Results 1 to 5 of 5
  1. #1
    ABW Ambassador Georgie Peri's Avatar
    Join Date
    January 17th, 2005
    Norwalk, CT
    Question Amazon Tax will raise 9.4 Million
    Interesting to see how they figured the "Amazon Tax" will raise 9.4 Million...

    Link with the Budget plan #'s

    Anyone have a idea?
    OpA! Giasou Ti kanies!

  2. #2
    Full Member
    Join Date
    June 15th, 2005
    Yeah, our Governor cut a deal and slipped in the Amazon Tax into his budget last night. Dirty politics.

    If you're a CT affiliate and stand to lose one penny from the Amazon Tax more then ever we need you to get involved. Please join the PMA's Google Group at:

  3. #3
    Join Date
    January 18th, 2005
    Is this estimate based upon the assumption that all or most online retailers will collect sales tax?

    Or does this estimate reflect the exclusion or Amazon, Overstock, and many other retailers who will terminate their advertising relationships with in-state publishers, to completely avoid the law's impact?

  4. #4
    Join Date
    January 18th, 2005
    Wait, WAIT, WAIT!

    I'm looking at the page you referenced, and it actually says "Amazon Tax." It doesn't say "Advertising Nexus" or "Affiliate." If this is a document coming out of the legislature, it's very damning evidence.

    Remember, it's generally illegal (unconstitutional, I think) to pass a law to impose special duties on a specific "person" (though certainly it's okay to pass a broad law that applies to all "persons" in a specific situation, even if there is currently only one "person" impacted by the law).

    They can't pass a law that says, "Amazon must..." but they could pass a law that says "Any out-of-state retailer receiving more than $XXX million in revenue from state residents, must...." And generally, legislators and their staffs KNOW not to ever spell out their specific intent to target a single person or company. (We all know what's going on here, it's the booksellers' lobbyists trying to punish Amazon, specifically.)

    Now Amazon might go to court to have the law ruled invalid because it's clearly targeted at Amazon specifically (in addition to the other constitutional arguments that would likely prevail before the US Supreme Court, though the issue will likely be moot before then). Other merchants might also argue that despite the wording of the law, they shouldn't be impacted because it's clear that the intent was that the law should apply only to Amazon.

    Would etailers win in court, on this particular theory? Probably not, but if this document did come from the legislature, it's definitely a mistake.
    Last edited by markwelch; April 21st, 2011 at 09:02 PM.

  5. #5
    Full Member
    Join Date
    June 15th, 2005
    They reached this figure based on the assumption affiliates won't be fired. "To the extent that remote sellers
    end their business relationship with local affiliates, as a result of
    the bill, there could potentially be less to no revenue gain as listed

  6. Newsletter Signup

+ Reply to Thread

Similar Threads

  1. Featured: Amazonís new tax deal plans to invest $135 million in two warehouses in Virginia!
    By Chuck Hamrick in forum Virginia Affiliate Tax
    Replies: 0
    Last Post: March 6th, 2012, 03:29 PM
  2. Amazon sues Texas over $269 million tax bill
    By CTanK in forum Texas Affiliate Tax
    Replies: 3
    Last Post: January 31st, 2011, 08:00 PM
  3. Your Tax money at work: $42-Million to Send Out Tax Letters
    By Eric Ewe in forum Virtual Family and Off-Topic
    Replies: 4
    Last Post: March 8th, 2008, 12:34 PM
  4. Claria Sets IPO, Would Raise $150 Million
    By Haiko de Poel, Jr. in forum Suspicious Activity!
    Replies: 15
    Last Post: August 14th, 2004, 08:30 AM
  5. Thank you for the Raise, Amazon!
    By Tracy in forum Amazon
    Replies: 5
    Last Post: July 14th, 2003, 08:05 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