[General Manager]

I'd like to find a list of all the publishers that moved out of NY due to the tax laws (and into another state that didn't have the Amazon Tax)?

I'd like to use to lobby against California enacting the same tax (to make the case that they'll lose more tax revenue than they'll gain since companies will leave the state).

Any suggestions?

Loren

[Chuck Hamrick]

No one is going to disclose that they moved out of the state as that would make them liable for taxes due.

[loxly]

Originally Posted by Chuck Hamrick

No one is going to disclose that they moved out of the state as that would make them liable for taxes due.

If they really moved, they wouldn't be liable. But I don't think you are going to get a list of people that moved. Networks wouldn't know if people moved because of the law or for other reasons, even if they could share that information.

[loxly]

Originally Posted by General Manager

I'd like to use to lobby against California enacting the same tax (to make the case that they'll lose more tax revenue than they'll gain since companies will leave the state).


Loren

It would be easier to show them some lists (even if they are incomplete) of the merchants that kicked out the NY Affiliates showing that they lost revenue from income taxes and related spending from those affiliates that now lost their income. Show them that the intended impact is not what they are expecting. Loss of revenue and businesses instead of increase in collected sales tax.

[markwelch]

Chuck is mistaken, and Loxly is right: moving from NY to another state to avoid application of the NY tax law is completely legal "tax avoidance." However, if a NY resident used a Connecticut or New Jersey "mail drop" address to avoid being excluded by merchants and to avoid application of the NY tax law, then that would be fraud against the merchant (who might be viewed as a "tax evader"), and of course if the NY resident didn't pay taxes on that income, that would also be tax evasion.

I think it's critically important that we all understand that most of the "hard data" for our industry is buried as "trade secrets." I don't talk about my successful web sites because I don't want to inspire competition; most merchants respect the privacy of their publishers; the technology providers (networks) usually respect the privacy of their merchants and publishers.

A few of us have shared specific "tidbits" of information about income from specific relationships -- I know I've posted on ABW about the sales and revenue I earned from a calendar-seller's advertising in past years (I was willing to share this information after I decided to stop working with that merchant); I've also shared data about the income for one specific web site which I sold in a public eBay auction. (I've also publicly discussed the fact that I've been mostly "on hiatus" and earned very little from web publishing during the past year, while I've been working on a tool that I can use to more effectively manage affiliate datafeeds and my own content.)

Quite frankly, I also assume that many affiliates and merchants don't want to share specific numbers because they may choose to evade these laws -- some because they believe the laws are unconstitutional, and others because they just hope they won't get caught. Certainly, a merchant who announces here that their CA publishers generated $50,000 of sales to Californians last year is quite likely to be on the California Franchise Tax Board's list to follow up with, if the law passes and the merchant doesn't terminate its California affiliates before the law's effective date.

And let me stress: if a merchant believes that the law is unconstitutional, and therefore refuses to comply with the law, it's entirely reasonable that they would still not want to become a "poster child" or an "example" for a state tax-enforcement agency; litigating a Constitutional question through appellate courts is likely to cost $100,000 or more.

I assume that the #1 source of "enforcement leads" for these laws for state tax-enforcement agencies will come from competitors: any merchant who is collecting sales tax for one state is quite likely to complain that their competitors are not collecting sales tax even though they fall within the scope of this law.

[AM Gabe]

Originally Posted by General Manager

I'd like to find a list of all the publishers that moved out of NY due to the tax laws (and into another state that didn't have the Amazon Tax)?

I have one affiliate and friend on our network who does quite well who moved his permanent residence from New York to New Jersey following the passing of the affiliate tax law.

[Bill]

Originally Posted by AM Gabe

I have one affiliate and friend on our network who does quite well who moved his permanent residence from New York to New Jersey following the passing of the affiliate tax law.

Unfortunately, New Jersey also has a "Sales and Use Tax" law. So, unfortunately, it is only a matter of time...

[Sam Bay]

Originally Posted by Bill

Unfortunately, New Jersey also has a "Sales and Use Tax" law. So, unfortunately, it is only a matter of time...

Right, especially since the state is already strapped for cash:
http://www.nj.com/news/index.ssf/200...ficit_tri.html

I'm guessing in the span of this year, many more states will join on this 'trend' as they have been looking for this 'opportunity' for so long. Thanks NY, for leading the way!

I'm hoping, though, there will a few states that won't do this, like Delaware or Nevada, and we will all move to these affiliate heavens

[Kevin]

I'm hoping, though, there will a few states that won't do this, like Delaware or Nevada, and we will all move to these affiliate heavens

I'm targeting the Turks and Caicos, Sam.

Unfortunately, the Catch 22 is that my affiliate income was supposed to get me there, now there is little aff income, etc.

Woe is me

[Chuck Hamrick]

It would be easier to show them some lists (even if they are incomplete) of the merchants that kicked out the NY Affiliates showing that they lost revenue from income taxes and related spending from those affiliates that now lost their income. Show them that the intended impact is not what they are expecting. Loss of revenue and businesses instead of increase in collected sales tax.
__________________

This is exactly what I have been preaching this week! Problem is that there is no way to detail what state income tax New York lost with no increase in sales tax collected. I am sure that Overstock, Amazon and Ebay will not disclose the total commissions paid to New York based affiliate in 2007! The states are on a witch hunt for revenue and all they have done is penalize their constituents.