California threatens Amazon, kills affiliate programs
Everyone is out blaming Amazon for doing what California asked them to do under threat. If you think Amazon should have started charging sales taxes in California rather than just end the affiliate program that California used as a hook to get them, I’ve got a deal for you, but first, you must:
- Hire a tax lawyer who understands California tax law
- Hire an accountant who understands California tax law
- Buy special, expensive software to handle all of your sales, but still be liable when that software is wrong
- Be ready to open your home and records at any time to California tax compliance specialists
If every state can bring an out-of-state company under their tax authority, then every state can force that company to waste time and money at any moment. Think about what you would go through and the waste of time and expense you’d incur if your state government decided to audit you today. Then multiply this and all of the above expenses by the size of Amazon compared to you and by 50 because Amazon sends to every state—or more if cities and counties get into the act. Amazon would be crazy not to respond to California‘s threat by doing what California asked them to do—end the affiliate program or be subject to California tax laws in addition to the laws of Amazon’s own state.
People seem to think that Amazon is ending the affiliate program in California as a retaliation. They’re doing it because California asked them to do it. California said, “Hey, Amazon! If you keep the affiliate program in California, you will need to hire tax experts across multiple fields and have someone ready to talk to our agents any time we want to inspect your records. If you don’t want that, end the affiliate program.”
California threatened Amazon if Amazon kept the affiliate program, and Amazon complied by removing the affiliate program. Regulations cost money and they cost more than what companies like Amazon and Overstock get from having an affiliate program. Having to deal with tax regulations for all fifty states, or, worse, all of thousands of municipalities, is an obvious resource drain, and worse, it will severely hurt startups and small businesses. Affiliate programs cost money, and aren’t really worth that kind of trouble.
I really hate this idea that when the government threatens some person or company, and that person/company backs down in the face of the threats, that that person/company is somehow at fault for doing what the government obviously wants them to do.
This is not about tax revenue. There is a solution if you want to tax out-of-state businesses but don’t want to kill startups and jobs. Make the tax law be the tax law of the state the seller is in, not the state the buyer is in. Then, the company bundles it up with zip codes and sends it to their own state’s tax bureaucracy to be distributed. It doesn’t require that each company buy and install bureaucracy event horizon software. It doesn’t require them to do anything other than comply with the tax laws they’re already complying with.
What I don’t understand is why California, and other states, don’t want affiliate programs. They know that the companies that offer affiliate programs will cancel them if threatened in this manner. Even if the first state to try it were so stupid as to not realize that affiliate programs aren’t worth the tax headaches, at this point they know. California isn’t trying to extract more tax money; they’re willing to forego tax money from affiliate earnings in order to kill the affiliate program. Why?
In response to Punishing low-tax states: An Internet sales tax that looks at the customer’s state instead of the seller’s state punishes states with low sales taxes and inhibits competition.
- Amazon Associates Program terminated in California immediately, no longer offering notice period: Joel Falconer
- “If the governor was attempting to call Amazon’s bluff, it didn’t work. In grabbing for sales tax, the state has, it seems, eliminated a chunk of income tax.”
- Golden state, stupid state: Phineas Fahrquar at Sister Toldjah
- “Brown and the Democratic majority expect this extension of the sales tax to bring in about $200 million. I’d like to know what they were smoking, because Amazon hasn’t needed the revenue from Affiliates in years, but kept the program running as a way to build goodwill and customer loyalty. Since they didn’t need the revenue, and since California has now raised the cost of the program to more than Amazon was willing to pay, the company did what was predictable by anyone except a California Democrat — they pulled the plug. Sacramento won’t see a dime of that $200 million.”
- Revolt of the Amazon Kulaks: William A. Jacobson at Legal Insurrection
- “This is why Obama will not see the trillion dollars in new taxes he wants, even if such legislation were passed. People change their business and personal practices once taxes reach a tipping point.”
More Amazon
- Notes on publishing ebooks, including scripts
- I have several scripts that make it easier to manage the translate from word processor to ePub or print, and I use them in different ways depending on what kind of a book it is.
- Regulations cost money
- Regulations cost money. Do politicians really not understand this?
- George Orwell’s incinerator
- Amazon shows by doing why digital restriction management on consumer items is a bad idea.
- Why does Amazon get the links?
- Why, when I love independent games, independent music, independent movies, independent comics, and independent books, do I link to Amazon.com for all of those?
More California
- California never had a free market power failure
- California’s experiment in free market power generation has become mythological in how it is remembered. The left is desperate to tar it as a free market failure. But California’s experiment wasn’t free market. It was a massive government-managed exchange practically designed to cause high prices.
- Can Californians drink a train?
- The meme goes that even if we’re wrong about global warming, the money spent will still make the world a better place. That is only true if you can drink a high-speed train.
- Tax event horizon
- How close are we to a tax event horizon, where so many people’s income depends on complicated tax laws that they can never be reformed?
- Sometimes you wonder, other times you expunge the vote
- California state assembly so proud of vote they… erase it from the public record.
- California eminent domain reform: 98 or 99?
- Thanks to Ilya Somin on the Volokh Conspiracy for explaining why proposition 98 is the one that needs supporting.
- 10 more pages with the topic California, and other related pages
More regulations
- How the left bribes big business
- There’s a reason giant corporations and the biggest conglomerates are almost all donors to Democrats if they prefer one party over another. The left’s policies kill their upstart competitors. Big government hurts small businesses far more than it hurts big businesses.
- The Star Trek Experience: Stanley Jaffe was right
- In 1992, Paramount executive Stanley Jaffe single-handedly killed an audacious, innovative, one-in-a-million Las Vegas attraction. Because that’s what he was hired to do.
- The Parable of the Mexican Farmer
- Betsey Stevenson’s an example of why it’s so hard to create middle-class jobs, Jared Bernstein.
- The Bureaucracy Event Horizon
- Government bureaucracy is the ultimate broken window.
- Zeno’s motorcar
- Automobiles are awesome machines. But sometimes it seems as though they’re stuck twenty years in the past.
Remember: Trump reassures crowd after assassination attempt fails. (read more…)
Blogroll
- According To Hoyt
- Ace of Spades HQ
- The Anchoress
- John Hayward
- Legal Insurrection
- National Motorists blog
- The Other McCain
- samizdata.net
- Sultan Knish
Yeah, thanks California for taking away a small but noticeable income stream from my budget (income that I paid taxes on). It seems CA is trying to cast the associate as the seller, which would logically mean that they should NOT charge sales tax on local businesses if the transaction went though an out-of-state associate.
What they are trying to do is create multiple sellers so the same transaction can be taxed multiple times. I don't blame Amazon one bit for walking away from that deal.
So now I'm working to set up a straw-man "associate" in another state, which starts to show that the idea of "location" is becoming obsolete. (My web server, which hosts my associate link is in Nevada. Will they try to tax my transactions based on that?)
California has engineered the perfect lose-lose-lose scenario. I get less money, California gets less money as a result, and Amazon sells less stuff. (Some people choose to buy from Amazon because they know I get a slice of the action. Now they will be more inclined to shop elsewhere.) The only winners are the big box stores that bought this legislation.
The other Jerry at 12:30 a.m. July 2nd, 2011
XZXfM