Results 1 to 9 of 9
  1. #1
    .
    Join Date
    January 18th, 2005
    Posts
    2,973
    California AB 178 "Amazon Tax" hearing delayed to January, but...
    Several folks posted comments under another discussion thread , but I realized that someone just browsing the CAaffiliates.com forum might not realize the status change:

    AB 178 was removed from the hearing schedule yesterday and was re-classified as a "two-year bill," meaning that it won't be considered until January (the second year of the current legislative session).

    This does not mean that the bill is dead, nor that nothing will happen until January.

    One concern is that the language from this bill might be inserted into some other bill. Since the California Board of Equalization has estimated that this bill would add $149.5 million in annual sales-tax revenue, this might sound very tempting to legislators desperate to close huge budget gaps.

    Also remember that a "mirror" bill is still pending in the "Third Extradordinary Session" (AB X3 27). That bill (which is identical except that it adds language pertaining to in-state repair facilities) has not even been assigned to a committee (nor has a Revenue & Taxation Committee been formed within the extraordinary session); I really don't understand how Extraordinary Sessions work, so I really don't know what the risks are here.

    I'd like to thank all the folks who did make the effort to travel to Sacramento to testify against this bill. As I mentioned last week, I decided not to do so, because I could not justify the cost (in time and money). However, many other dedicated folks did end up wasting the entire day traveling to Sacramento for a hearing which never happened.

  2. #2
    ABW Founder Haiko de Poel, Jr.'s Avatar
    Join Date
    January 18th, 2005
    Location
    New York
    Posts
    21,609
    Quote Originally Posted by markwelch
    This does not mean that the bill is dead, nor that nothing will happen until January. One concern is that the language from this bill might be inserted into some other bill (and given that the California Board of Equalization estimates that the bill would add $149.5 million in annual revenue, this is a huge concern).

    Also remember that a "mirror" bill is still pending in the "Third Extradordinary Session" (AB X3 27). That bill (which is identical except that it adds language pertaining to in-state repair facilities) has not even been assigned to a committee (nor has a Revenue & Taxation Committee been formed within the extraordinary session); I really don't understand how Extraordinary Sessions work, so I really don't know what the risks are here.
    Thank you for posting this Mark!
    Continued Success,

    Haiko
    The secret of success is constancy of purpose ~ Disraeli

  3. #3
    Outsourced Program Manager TrishaLyn's Avatar
    Join Date
    February 24th, 2008
    Location
    San Leandro, CA
    Posts
    1,049
    We found out about 10 minutes outside Sacramento that the change had been made! We were also told that we need to watch for it again in June as it MAY show up as a budget item in another form. The ladies from CalChamber and CalTax were TONS of help for us and they're watching it as closely as we are.
    Trisha Lyn Fawver

    @TrishaLyn | My Managed Merchants

  4. #4
    Newbie
    Join Date
    September 17th, 2007
    Posts
    31
    This seems to be a (good) anticlimax since everybody was expecting it to be just railroaded through..

    Any scoop on what happened behind-the-scenes to have led to this? Anybody threaten anybody with deals they couldn't refuse?

  5. #5
    .
    Join Date
    January 18th, 2005
    Posts
    2,973
    The most likely reason is that the bill's authors (Skinner & Calderon) simply recognized that they simply didn't have enough votes to move the bill out of the committee.

    It's also quite likely that the task of amending this bill proved more difficult than expected, in part because Ms. Skinner and others want to insist that this bill (which is about internet advertising) is not actually about advertising. Thinking outside the box is one thing; calling the box a balloon is something else.

  6. #6
    ABW Ambassador CathyM's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 30th, 2006
    Location
    Torrance, CA
    Posts
    893
    The official status update is now posted.
    http://www.leginfo.ca.gov/pub/09-10/...28_status.html
    Hearing canceled at the request of author.
    It's definitely good news for the short term. Skinner may be waiting to see what happens at a national level or maybe she did not have time to re-write the bill as she intended (per her interview with the book association), or as some have suggested, may try to bring it forward as part of another process such as the budget.

  7. #7
    .
    Join Date
    January 18th, 2005
    Posts
    2,973
    Quote Originally Posted by MarkWelch
    > * * * "This does not mean that the bill is dead, nor that nothing will happen until January. // One concern is that the language from this bill might be inserted into some other bill. Since the California Board of Equalization has estimated that this bill would add $149.5 million in annual sales-tax revenue, this might sound very tempting to legislators desperate to close huge budget gaps." * * * <
    FYI, I don't know of anyone actively monitoring to see if the language from AB 178 might be inserted into other budget bills (to claim the $149 million in estimated revenue). I'm not even sure how we might know about such a move. Any ideas?

  8. #8
    Outsourced Program Manager kgarcia's Avatar
    Join Date
    January 18th, 2005
    Location
    Near Sacramento, CA
    Posts
    110
    Hi Mark,

    Actually this unfortunately has happened and we just found out that AB178 has been re-added to the budget bill that will go to Governor Schwarzenegger as early as the end of this week.

    A group of us will be making the rounds on Monday 6/22 to again point out what a terrible idea this is and why it would be devestating to so many small businesses. I know it's very short notice, but if you are interested in joining us, please let Brook Schaaf and I know asap so we know to expect you. We will be meeting at 10am at the 6th floor cafeteria again.

    Thanks,
    ~Karen
    Karen Garcia
    [URL=http://lab6media.com]Lab6 Media[/URL]
    Are you a content creator? A serial entrepreneur? New to the space or a long time player? We'd love to work with you!
    [URL=http://lab6media.com/clients/]Explore the affiliate programs we manage![/URL]

  9. #9
    .
    Join Date
    January 18th, 2005
    Posts
    2,973
    Thanks, Karen. This discussion is continuing in another thread:
    http://forum.abestweb.com/showthread.php?t=120833

  10. Newsletter Signup

+ Reply to Thread

Similar Threads

  1. New Report: The Harm and Failures of "Amazon Tax" Laws - From the Tax Foundation
    By Linda - 5starAffiliatePrograms in forum Affiliate Tax Laws
    Replies: 1
    Last Post: March 9th, 2010, 03:32 PM
  2. Planned Amendment to AB 178 (California's Amazon Tax)
    By markwelch in forum California Affiliate Tax
    Replies: 13
    Last Post: April 24th, 2009, 10:43 AM
  3. How Do We Want to Change California's "Amazon Tax" Bill?
    By markwelch in forum California Affiliate Tax
    Replies: 3
    Last Post: March 25th, 2009, 06:56 PM
  4. AB 178 (Amazon Tax) - also an "eBay tax"
    By markwelch in forum California Affiliate Tax
    Replies: 3
    Last Post: March 20th, 2009, 03:07 PM
  5. Links to articles and blog entries about CA AB 178 ("Amazon Tax")
    By markwelch in forum California Affiliate Tax
    Replies: 0
    Last Post: February 28th, 2009, 03:31 PM

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •