If you can buy it locally or through Amazon, and both charge taxes, then Amazon will have to offer deeper discounts because of the shipping charge. Otherwise, Amazon will end up costing more than a local retailer, which is exactly how local retailers would prefer it.
Here is an article from a couple of years ago that seems to present the state's argument : http://news.bookweb.org/news/nexus-texas-state-investigate-amazoncoms-irving-facility Sometime last year the State of Texas asked Amazon to pay $269 million in "back taxes".
Cut spending. Uncontrolled spending will still lead to a deficit, no matter how much you increase taxes. Eventually, the tax burden is too much to bear by the tax payers.
QFT. You saved me the time, RR. I choose to pay sales tax by choosing to buy things. It's that simple.
As I understand it, the dist. center isn't owned by amazon.com, but rather some other company used to skirt this law, therefore what amazon was doing is perfectly legal, albeit sneaky.
That's true - but you're also paying for the service of having it delivered to your house. You *should* pay more for that. But it's not even just about local retailers - it's about other online retailers. Walmart.com charges taxes for the same products that Amazon.com doesn't. That's non-responsive. Texas already has one of the lowest tax burdens anywhere. You have 3 basic choices of what to tax: property, income, and sales. Each has advantages and disadvantages, so as a country, we mix them all up so no one group is forced to bear excessive share of the burden.
Not necessarily, according to the article posted above: Following news of the investigation, Amazon stated publicly that, under Texas sales tax laws, it is not required to collect and remit sales tax because the distribution facility is operated by a subsidiary, Amazon.com.kydc, Inc. But this is not necessarily the case, according to R.J. DeSilva, a spokesperson for the Texas Comptroller's Office, who explained that there are circumstances where a subsidiary could, in fact, constitute nexus. "It varies," DeSilva told BTW. "Part of it would be dependent on the business mix -- so it's possible that a subsidiary would constitute nexus." It seems that just being a subsidiary doesn't clear you by itself. You probably have to have independent operations, a clear dividing line between the two organization, etc. They are running into this problem in other states where they have this subsidiary set up too.
I don't see anything wrong with it. It costs money to deliver stuff to your door. Just a cost of doing the Amazon business, just local retailers carry costs such as renting a storefront, hiring employees to stock the shelves, manning the cash register, etc., which Amazon doesn't have to the same degree since its costs of renting distribution center space and hiring employees is likely lower on a per dollar sold basis. Now, these costs don't get charged separately from the price of the product like shipping cost but they are likely reflected as part of what you pay anyway. In any case, it seems fair to charge the same sales tax on both kind of businesses and let the businesses decide how best to price their products and let the consumer decide where they want to buy stuff.
Update: Rick Perry wants Amazon to stay and throws the state comptroller under the bus. Looks like they just called Texas' bluff. Don't mess with Texas, unless you can give us jobs. link Rick Perry: Amazon decision wasn't the right one Comments (0) "BookmarkShare PrintPrint By: J.P. Freire 02/11/11 4:21 PM Gov. Rick Perry, R-Texas, told The Examiner in an exclusive interview that Amazon's decision to leave the state was a result of a wrong decision by the state comptroller, and that he will work with legislators to make sure Amazon can stay. "That is a problem and I would suggest to you that we need to look at that decision that our comptroller made," he said. "The comptroller made that decision independently. I would tell you from my perspective that's not the decision I would have made." Amazon announced that it would close its Texas distribution center, citing "an unfavorable regulatory climate" due to the comptroller's attempts to collect sales taxes. Perry noted that the Amazon distribution center was a warehouse without a storefront. "You couldn't go in and buy anything out of that store, and that, historically, has been the way we defined whether you pay taxes or not -- if you had a storefront. This obviously didn't have a store front. It was specifically there to manage products that need to be shipped out." But State Comptroller Susan Combs believes that Amazon is responsible for sales taxes not collected on online sales in the state. Last year, her office demanded $269 million in uncollected sales taxes from the company, and the case is pending before the Sate Office of Administrative Hearings. "We don't want to be onerous on tax policy where businesses and I would say I'm having a hard time getting my hands around this one," Perry continued. "The good news is that the legislature is in town for our bianual session. Hopefully someone will be able to craft some legislation -- and actually do it -- before Amazon walks out the door. Texas should be a bastion for businesses not one where they're sitting there going 'we'd rather go over to go to Oklahoma where we could get a better deal.'" "Texas doesn't need to make itself less competitive with its tax decisions." Read more at the Washington Examiner: http://washingtonexaminer.com/blogs...amazon-decision-wasnt-right-one#ixzz1Dy9PciAF
Shamelessly lifted from another forum conversation on this topic: I am confused why this would not be considered tax evasion by Amazon and result in some serious lawyering from the government of Texas... Oh wait, it's a bajillion dollar corporation - they can do anything they want! Yay!
Well duh, Perry prefers to make poor people and children pay the brunt of his massive fiscal ****-up. **** Rick Perry.
