With the semi-aggressive steps taken recently by New York, Illinois, and California, it’s clear that Amazon knows that its tax avoidance policy, central to the firm’s business strategy since its inception, is coming undone. Now it’s all about how much it can stall.
The Audit
02:37 PM - September 6, 2011
Amazon’s California Tax Battle
Fighting to delay the end of its unfair advantage
‘See you on the other side’ - Meet Jessica Lum, a terminally ill 25-year-old who chose to spend what little time she had practicing journalism
#Realtalk: This is the best moment to be in journalism - The old stuff isn’t coming back, but that’s okay
Streams of consciousness - Millennials expect a steady diet of quick-hit, social-media-mediated bits and bytes. What does that mean for journalism?
Sticking with the truth - How ‘balanced’ coverage helped sustain the bogus claim that childhood vaccines can cause autism
An ink-stained stretch - Can Aaron Kushner save the Orange County Register—and the newspaper industry?
This is the best moment to be in journalism (25)
The WSJ editorial page hits rock bottom (19)
The completist guide to Star Trek
Matt Yglesias watched every Star Trek movie and every episode of every TV show in the franchise
The uncomfortable questions not raised by Benghazi
The press and Congress are asking the wrong questions
Rob Ford in ‘crack cocaine’ video scandal
A video that appears to show Toronto’s mayor smoking crack is being shopped around by a group of Somali men involved in the drug trade
Why the underwear-bomber leak infuriated the Obama administration
The threat of even grander leaks
CJR's Guide to Online News Startups
Uptown Messenger – Hyperlocal news for a neighborhood in New Orleans
Who Owns What
The Business of Digital Journalism
A report from the Columbia University Graduate School of Journalism
Questions and exercises for journalism students.
Tax cuts for jobs is a losing proposition for any state. Corporations take their tax breaks, then leave. Amazon should play fair, but they won't. I'm not usually on Walmart's side, but bricks and mortar merchants have the right in this match-up.
#1 Posted by Lawyermom, CJR on Tue 6 Sep 2011 at 07:27 PM
I have to pay $34.00 +taxes for Ian Kershaw's new book, "The End" at my Barnes and Noble on 86th Street. I can buy it at Amazon for only $22.00 NET including shipping. Why on earth would I go to the former and foresake the latter? The consumer is a big net winner. Why encourage a state legislator to misuse funds I could better use to suit myself? The cretins from The Bronx who rapturously defeated a money saving WalMart for the Kingsbridge Armory site surely did a great service for NYC. Wake up Chittum!
#2 Posted by Mike Robbins, CJR on Wed 7 Sep 2011 at 05:10 PM
A couple of important fact-thingies are missing from Ryan's latest commie diatribe:
1. Internet sales are NOT exempt from sales tax in California. Buyers are required to pay these taxes. The tax cheats here are the BUYERS, not AMAZON! (But hey, why let a mere fact get in the way of another Chittum Commie Fairy Tale, right?)
2. Amazon has publicly called for a national sales tax for internet retailers.
You'd think a self-proclaimed "professional journalist" would dole out these facts to give the readers a true picture.
#3 Posted by padikiller, CJR on Wed 7 Sep 2011 at 05:21 PM
HELLOOO???!!!!
Anyone home?!...
Why can't we acknowledge the R E A L I T Y that Amazon's current sales in California are NOT exempt from sales taxes, HUH?
This IS the R E A L I T Y after all!...
WHY can't we acknowledge the R E A L I T Y that the people cheating the tax laws in California are not working for Amazon, but are instead the BUYERS of Amazon's products? HUH?
How about it, Ryan? Why don't your readers deserve this little slice of TRUTH?
REPEAT! The people currently cheating California out of sales taxes on Amazon purchases in California are the BUYERS who fail to pay sales taxes!..
PERIOD!
And why don't your readers deserve to know the Inconvenient Truth that Amazon has called for a uniform sales tax for internet retailers? HUH?..
Dude... Do you feel any obligation as self-proclaimed "professional journalist" to deal out these unpleasant "fact-thingies"? HUH?
Man up and do your damned job, Ryan!
#4 Posted by padikiller, CJR on Thu 8 Sep 2011 at 10:27 PM
But Padi, don't you understand? The innocuous govt needs "revenue" to finance its wonderfully effective, super-efficient, unquestionably moral, and always necessary schemes; therefore, every private exchange is guilty until sufficiently extorted.
#5 Posted by Dan A., CJR on Fri 9 Sep 2011 at 12:28 AM
The funny thing is that Amazon plainly states that it's transactions are subject to sales tax!:
"We do not collect sales or use taxes in all states. For states imposing sales or use taxes, your purchase is subject to use tax unless it is specifically exempt from taxation. Your purchase is not exempt merely because it is made over the Internet or by other remote means. Many states require purchasers to file a sales/use tax return at the end of the year reporting all of the taxable purchases that were not taxed and to pay tax on those purchases. Details of how to file these returns may be found at the websites of your respective taxing authorities."
http://www.amazon.com/gp/help/customer/display.html?nodeId=468512
The California law is plainly stated:
"Many individuals and businesses in California buy items from out-of-state retailers that are not required or authorized to collect California tax. If you make such a purchase and then use, give away, store, or otherwise consume the item in California, you may owe California use tax. This is true whether you order the item over the Internet, by telephone, or by mail. The use tax rate for any California location is the same as the sales tax rate."
Now why would any self-proclaimed "professional journalist" omit these little truisms?
I could see why a commie/liberal activist hack would hide the ball and gloss over the fact that Amazon isn't cheating California taxpayers (the buyers are), but why would a "professional journalist" do so?
But here in Chittumland, the "people" can do no wrong, and "corporations" can do no good. So any of those inconvenient "fact-thingies" that counter the commie/liberal line are swept under the rug.
People cheating on their taxes? Or food stamps? Or unemployment? Or Medicaid? Nothing to see here, people! Move on! It's all "Wall Street's" fault.
A corporation makes money on an investment? Plain thievery! Any profit is theft. Unearned looting from the communal treasury - money stolen from the hands of the workers.
A corporation loses money? Plain fraud! Criminal malfeasance!
It's like Pravda, circa 1955.
#6 Posted by padikiller, CJR on Fri 9 Sep 2011 at 08:06 AM