Amazon is nobody's friend

[Sil_liS]

Originally Posted by RDaneel54

What is this massive tax break that Amazon has? The taxes are paid by the consumer, not Amazon. Were Amazon to charge the taxes, they would only be a funnel for the consumer, not the payer of the taxes.

In Europe we pay VAT for everything, including internet purchases:

A Value Added Tax (VAT) is a form of consumption tax. From the perspective of the buyer, it is a tax on the purchase price. From that of the seller, it is a tax only on the "value added" to a product, material or service, from an accounting point of view, by this stage of its manufacture or distribution. The manufacturer remits to the government the difference between these two amounts, and retains the rest for themselves to offset the taxes they had previously paid on the inputs.

I always viewed it as a tax that the manufacturer and distributors have to pay, and the money comes from the buyer, so the buyer indirectly pays it.

[RDaneel54]

Originally Posted by Sil_liS

In Europe we pay VAT for everything, including internet purchases:


I always viewed it as a tax that the manufacturer and distributors have to pay, and the money comes from the buyer, so the buyer indirectly pays it.

Yes. In the U.S., the sales tax is a direct tax on the consumer's purchase paid at point of sale (for in person sales and in state sales) by the consumer.

[Skip Wyona]

Originally Posted by RDaneel54

What is this massive tax break that Amazon has? The taxes are paid by the consumer, not Amazon. Were Amazon to charge the taxes, they would only be a funnel for the consumer, not the payer of the taxes.

I can see why we should readdress the issue, but I would rather not have the US Congress meddling further in state affairs. Let the states and the retailers fight it out.

Personally, I pay my state sales taxes for internet purchases on my tax form every year. Anyone who objects to Amazon not paying their taxes can take the same route.

You should be commended for paying online sales taxes but most people do not and are not even aware they owe anything. The state of Illinois has now added a section to their state's tax forms to try to collect the 5-6 million it believes it is owed.

In Massachusetts, the online sales tax exemption is estimated to give online businesses a 6.25% income advantage over brick & mortar stores.

And the U. of Tennessee estimates that states overall have lost $52 Billion in potential sales tax income over the past 6 years to internet sales:

Examine these documents:
http://cber.utk.edu/ecomm/ecom0409.pdf

Read about Amazon's deal with the state of California here:

http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/articl...BUBT1L9K5I.DTL

And look at the state by state figures here:

http://www.thestreet.com/story/11052...-by-state.html

I can understand that you do not like taxes but my statement is really fairly simple: What are the consequences of lost state income to the future of citizens if online business like Amazon are given a pass on their responsibility to collect and disperse sales tax efficiently? Can a state go bankrupt? Will the online advantage close more brick & mortar shops? I'd like to know.

I am unaware of any interference from the US Congress in this issue. What is it?

And finally, do you consider the implementation of a VAT like system for the US a possible solution?

[RDaneel54]

Originally Posted by Skip Wyona

You should be commended for paying online sales taxes but most people do not and are not even aware they owe anything. The state of Illinois has now added a section to their state's tax forms to try to collect the 5-6 million it believes it is owed.

In Massachusetts, the online sales tax exemption is estimated to give online businesses a 6.25% income advantage over brick & mortar stores.

And the U. of Tennessee estimates that states overall have lost $52 Billion in potential sales tax income over the past 6 years to internet sales:

Examine these documents:
http://cber.utk.edu/ecomm/ecom0409.pdf

Read about Amazon's deal with the state of California here:

http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/articl...BUBT1L9K5I.DTL

And look at the state by state figures here:

http://www.thestreet.com/story/11052...-by-state.html

I can understand that you do not like taxes but my statement is really fairly simple: What are the consequences of lost state income to the future of citizens if online business like Amazon are given a pass on their responsibility to collect and disperse sales tax efficiently? Can a state go bankrupt? Will the online advantage close more brick & mortar shops? I'd like to know.

I am unaware of any interference from the US Congress in this issue. What is it?

And finally, do you consider the implementation of a VAT like system for the US a possible solution?

I didn't say I don't like paying taxes, but rather that I do it when required. Lost state income is a state by state issue and should be addressed by each state. What California and Amazon agreed on is outside my concern as it is not my state (Ohio).

Can a state go bankrupt? If so, I don't see it as the U.S. as a whole responsibility, although our government will probably assume it if it happens.

My concern is not with any current US Congress action, but future interference into what is a state issue. The more the line is crossed, the less autonomy the states have.

I would not want to see a VAT in the US because I think it would supplement rather than replace our current income tax system. I wouldn't want to see a national sales tax supplementing either.

[Skip Wyona]

Originally Posted by RDaneel54

I didn't say I don't like paying taxes, but rather that I do it when required. Lost state income is a state by state issue and should be addressed by each state. What California and Amazon agreed on is outside my concern as it is not my state (Ohio).

Unfortunately because we have 50 separate state governments and 50 state tax systems it makes it easy for businesses to play one state against another.

Originally Posted by RDaneel54

Can a state go bankrupt? If so, I don't see it as the U.S. as a whole responsibility, although our government will probably assume it if it happens.

Unfortunately history has shown that not to be the case and the constitution forbids states from declaring bankruptcy.

Originally Posted by RDaneel54

My concern is not with any current US Congress action, but future interference into what is a state issue. The more the line is crossed, the less autonomy the states have.

Agreed.

Originally Posted by RDaneel54

I would not want to see a VAT in the US because I think it would supplement rather than replace our current income tax system. I wouldn't want to see a national sales tax supplementing either.

A valid fear. In any case, a VAT would be almost impossible to legislate in the USA because, unlike Europe which only has to deal with one government to try to make changes, the USA has to deal with 50 different governments. Still there are many types of VAT ideas that can be considered. I am curious about the possibilities in any quest to revise the entire tax code.

Thanks for your replies.

[frahse]

I don't wish to sound unresponsible, but I pay enough taxes and don't want to pay any more.

[Sil_liS]

Originally Posted by Skip Wyona

A valid fear. In any case, a VAT would be almost impossible to legislate in the USA because, unlike Europe which only has to deal with one government to try to make changes, the USA has to deal with 50 different governments.

What do you mean by the part in bold?

[frahse]

Originally Posted by Skip Wyona

A valid fear. In any case, a VAT would be almost impossible to legislate in the USA because, unlike Europe which only has to deal with one government to try to make changes, the USA has to deal with 50 different governments. Still there are many types of VAT ideas that can be considered. I am curious about the possibilities in any quest to revise the entire tax code.

Actually the EU is now old enough so that it's warts are showing and it is becoming difficult for it to act even though it is in a perilous state. The US govt has more control over its 50 states than the EU has over the "sovereign" nations that comprise it, and unless the EU is ready to "federalize" all it's nations, which would require the will to go to war, which it doesn't have, it can only push those nations so far.

[montsnmags]

This is a reminder of MobileRead's Guidelines, specifically in regards to political content:

7. Political and Religious Topics

Past experience has shown that threads on religious or political matters frequently lead to heated debates, and detract from the lively, fun-loving atmosphere that MobileRead is intended to have.

If you are interested in discussing these topics, please review this thread for instruction how to opt in to a dedicated section.

MobileRead reserves the right to disapprove topics, and edit or delete posts about politics and religion, where these are unrelated to mobile reading.


Cheers,
Marc
Moderator

[frahse]

Hmm, can we discuss Amazon and the sales tax issue and not bring other countries into it?

Or do you think the tax issue is too "political"?

[montsnmags]

Originally Posted by frahse

Hmm, can we discuss Amazon and the sales tax issue and not bring other countries into it?

Or do you think the tax issue is too "political"?

Discussing Amazon and tax is possible, and has been in several other threads (see, for example, here: https://www.mobileread.com/forums/sho...d.php?t=149355 ). Most of these discuss purely the American states' sales tax, though discussing taxes of other countries as they relate to and are collected from ebook purchases, for example, is likely reasonably possible and ebook-related.

However, if commentary drifts to more generalized political issues, even as they relate to tax (or, to use a relevant example, the political status of the EU) then it has likely drifted into political commentary which is best directed to the relevant forum as indicated in my previous post, where you are welcome to and encouraged to discuss political (or religious) subjects.

Cheers,
Marc
Moderator

[elcreative]

Originally Posted by Sil_liS

In Europe we pay VAT for everything, including internet purchases:


I always viewed it as a tax that the manufacturer and distributors have to pay, and the money comes from the buyer, so the buyer indirectly pays it.

Errr... all tax is paid for by the end user/buyer/consumer... businesses do not have a magic money producing wand to conjure up money to pay their taxes... and as far as VAT is concerned, everybody in the production/sales chain (that's registered) claims back every penny of VAT that they pay... it's only the las person in the chain that really pays the VAT and that is the buyer... it's a direct tax on consumption/usage...

[Sil_liS]

Originally Posted by elcreative

Errr... all tax is paid for by the end user/buyer/consumer... businesses do not have a magic money producing wand to conjure up money to pay their taxes... and as far as VAT is concerned, everybody in the production/sales chain (that's registered) claims back every penny of VAT that they pay... it's only the las person in the chain that really pays the VAT and that is the buyer... it's a direct tax on consumption/usage...

The reason why I said indirectly is because the money doesn't go directly from my pocket to the government (or whoever it is that ends up collecting it). It goes to the one that I buy it from, and they pay the tax.

[kennyc]

Well, is Amazon your friend now with 4 new Kindles available? Huh? Huh?

[Nyssa]

Originally Posted by kennyc

Well, is Amazon your friend now with 4 new Kindles available? Huh? Huh?

Although Amazon will never truly be our friend, they sure are trying to be good to us so that we will, in turn, be good to them.