The New York Times: Amazon Takes on California
The New York Times just published an article covering the AMZN proposed referendum to repeal ABX1 28.
One part, which we are now investigating, really caught our eye:
Amazon said this week that it would push a voter initiative in California that could eliminate sales tax for virtual sellers with only a modest physical presence in the state. (emphasis added)
We hope that the voters of California don’t get tricked into thinking the referendum would actually repeal the sales tax itself. Regardless of the outcome of this proposed referendum, if a “virtual seller” refuses to collect sales tax, consumers will still owe it—just as they have in California since 1935 (no, that is not a typo).
All-in-all, it is a well-written and thorough piece, but we wish the writers had pointed out the fact that with federal legislation, such as the much anticipated Main Street Fairness Act (MSFA), states could legitimately repeal affiliate nexus laws (no voter referendum necessary) while simultaneously generating significantly more revenue. This is because the MSFA would authorize states (those that have simplified their sales tax laws by adopting SSUTA guidelines) to compel remote retailers to collect sales tax at the time of the transaction. This would allow states to collect the approximately $23 billion in sales tax that goes uncollected each year (nearly $1.7 billion in California alone).
We will let you know what we learn about the “eliminate sales tax” quote.
