backtop


Print 113 comment(s) - last by soghjai.. on Sep 7 at 5:21 PM


Senate President Pro Tem Darrell Steinberg is even going as far as gaining support for a bill that prevents Amazon from bringing a referendum to unravel the present sales tax law  (Source: uncoverage.net)

Amazon CEO Jeff Bezos
If state leaders can put a hold on the new law until 2014, Amazon will drop its effort to repeal it and would hire 7,000 new employees in California

Amazon has been fighting a tax-related battle for quite some time now. In the past, state's like Texas, Illinois and Colorado have pressured the online retailer to collect taxes in order to make up for state budget shortfalls, but Amazon refused and would simply pack its bags to move on to another state.

California recently joined the list of states who've pressured Amazon to collect. In fact, Governor Jerry Brown signed a bill in June that would require websites that forward shoppers to Amazon to collect sales tax in California. The law, which took effect July 1 and is expected to generate $200 million in revenue, angered Amazon to the point that it asked California voters to repeal the law.

Now, Amazon has a new proposition for the state of California that was discussed in a meeting Tuesday with leaders of the California Retailers Association and those in the office state Senate Republican Bob Dutton in Sacramento: If state leaders can put a hold on the new law until 2014, Amazon will drop its effort to repeal it and would hire 7,000 new employees in California.

While the hiring spree could be an appealing option for the state, since California's unemployment rate was at 12 percent in July and is expected to remain in the double-digits through 2012, Democrats are rejecting Amazon's proposal due to budget-related woes.

Earlier this year, state leaders needed to close a $10 billion shortfall. This gap was closed in June after deep spending cuts in previous budget cycles, but Democrats are backing the new law due to the fact that it has the support of local governments, public employees and small and large businesses.

Brick-and-mortar businesses like Best Buy and Walmart have been complaining about "unfair competition" with Amazon since they have to collect taxes and Amazon doesn't. The California Retailers Association quickly rejected Amazon's proposal.

"Our people came back and said this isn't legitimate," said Bill Dombrowski, president of the California Retailers Association. "It's unacceptable."

As for local governments and public employees, their "ranks are being thinned" due to a weak local revenue and overall state.

Senate President Pro Tem Darrell Steinberg is even going as far as gaining support for a bill that prevents Amazon from bringing a referendum to unravel the present sales tax law. Amazon spokespeople said they believe they'll have enough voter signatures by September 27 to qualify its referendum for next year's ballot.

In addition, Steinberg and other Democrats will create California jobs without the help of Amazon by proposing tax breaks for businesses, creating an economic development office and easing regulation.


Comments     Threshold


This article is over a month old, voting and posting comments is disabled

RE: The new world order
By bah12 on 9/2/2011 10:48:11 AM , Rating: 3
How is it supposed to work smarty pants? Business A needs to open several warehouses and hire 7K employees. Business A's model dictates they can do this in several different states. Are you honestly suggesting that Business A choose the more costly state to operate in purely out of the kindness of their heart?

They aren't saying do this or no jobs, rather do this or no jobs in YOUR state. Amazon isn't creating 7K jobs because it wants to pay 7K people to do nothing, these jobs will be created either way just not in CA. Face reality CA is expensive to operate in, and their legislature needs to pull it's head out of its ass or they will continue to loose businesses to more business friendly states.


RE: The new world order
By FITCamaro on 9/2/2011 10:54:15 AM , Rating: 2
Agreed. However I think eventually all states will require the collection of sales tax from internet sites.

Internet stores do have an unfair advantage. Both lower overhead which results in lower prices as well as not collecting sales tax unless you live in a state where they have a presence.


RE: The new world order
By TheMan876 on 9/2/2011 11:33:26 AM , Rating: 4
quote:
Internet stores do have an unfair advantage.


Or maybe B&M stores have an unfair advantage. They have a local presence and are too convenient for people to drive by on their way home from work and buy things. We should legislate some changes to make it harder for them.


RE: The new world order
By kmmatney on 9/2/2011 11:41:14 AM , Rating: 2
For me personally, I only buy small stuff locally. For more expensive items, I buy online just to avoid the tax. The state governments are losing several hundred dollars a year from me alone, and I'm sure there are more people like me.


RE: The new world order
By YashBudini on 9/2/2011 12:06:22 PM , Rating: 1
quote:
The state governments are losing several hundred dollars a year from me alone, and I'm sure there are more people like me.

So much for ethics.

States compensate for such behavior by raising sales tax rates. The very people who bypassed the sales tax laws end up complaining the most.

Pray you never end up on Medicaid when you're old (almost impossible for a huge number of middle class retirees over the long haul). Research where such funding comes from in your state. Odds are sales tax revenue plays a major role.


RE: The new world order
By OS on 9/2/2011 12:36:51 PM , Rating: 2
medicare/medicaid are dead long term anyways just from projected change in demographics


RE: The new world order
By Kurz on 9/2/2011 1:00:35 PM , Rating: 3
The entitlement System is completely BS anyway.
Government has long since left its intended role.


RE: The new world order
By YashBudini on 9/2/2011 4:16:26 PM , Rating: 3
Gee I paid into that system. I never got anything for free.


RE: The new world order
By rameshms on 9/2/2011 1:49:43 PM , Rating: 4
I already pay several thousands in property tax (live in bay area).. I don't see the state govt do anything special to my area. Roads are still poor, traffic jams everywhere, my local school still begs for money from parents for various things. The govt is just another business trying to swindle money from locals, mismanaging funds, trying to save themselves from bankruptcy.
What is the motivation for me to give the more money to the govt ? I'm starting to feel CA is not the place to be in and move to some other state where the money given to govt is put to better use..


RE: The new world order
By FITCamaro on 9/2/2011 2:22:51 PM , Rating: 2
So either move or work to elect better officials who will get rid of wasteful spending on people who contribute nothing (illegals) and other crap.

This is why I refuse to live in Kalifornia.


RE: The new world order
By YashBudini on 9/2/2011 11:05:48 PM , Rating: 2
quote:
people who contribute nothing (illegals)

But why aren't the white people who hire the illegals ever arrested? Because the illegals are "contributing" to the wealth of their illegal employers? Even if they weren't arrested they could shame them on TV, but no apparently it's OK.

</double standard>


RE: The new world order
By Spuke on 9/3/2011 12:01:09 AM , Rating: 2
quote:
But why aren't the white people who hire the illegals ever arrested?
I would LOVE it if they were fined (hiring illegals results in a massive fine...no jail time)!! Actually, there is a bill in the works that will give nannies, babysitters, and housekeepers certain "rights". Like, a paycheck, breaks, clocking in/out like a regular job, etc. A lot of stuff was stripped out. The govt originally wanted paid vacations and sick time for example. I was against this at first but now I'm for it. All of these illegals are hired into these positions because they're cheap. If you remove the reason for hiring them, you effectively stop them from being hired. If there are no jobs, they will stop coming here. Problem solved!


RE: The new world order
By YashBudini on 9/3/2011 12:09:13 AM , Rating: 2
quote:
If there are no jobs, they will stop coming here.

The women would still come here so that their newborns are citizens, but it should put a dent in the number of men who come here.


RE: The new world order
By FITCamaro on 9/3/2011 12:06:59 AM , Rating: 2
I personally would love it if they were fined and then thrown in jail for multiple offenses.

When I was in college, the city of Palm Bay tried to pass a law that said that businesses caught hiring illegals would be fined and after a second offense would lose their license. Of course it was thrown out after hispanic groups threatened to sue for reasons of racism. The city should have stuck to its guns.


RE: The new world order
By YashBudini on 9/3/2011 12:15:49 AM , Rating: 2
quote:
Of course it was thrown out after hispanic groups threatened to sue for reasons of racism.

Wha? You don't also have Asian food places full of illegal Asians? Ironically it's the lawsuit itself that sounds racist here.

We had such an Asian restaurant raided and closed here a couple of years ago. Of course they were open and fully employed a week later.

OT - You know that sign in the bathroom about washing your hands before leaving? They can't print that in enough languages for my tastes.


RE: The new world order
By FITCamaro on 9/2/2011 2:15:17 PM , Rating: 2
Don't act like I'm looking forward to the end of tax free shopping.

But in the end, it is harming local communities. Sales taxes pay for roads, schools, police, firemen, etc. And states shouldn't rely on the federal government to make up for that because it isn't the federal government's job.

So either you have to raise the sales tax for those who do pay it, increase property taxes which potentially drive people out of their homes, or make it so that everyone pays the tax.


RE: The new world order
By Spuke on 9/2/2011 2:38:13 PM , Rating: 2
CA says that $317 million a year was estimated to be collected from that new law. We're 10 billion in debt. In all honesty, my only issue is how does CA collect sales tax from out of state B&M's? If we're to be "fair", out of state B&M's need to collect CA or any other states sales tax and return that amount to the state of the persons residence PLUS collect sales tax for their own states.


RE: The new world order
By YashBudini on 9/2/2011 5:53:34 PM , Rating: 2
quote:
But in the end, it is harming local communities. Sales taxes pay for roads, schools, police, firemen, etc. And states shouldn't rely on the federal government to make up for that because it isn't the federal government's job.

Exactly, which is why I pay sales tax on my 'Net purchases. Don't get me wrong, I'm not saying I like it, but I did use the pesky E word, didn't I?


RE: The new world order
By rage33 on 9/2/2011 11:44:30 AM , Rating: 1
quote:
Internet stores do have an unfair advantage. Both lower overhead which results in lower prices as well as not collecting sales tax unless you live in a state where they have a presence.


Yes, but B&M stores have an advantage too. If I need something now, I have to a store. If I want to look at a product, I have to go to the store. Isn't there some unwritten sales rule out there which states the first thing a salesperson needs to do is get a product into the consumer's hands? I have to worry about shipping. If I have a dispute with an online retailer, some can be much more difficult to deal with. Returns and refunds can be much easier handled at a store. If it's a big ticket item (think big screen TV), electronics stores have a nice advantage of being able to display them for you to try and a better route to fix something if something goes wrong.


RE: The new world order
By bah12 on 9/2/2011 11:47:41 AM , Rating: 2
I totally agree that they do, and the argument that it is too hard, is complete BS. Maybe it could get cumbersome to collect county/city taxes, but at the state level it is a pretty straight forward process not unlike paying payroll/unemployment taxes in different states. Some even have county requirements as well.

I understand the constitutional issues, but I also don't think the founding fathers would have envisioned the ease of interstate commerce that we are experiencing now.

Of course you and I both know it's rarely a tax revenue issue, and almost certainly a spending issue. If CA spent more reasonably chances are it wouldn't even need a sales tax at all (after all they already have income tax).


RE: The new world order
By YashBudini on 9/2/2011 12:00:47 PM , Rating: 2
quote:
If CA spent more reasonably chances are it wouldn't even need a sales tax at all

Why single out any state for this? How many states have both?


RE: The new world order
By bah12 on 9/2/2011 12:12:07 PM , Rating: 2
Because it was the topic of the article, of course every high tax issue at any level of government is probably more of a spending issue, was my point. Not just CA, federal, and any taxing authority. If they did a better job of spending, taxation would not be getting out of hand.


RE: The new world order
By AssBall on 9/2/2011 12:27:51 PM , Rating: 2
California is both one of the most deeply indebted states. They grow money on trees there so I've heard.


RE: The new world order
By YashBudini on 9/2/2011 6:59:16 PM , Rating: 2
I never considered the possibility that money was a citrus fruit.


RE: The new world order
By quiksilvr on 9/2/2011 12:49:38 PM , Rating: 2
Nothing is stopping them from creating their own online environment and shutting down their stores. And it isn't like online stores don't pay taxes elsewhere.


"We can't expect users to use common sense. That would eliminate the need for all sorts of legislation, committees, oversight and lawyers." -- Christopher Jennings














botimage
Copyright 2014 DailyTech LLC. - RSS Feed | Advertise | About Us | Ethics | FAQ | Terms, Conditions & Privacy Information | Kristopher Kubicki