The War on Local Communities Coninues

[Zorro]

Amazon Tax Battle Rages in The Capital

http://www.nysun.com/new-york/schumer-weiner-meeks-side-against-paterson/82086/

Senator Schumer and Reps. Anthony Weiner and Gregory Meeks are co-sponsoring federal legislation that could undercut taxes New York State imposed this year on banks and online retailers, such as Amazon.com, that have customers in New York but no offices here.

Basically companies like Amazon have not paid sales taxes at the expense of local businesses. New York corrected this June 1st, but now our own politicians have sponsored legislation exempting these companies from paying their fare share.

Simply put the legislation says... Don't put a location in a local community and we'll protect you by surcharging those that do. So, the government is encouraging low paying jobs in awful places.

[RAAMONE]

anthony weiner is a dick

[topless_mike]

schumer is such a crook, it doesnt surprise me that he's trying to pull this.

[Zorro]

schumer is such a crook, it doesnt surprise me that he's trying to pull this.

I would expect this from some politician in Arkansas or some place like that, but this is a slap in the face to the people you represent. So, the only question that remins is how much are these business interests paying you... or should I say "contributing"

[K.C.]

I'm not putting this out to be smarmy or anything. I legitimately would like someone to explain this statement to me:

Mr. Weiner, a candidate for mayor in New York City next year, defended the bill in a statement. "New York's business community, particularly our vital financial services sector, has been hammered with business activity taxes in states and localities where they do not operate," he said. "It's bad for our economy and kills jobs. Period."


Ummm...if Amazon, or these out of state banks, have no physical presence in the city, how the hell does it cost jobs and kill the economy of New York?

Am I missing something here?

[Zorro]

I'm not putting this out to be smarmy or anything. I legitimately would like someone to explain this statement to me:



Ummm...if Amazon, or these out of state banks, have no physical presence in the city, how the hell does it cost jobs and kill the economy of New York?

Am I missing something here?

By not having to charge sales taxes the government is using tax policy to encourage citizens to not contribute their fare share to the maintenance of the cities and towns in which they live.

You create an unfair advantage where it becomes possible for a corporation such as amazon to drain resources from a community and not put anything back in.

I think the physical presence argument has been trumped by the growth of the internet.

[K.C.]

By not having to charge sales taxes the government is using tax policy to encourage citizens to not contribute their fare share to the maintenance of the cities and towns in which they live.

You create an unfair advantage where it becomes possible for a corporation such as amazon to drain resources from a community and not put anything back in.

I think the physical presence argument has been trumped by the growth of the internet.


Oh, I'm in favor of the tax.

I just don't understand Weiner's argument where it'll cost people jobs and hurt the economy.

Amazon has no ties to New York. They don't employ anyone in the state to begin with.

So making them pay taxes should have no effect one way or another on New York employment.

If anything, the Amazon will pass the tax cost onto the consumer, like most of these corporations do, which will hike their prices a little, which will make local businesses a little bit of a more attractive option for people as a result.

It's akin to an old style tariff that's designed to make shopping locally more attractive, or at the very least, make sure the state of New York gets theirs if people are going outside the state.

Seems like Weiner, and these fools are completely missing the boat on serving their local constituencies first.

[Zorro]

Oh, I'm in favor of the tax.

I just don't understand Weiner's argument where it'll cost people jobs and hurt the economy.

Amazon has no ties to New York. They don't employ anyone in the state to begin with.

So making them pay taxes should have no effect one way or another on New York employment.

If anything, the Amazon will pass the tax cost onto the consumer, like most of these corporations do, which will hike their prices a little, which will make local businesses a little bit of a more attractive option for people as a result.

It's akin to an old style tariff that's designed to make shopping locally more attractive, and, or at the very least, make sure the state of New York gets theirs if people are going outside the state.

Seems like Weiner, and these fools are completely missing the boat on serving their local constituencies first.

They don't employ anyone in the state not for business reasons, but specifically as a tax avoidance measure. If they were rquired to collect the tax they would also have no reason to not have a presence. By not having to collect taxes the government is giving them an 8-9% price advantage encouraging people away from the businesses that do exist reducing employment. So, it does affect New york and other places that aren;t getting paid.

Seems like Weiner, and these fools are completely missing the boat on serving their local constituencies first

This was actually what prompted me to start the thread in the first place. Weiner is my congressman... i voted for him twice and even gave money during his mayoral run. Not again.

[topless_mike]

here's a suggestion..
stop nickel and diming your local business owner. he then could lower his costs to compete with online sales and you could earn your tax dollars, you schmuck.

[Zorro]

here's a suggestion..
stop nickel and diming your local business owner. he then could lower his costs to compete with online sales and you could earn your tax dollars, you schmuck.

Great thought, but it's a different argument.

[epo]

Amazon and all of the other online companies should follow the same interstate taxation laws of every other industry in this country. Why they are treated differently has always confused and baffled me.

They are receiving all of the benefits (one could argue more because of the transportation factor of their industry) and yet don't pay their share of the cost.

Bravo Sierra!

[Recyclerz]

I'm not putting this out to be smarmy or anything. I legitimately would like someone to explain this statement to me:



Ummm...if Amazon, or these out of state banks, have no physical presence in the city, how the hell does it cost jobs and kill the economy of New York?

Am I missing something here?

Since NY is the corporate home to a lot of financial institutions, I suspect the Schumer/Weiner argument goes something like this: If NY State levies a tax on retail sales from an outfit like Amazon with no physical presence in the State, other states will start taxing financial services provided by Wall Street to the clients with money out in the boonies.

I agree with Zorro that this tax deal provides Amazon with an unfair advantage over the "real" stores in NY state. But the problem starts when each state begins its own taxing programs on activities outside its own borders. Left unchecked, these tax schemes could make interstate commerce almost impossible; that's why interstate commerce is supposed to be a federal responsibility. NY would probably be better off legally trying a RIAA type of approach of making examples of taxpayers who didn't pay the year end use tax on purchases from outfits like Amazon and coming down on them like a ton of bricks. Not that I'm advocating this, mind you. But the tax-free ride on internet purchases is probably coming to an end, one way or another, because the States have used up the free tobacco settlement money and now they can't pay for the services they provide.

[Zorro]

Since NY is the corporate home to a lot of financial institutions, I suspect the Schumer/Weiner argument goes something like this: If NY State levies a tax on retail sales from an outfit like Amazon with no physical presence in the State, other states will start taxing financial services provided by Wall Street to the clients with money out in the boonies.

I agree with Zorro that this tax deal provides Amazon with an unfair advantage over the "real" stores in NY state. But the problem starts when each state begins its own taxing programs on activities outside its own borders. Left unchecked, these tax schemes could make interstate commerce almost impossible; that's why interstate commerce is supposed to be a federal responsibility. NY would probably be better off legally trying a RIAA type of approach of making examples of taxpayers who didn't pay the year end use tax on purchases from outfits like Amazon and coming down on them like a ton of bricks. Not that I'm advocating this, mind you. But the tax-free ride on internet purchases is probably coming to an end, one way or another, because the States have used up the free tobacco settlement money and now they can't pay for the services they provide.


The thing here is states are not trying to set up a separate tax system. They are simply asking that products sold inside their borders by internet merchants be treated the same as products sold by brick and mortar establishments.

The basis for the "physical presence" standard goes to the Quill decision of 1994. At that time Quill (now owned by Staples and taxing) complained that trying to abide by the tax laws of each taxing authority it sold products in would be onerous and expensive. The court agreed. But 14 years later things have changed. What was once amazingly complicated is now easily done. States...(somewhere around 14 if I remember the WSJ article correctly) have even offered to provide the software free of charge to sellers.

Companies do not pay sales tax they collect it. This would not be an additional tax on Amazon or any other company. They don't pay a dime of sales tax on products they sell their customers do.

[sailor]

i can't believe all you people want to pay more taxes.

[HBox]

i can't believe all you people want to pay more taxes.

My thoughts exactly.

[Alice S. Fuzzybutt]

I remember years ago that NY (city and state) was mad that New Yorkers were shopping in NJ because we have no sales tax on clothing.

I also vaguely remember the politicians "threatening" New Yorkers who shopped in Jersey City (since the sales tax is only 3%) that they were going to take pictures of all the NY state license plates they found in the Newport Centre Mall parking lot. I swear I am not making this up. WHAT they were actually going to DO I'm not sure.

If they were going to go through that much trouble then why are they supporting this legislation? I don't get it.

[Zorro]

i can't believe all you people want to pay more taxes.

It's not about paying taxes, but paying your fair share of the cost to run your city.

[scottinnj]

Why would I want to do that? Paying your "fair share" is one thing, but when your city decides to spend money on useless crap, then looking for tax free solutions to buy a book or a CD is mighty tempting.

I'd rather give my money to UPS in shipping charges then to my local government in taxes anyday. The UPS driver gets money put into his retirement pension, and my local government has less money to spend on useless trinkets.

[Captain Rooster]

People seem to be missing the point: Remove business from the local community and the community suffers. Offer a tax break to go outside the "the community" and that's what businesses (big ones) do. Then ... the community suffers.

[sailor]

isn't every business part of some community, even if it's not yours?

[Captain Rooster]

isn't every business part of some community, even if it's not yours?

Are you Chinese or Indian? Wake up.

[scottinnj]

People seem to be missing the point: Remove business from the local community and the community suffers. Offer a tax break to go outside the "the community" and that's what businesses (big ones) do. Then ... the community suffers.

But that's the thing. Amazon and other online vendors do not get tax breaks from NJ to operate outside the state. They just operate outside the state of NJ, so they are not allowed to charge a sales tax on me. Which is fine by me, because like I said before, my city, county and state are totally whacked on how to spend the tax dollars they get from me through property and sales taxes already, so why send more of it to Trenton, Atlantic County, and the Northfield City Hall so the polilticians can piss it away along with the money I have no choice in paying them in the first place?

Think of all the mom and pop vendors, like on Ebay, who don't have the means to handle the beauracracies of each state they sell items too? If I sell an iPod or two, or old cellphones or whatever, why should I have to charge a tax on the seller, then go through all the processes of making sure I give some percentage of the sale to a revenuer in some state I've never seen, or will ever goto?

State and local governments have to learn to do with what they have, instead of the endless search to tax each and every occurance of a dollar changing hands.

[scottinnj]

isn't every business part of some community, even if it's not yours?

Yep, and somebody is drawing a paycheck from them. Government is to stay out of that as much as possible-the more it intervenes, the less growth occurs, and job creation goes down.

[Captain Rooster]

Yep, and somebody is drawing a paycheck from them. Government is to stay out of that as much as possible-the more it intervenes, the less growth occurs, and job creation goes down.

So ... Go China! Go India! Go child labor! Why buy American? Go internet! We're a global community (yeah right).

[scottinnj]

So ... Go China! Go India! Go child labor! Why buy American? Go internet! We're a global community (yeah right).

Who said anything about not buying American? The CDs I buy from Amazon are made in Glassboro NJ. I just don't have to pay a tax on them if I buy them on the Internet.
Same thing with my Verizon music downloads. If nobody did iTunes downloads (or Sprint, AT&T, Verizon, whatever your cellphone does) where would the software engineers go? How many fewer techs would Verizon have? The cellphones and MP3 players may be made overseas, but the servers that hold the music waiting for customers to download, and the cell infratstructure needed to connect the cellphone to those servers are built and maintained here in the states.

That "foreign" Subaru you see rolling down the road was made in Indiana.

That "domestic" Chevrolet you're saving up for was made in Mexico, or Canada, depending if it is a pickup or passenger car.

[sailor]

yeah, i don't know where rooster's xenophobia comes from, but i'm not buying stuff from overseas retailers. and even the stuff sold locally was probably made in china, so it's a bit late to jump on that bandwagon. it's a global economy and it's been that way for years.

[Captain Rooster]

yeah, i don't know where rooster's xenophobia comes from ...

So that's what wanting to buy American is these days. Amazing how semantics works.

[Zorro]

But that's the thing. Amazon and other online vendors do not get tax breaks from NJ to operate outside the state. They just operate outside the state of NJ, so they are not allowed to charge a sales tax on me. Which is fine by me, because like I said before, my city, county and state are totally whacked on how to spend the tax dollars they get from me through property and sales taxes already, so why send more of it to Trenton, Atlantic County, and the Northfield City Hall so the polilticians can piss it away along with the money I have no choice in paying them in the first place?

Think of all the mom and pop vendors, like on Ebay, who don't have the means to handle the beauracracies of each state they sell items too? If I sell an iPod or two, or old cellphones or whatever, why should I have to charge a tax on the seller, then go through all the processes of making sure I give some percentage of the sale to a revenuer in some state I've never seen, or will ever goto?

State and local governments have to learn to do with what they have, instead of the endless search to tax each and every occurance of a dollar changing hands.


When amazon can charge 7 or 8 % less than a competitor solely because of tax policy then by definition they are government subsidized.

...and here's a shocker you gotta pay for roads, police, hospitals etc...if they can't collect them from amazon there gonna get them someplace...

[SatCam]

When amazon can charge 7 or 8 % less than a competitor solely because of tax policy then by definition they are government subsidized.

...and here's a shocker you gotta pay for roads, police, hospitals etc...if they can't collect them from amazon there gonna get them someplace...

Actually, the plan wouldn't affect amazon's prices at all. It would just add sales tax to the end of your purchase which would then go to your state's gvt. Amazon would not gain or lose any money from this, except lost revenue from people who wont shop there anymore. But let's face it, people who shop online aren't going to stop shopping online just because they have to start paying sales tax.


Also, while we're getting fact straight, you ALWAYS had to pay tax on the stuff you bought online. Except now NY wants the merchant to be responsible for collecting it because no consumers were actually paying it.


Amazon.com is NOT getting taxed by NY.

[scottinnj]

When amazon can charge 7 or 8 % less than a competitor solely because of tax policy then by definition they are government subsidized.

...and here's a shocker you gotta pay for roads, police, hospitals etc...if they can't collect them from amazon there gonna get them someplace...

Yeah, the price is the price. Amazon's pricing has nothing to do with the amount of sales tax charged by the government.


"here's a shocker?" Duh. I never said local governments shouldn't charge taxes. I'm against paying taxes for stupid shit.

Roads..fine.

Police...fine.

Hospitals...fine.

Bike paths...meh, okay.

Lights for the bike path, go screw!

A big clock on the bike path, go fuck yourselves.

Building permits that cost 100 dollars? THIEVES!


The only way to control spending by politicians is to cut off the supply of money going to them. So I'll find any way I can to get out of paying a tax.

[Zorro]

Actually, the plan wouldn't affect amazon's prices at all. It would just add sales tax to the end of your purchase which would then go to your state's gvt. Amazon would not gain or lose any money from this, except lost revenue from people who wont shop there anymore. But let's face it, people who shop online aren't going to stop shopping online just because they have to start paying sales tax.


Also, while we're getting fact straight, you ALWAYS had to pay tax on the stuff you bought online. Except now NY wants the merchant to be responsible for collecting it because no consumers were actually paying it.


Amazon.com is NOT getting taxed by NY.

:wallbash: