Comments on: As Expected, Amazon Sues New York http://uneasysilence.com/archive/2008/05/13183/ Sun, 22 Nov 2009 09:40:00 -0600 http://wordpress.org/?v=2.8.6 hourly 1 By: Rager http://uneasysilence.com/archive/2008/05/13183/comment-page-1/#comment-405849 Rager Tue, 06 May 2008 09:35:07 +0000 http://uneasysilence.com/?p=13183#comment-405849 How is the collection of taxes on interstate commerce even legal at all, then? New York needs to find better ways to improve its budgetary woes, like not locking up non-violent drug offenders with no violent history. That would clear prisons and ease up on their budget in a much more constitutional manner, since New York has no right to tax goods that cross state lines. How is the collection of taxes on interstate commerce even legal at all, then? New York needs to find better ways to improve its budgetary woes, like not locking up non-violent drug offenders with no violent history. That would clear prisons and ease up on their budget in a much more constitutional manner, since New York has no right to tax goods that cross state lines.

]]> By: mark http://uneasysilence.com/archive/2008/05/13183/comment-page-1/#comment-405823 mark Mon, 05 May 2008 18:02:58 +0000 http://uneasysilence.com/?p=13183#comment-405823 @Paul B - I agree. That is indeed why I imagine Amazon is upset. Certainly they should be as a major corporation looking only towards the growth of profits. If I was a NYer though, I'd find it difficult to whine about this new law (without feeling like a mini Phil Collins or Celine Dion). @Paul B – I agree. That is indeed why I imagine Amazon is upset. Certainly they should be as a major corporation looking only towards the growth of profits. If I was a NYer though, I’d find it difficult to whine about this new law (without feeling like a mini Phil Collins or Celine Dion).

]]> By: Paul B http://uneasysilence.com/archive/2008/05/13183/comment-page-1/#comment-405817 Paul B Mon, 05 May 2008 12:53:05 +0000 http://uneasysilence.com/?p=13183#comment-405817 But since Amazon has no physical presence in the state of New York, the state has no jurisdiction in this matter. They should just worry more about how to penalize people who do not report the purchases. It's not Amazon's fault that the people of New York do not follow the law. Amazon has a reason to be upset, because they should not be required to collect taxes for a state in which they do NOT reside. But since Amazon has no physical presence in the state of New York, the state has no jurisdiction in this matter. They should just worry more about how to penalize people who do not report the purchases. It’s not Amazon’s fault that the people of New York do not follow the law. Amazon has a reason to be upset, because they should not be required to collect taxes for a state in which they do NOT reside.

]]> By: mark http://uneasysilence.com/archive/2008/05/13183/comment-page-1/#comment-405798 mark Sun, 04 May 2008 10:25:11 +0000 http://uneasysilence.com/?p=13183#comment-405798 Whether taxing interstate goods is illegal or not is another question. It's not that aspect of the tax that Amazon is attacking per se ("The suit argues the change unfairly targets Amazon, is overly broad and vague, and violates the commerce clause of the constitution because it [b]imposes tax-collection obligations on out-of-state entities[/b]"). What's more, the tax, as a tax on interstate goods, already exists ("New Yorkers are currently on an honor system to report their online spending when they file state tax returns"). It's the enforcement of it (and the use of them as tax farmers) that they're not happy about. Whether taxing interstate goods is illegal or not is another question. It’s not that aspect of the tax that Amazon is attacking per se (”The suit argues the change unfairly targets Amazon, is overly broad and vague, and violates the commerce clause of the constitution because it [b]imposes tax-collection obligations on out-of-state entities[/b]“). What’s more, the tax, as a tax on interstate goods, already exists (”New Yorkers are currently on an honor system to report their online spending when they file state tax returns”).

It’s the enforcement of it (and the use of them as tax farmers) that they’re not happy about.

]]> By: Rager http://uneasysilence.com/archive/2008/05/13183/comment-page-1/#comment-405790 Rager Sun, 04 May 2008 04:41:35 +0000 http://uneasysilence.com/?p=13183#comment-405790 Interstate Commerce. Mark, you failed to recognize that states cannot tax goods going across borders. Sales tax still applies to purchases within the state, but anything else is interstate commerce. Interstate Commerce. Mark, you failed to recognize that states cannot tax goods going across borders. Sales tax still applies to purchases within the state, but anything else is interstate commerce.

]]> By: mark http://uneasysilence.com/archive/2008/05/13183/comment-page-1/#comment-405778 mark Sat, 03 May 2008 14:56:48 +0000 http://uneasysilence.com/?p=13183#comment-405778 This is still a non-story, imo. Since these goods are already taxed, it's not a new tax. Their simply asking the shippers to collect the taxes for them. Something that any honest New Yorker should support (as it makes their life easier), any less-honest New Yorker should hate (they're paying more money), and any company should be upset about because a) it discourages the dishonest customers and b) it may be a slight financial burden for them to organize (but obviously the financial burden is offset by the profits they make by shipping to NY in the first place). This is still a non-story, imo. Since these goods are already taxed, it’s not a new tax. Their simply asking the shippers to collect the taxes for them. Something that any honest New Yorker should support (as it makes their life easier), any less-honest New Yorker should hate (they’re paying more money), and any company should be upset about because a) it discourages the dishonest customers and b) it may be a slight financial burden for them to organize (but obviously the financial burden is offset by the profits they make by shipping to NY in the first place).

]]>