Comments on: Amazon Challenges “Amazon Tax”

By: Geetika

Geetika — Mon, 05 May 2008 04:40:42 +0000

I feel like the obligation of informing the customer of whether he/she is required to pay tax on a particular item is necessary. And, obligating the collection of tax by out of state entities will just ensure its collection and reduce the workload of the state govt. It seems like an extension of the law in existence and should not face much retaliation, except from businesses like Amazon, which is quite obvious as they are greatly affected by it due to the large proportion of business they get through reference fees. However, Amazon might have a strong point there because it might be hard to prove the actual physical presence of its agents.

By: Paul Garfinkle

Paul Garfinkle — Mon, 05 May 2008 01:54:57 +0000

I think that Amazon should be forced to pay sales tax to items sold to NY residents. This scenario is similiar to the Borders Online v State Board of Equalization case in which cashiers acted as agents for Borders Online in accepting returned merchandise. Since Amazon receives referrals from NY based websites, they should be forced to pay NY sales taxes.

By: Howe Lin

Howe Lin — Sat, 03 May 2008 15:48:04 +0000

Depending on the details of new law, NY may possibly have a strong defense, as along as it can show its redefinition of a nexus portrays substantial activity in its state, is fair, and does not burden against interstate commerce. If Amazon receives a reasonable amount of money in referral fees through NY, then Amazon should have to collect taxes to compensate for the benefit of doing business in NY.

By: JesseR

JesseR — Fri, 02 May 2008 19:29:06 +0000

NY is too afraid to tax consumers directly with a sensible ‘Congestion Charge,’ but they have no problem forcing Amazon.com (and other retailers) to collect taxes for them. Quite pathetic - Amazon should fight this tooth and nail.