Just a central neutral gathering place for everyone involved.

[mellie]

My reference to the Google group was not to disuade any one on the use of a group/forum/blog/other venue. It was simply a statement that some people will not sign up for the google group.) It was just to share that there were additional affiliates working on the issue. It was meant to be reassuring to those who may have felt alone.

Those same affiliates who do not want to join a Google group also will not post here. But those affiliates will read and they are acting on the issue by contacting news media, legislators, and other affiliates.

There are many more working on this issue than you will see on any forum or group.