Results 1 to 20 of 20
April 27th, 2013, 07:06 AM #1Amazon supports Internet Tax
Doing some reading and as i go through my list of new sites I find this and think how much I dislike life today
The Marketplace Fairness Act: Why Amazon Wants to Be Taxed - DailyFinance
I wonder how this will affect online marketing and commissions.
Also WalMart CEO will make even more money, when people will be forced in line to buy their underwear from him. http://www.cbsnews.com/8301-505125_162-57580839/wal-mart-ceo-mike-duke-in-2012-paid-$20.7-million/
I personally Like underwear from Amazon , lot of choices and nobody is looking at my bum as pick and choose.
The state of Rhode Island has not made any money since the nexus law passed years ago.
Even sales tax free states like New Hampshire will have to cough it up.
A listing of saps who support the Bill Marketplace Fairness Act: Supporters
I cannot believe businesses in my home state of Louisiana support this and they voted down internet taxes...
Still doing some reading...
April 27th, 2013, 10:04 AM #2
Yes read the other threads in Tax forum as much of this has been written about. I personally feel that if we can get past the tax issue that online merchants and affiliates will benefit. An online merchant has economy of scale and can cut the costs of products by not having so much staff, rent and overhead costs. With so much free shipping and equal (if not lower) taxes then the convenience of getting it delivered to your home makes a difference. I tried to buy underwear from Wal-mart a year ago and have it shipped to me but it was a terrible experience shopping there online.
April 27th, 2013, 12:09 PM #3
Some points of clarification, as there is a lot of misinformation out there.
1. This is not a new tax. When you buy something from another State online, in the majority of cases, you ALREADY owe this tax. You should be voluntarily paying this tax at the end of the year ... the fact that many people are not is the reason for the bill. This is about collection, not about the tax itself... the tax already exists (in most States).
2. Citizens of New Hampshire and other States that do not have a Sales tax will NOT have to pay a Sales Tax on online items.
3. Businesses are not charged a tax.
4. In order to have the power being granted to force tax collection, a State must first simplify their sales tax code AND provide the cost of the software to a retailer involved in collection.
5. This is NOT a national sales tax on the internet. There is no new tax being added to anything, it is about empowering States to be able to collect taxes that are already due.Thanks,
President/CEO - ShareASale.com, Inc.
April 27th, 2013, 12:40 PM #4
THANK YOU, Brian!Salty kisses, Sandy toes, and a Pirate's heart...
April 27th, 2013, 12:56 PM #5
Brian, while business's are not charged a tax they do incur the expense of maintaining the software, tax tables, filing and the rest..
The states idea of simplifying the tax code only works if all states agree that taxable definition of each class of product is the same across the board. Take my core product: chocolate covered strawberries, in some states it's food, other it's a bakery item and others it's candy (and side items in the same box or shipment just make it more complicated), each of those can have a different rate. As long as the states have the ability to define "simplified" (rather than "flat") it's going to be ugly.
Right now it varies by state if shipping is taxable or not and then it depends on the item being shipped (and where), again this is the government, their idea of simple may not match what a reasonable person would call simple, especially when it's multiplied by 50 states.
While that states have to provide the cost of the software: is it one integrated piece of software or 40+ pieces, one for each taxable state, each with it's own setup, sku list and the rest (a maintenance nightmare for the merchant).
A hole in all of this is that the state has to provide the cost of the software, if a merchant gets it's cart on a platform that does not have a package available they don't have to collect. (time to find a used HP3000 and a copy of Speedware.., then open up a consulting company that charges a million an hour..)
April 27th, 2013, 02:44 PM #6
I understand that this doesn't cover every bit of work needed, but one of the goals of the bill is to remove the "work" from the retailer - and put it on the State. There is a lot that a State has to do in order to utilize this Act.Thanks,
President/CEO - ShareASale.com, Inc.
April 27th, 2013, 02:58 PM #7
Brian, since a lack of the software for any platform/cart would give the merchants on that platform a competitive advantage that opens up a big hole for unfair competition.
April 27th, 2013, 08:45 PM #8
- Join Date
- April 19th, 2013
Amazon is already paying taxes for these states ( because of their size ). Having that bill passed, will not affect them that much ( since they already collecting taxes on majority of states ) on the other hand, if that bill passed, it will hit eBay fast enough, that ebay will not know what went down, if it is affecting eBay badly, why don't Amazon go for it
April 30th, 2013, 10:25 AM #9
Ebay Needs Your Help? Excuse Me???
- Join Date
- April 30th, 2013
Big Business is the stability this Country counts on! Yes they do seem to get their lions share of unfair advantages, but what would this Country be like without them? Would we be better off? After all isn't that our bottom line now in America, what we alone get out of the deal? "It's time that we all need to get a mature life and stand behind this Country to get out of debt"! We can't borrow our way out, and this mentality that thinks we can cheat our way around taxes (and helping this Country) has just got to go! OK; You want personal reasons to stand behind this Internet Tax Bill? How many of you have been given no service on products that are great deals, but turn out to be defective junk; then you end up losing your hard earned money on your wonderful tax free purchase? With companies like Ebay (that have their own finagled buyer protection program), all that happens when you use their system to report the myriads of tax free swindlers is, you eventually get banned! Why Banned? Because Ebay is not protecting the buyer or seller, they are solely protecting their commissions. What would happen to these internet swindlers and ebay, if the sellers were to become accountable? We would have more Trustworthy Merchants and Internet Middlemen to deal with, and we wouldn't be getting hoodwinked by petty thieves hiding behind large corporations! Support Accountability Folks! Think Deep!! (Bravo Amazon)
April 30th, 2013, 11:00 AM #10
April 30th, 2013, 11:04 AM #11
April 30th, 2013, 11:24 AM #12
No one is going to stop shopping online, nor are they going to stop shopping locally at their brick and mortar. It's all scare tactics to justify a money grab.
HOWEVER, as an industry, Affiliate Marketing NEEDS this Bill...Salty kisses, Sandy toes, and a Pirate's heart...
April 30th, 2013, 11:30 AM #13
April 30th, 2013, 12:38 PM #14How many of you have been given no service on products that are great deals, but turn out to be defective junk; then you end up losing your hard earned money on your wonderful tax free purchase? With companies like Ebay (that have their own finagled buyer protection program), all that happens when you use their system to report the myriads of tax free swindlers is, you eventually get banned! Why Banned? Because Ebay is not protecting the buyer or seller, they are solely protecting their commissions. What would happen to these internet swindlers and ebay, if the sellers were to become accountable?
Thanks for the rant as your first post, tells me you are a regular reader and passionate about this subject. Would be nice if you joined the conversation instead of screaming from the sidelines.
April 30th, 2013, 01:40 PM #15Affiliate Marketing NEEDS this Bill...
A flat tax by state without exemptions makes more sense, as right now the same product can have a different definition in different states. (food, bakery, candy..) and different tax rates for each even in the same state.
If the states objective it to gather more tax it's in their best interest to simplify it as much as possible, with a central collection location, flat taxes without exemptions and standard method of treating shipping (taxable/non-taxable) and this bill just continues the twisted tax rates that are out there. (But CCBerries is under the $1mil cap, so as long as that stays in place zero effect)
April 30th, 2013, 02:22 PM #16
If this passes the Senate on the 6th it will most likely take several week to pass the house the on to the president to sign. I doubt they will work out the particulars very quickly. i agree they need a simple flat tax.
My interest is to get something into law so we can stop the bleeding of affiliates and program. Realistically if this passes I don't see it taking full effect for a year but it would at least set a direction to move forward.
April 30th, 2013, 03:16 PM #17
No more. But that will have no effect on affiliate marketing once the Marketplace Fairness Act is effective.
The Marketplace Fairness Act is our last and final chance to save affiliate marketing. Nexus taxes are the ELEPHANT IN THE ROOM and are destroying the industry. If you have not been directly affected by it, you do not fully realize the ramifications.
I GUARANTEE that without the Marketplace Fairness Act, in another year or two, when another two dozen states have passed their own nexus laws, 500,000 affiliates will be 50,000, and shrinking.
CAVEAT: At such time as the US Supreme Court rules on the issue, which is probably still two or more years away, I still feel strongly that the legal fiction of the nexus rule will be struck down.
April 30th, 2013, 07:32 PM #18
May 3rd, 2013, 07:58 PM #19
Thanks for all of the responses everyone.
I have a noob question here. If this Tax would go into effect. Would we expect to see the merchants and Amazon to allow us who were effected by the nexus tax to start promotions with them again?
Basically would we be able to get all the merchants who dropped us to accept us with open arms? since all affiliates will be affected in sales tax collecting states.
Thanks in advance for any response.
May 3rd, 2013, 08:11 PM #20
On the other hand, say Merchant X had $1 M plus sales per year from CA residents with CA affiliates, but dropped down to $.5 M per year after firing their CA affiliates. They might well not take back their CA affiliates in order to remain under the $1 M threshold.
Also, some merchants may just not take them back. When the original CA nexus tax went into effect merchants quickly fired us, and then the law was suspended for a year. Most merchant took us back until the law ultimately went back into effect a year later, but many did not. I see many merchant just not taking back fired affiliates.
By DealSucker in forum Affiliate Tax LawsReplies: 9Last Post: January 26th, 2015, 04:33 PM
By Andy Rodriguez in forum Deluxe Business Products & ServicesReplies: 0Last Post: July 1st, 2011, 01:40 PM
By Linda - 5starAffiliatePrograms in forum Affiliate Tax LawsReplies: 1Last Post: March 9th, 2010, 02:32 PM
By markwelch in forum California Affiliate TaxReplies: 4Last Post: March 22nd, 2009, 04:48 PM