Slashdot Mirror
Amazon Cuts Off North Carolina Affiliates
Amazon.com has reportedly cut off all affiliates in North Carolina as a preemptive response to the sales tax change being pushed through the state legislature. The Seattle-based online retailer warned affiliates last week that such a move might be necessary, but the early shutoff seems to be a move in hopes of swaying opinion on the proposed legislation. "Local affiliates say they were 'blind-sided' by the company's action. 'I got this e-mail at 4:30 this morning,' said James Barrett, a technology consultant from Winston-Salem. 'It wasn't saying your account will be shut down. It said it is shut down. That just blew me up right there.' Barrett said that he is frustrated at lawmakers for considering the tax, but equally aggravated with Amazon. 'They're trying to tick off all their associates and get them to call down to Raleigh,' Barrett said. 'I think that is pretty tacky. That's not the way to use people who are referring business to your business.'"
That's the real meaning of "voting with your feet". There is an unjust law, or even a just one that Amazon doesn't agree, and they don't want to be subjected to it, so they move out of the state.
... even if it is a bit assholeish. It sends a loud and clear message to the NC government that the legislation will hurt local businesses.
Disconnect your television. Do your own research. Draw your own conclusions. They're probably lying. Don't be a sheep.
That's exactly the way to use people who are referring business to your business. The only thing that motivates a business "relationship" is the exchange of value. If the proposed law was going to cause this change anyway, making it early as an example is the way to get people to "call down to Raleigh."
When the axe came to the forest, the trees said, "Look out - the handle was once one of us."
So NC is acting like a typical "me first" government and ignoring its responsibility to the community. What else is new?
The fact is, governments have been leeching off communities for far too long.
Fixed that for you.
They're trying to tick off all their associates and get them to call down to Raleigh,' Barrett said. 'I think that is pretty tacky.
Sounds like an excellent way to motivate your local associates to get their arses over to the capital and ride their representatives. There's not a great deal Amazon can do directly to fix this, they have to rely on their local affiliates to keep the local conditions amicable to their business. If the locals aren't moving, then it's time to light a fire under them.
Got their attention too didn't it? Sounds like it's working as intended to me...
I work for the Department of Redundancy Department.
What has happened to North Carolina lately?
>Bravo to North Carolina for calling these online retailers to be responsible.
Hope they enjoy no Amazon-related resellers operating in their state.
Taxes are how states compete for business. Raise taxes on a business that can operate anywhere else and avoid the tax, guess what? They are leaving town.
A work that expires before its copyright never enters the public domain and thus enjoys eternal copyright protection.
The Balkanization of commerce isn't a good thing.
Amazon pays its taxes. Get Amazon to head quarter in your community and then you'll get its tax money.
The overhead of tracking tax codes down to the city level (and keeping up to date) would be overwhelming. The only winning move in this case really is not to play and that's what Amazon did.
OK then, riddle me this: what is the sales tax rate for any address in the US? Note that you can't stop at the city plus ZIP code level, in San Diego County there are ZIP codes that're partly in a city (where city sales tax applies) and partly outside the city (where city sales tax does not apply). Where can a company go to find out authoritatively what the sales tax rate is for a customer address? I don't know of any, and it's just not reasonable to require a company to pay sales tax without giving them a way to find out how much sales tax they're supposed to collect.
Finally some business demonstrating some balls. If the tax is being considered, then the locality has an environment hostile to Amazon's business. It doesn't matter if it goes through. The fact that they see nothing wrong with their hostile attitude is enough of a reason for Amazon to declare that they will have nothing to do without them. No business with bullies -- not even with those who associate with bullies by living in their tax base. Good for them!
Any guest worker system is indistinguishable from indentured servitude.
Kudos to Amazon for making a decision and implementing it. Interstate commerce is hardly mandatory, and it sounds like there are some North Carolina lawmakers that need to get their heads held in a toilet and have it flushed a few times until they get the message.
The legislator claims it's not fair that brick and mortar stores collect sales tax and Amazon doesn't. I say the brick and mortar collects taxes according to ONE tax structure in ONE place. What's fair about an out of state retailer having to understand potentially thousands of sales tax structures in many different combinations? Not to mention then needing to keep books on thousands of accounts to make sure the various state and local tax collectors get said taxes.
Unless and until the various legislatures are willing to get together on a simple clearing house to make it easy for retailers to figure out how much to collect and where to send it, they have little choice but to not do business in places that insist on it.
NC is already proving that such questions could be hard to answer. Whose taxes do we collect, the billing address? the ship to address? The address where the affiliate's server is located? NO! We must collect for the physical address of the person who owns the affiliate site. At least this week. No doubt the eventual answer (at least the one legislators will want) is ALL OF THE ABOVE AND MORE! In all different amounts with a whole table full of thresholds, percentages, and exceptions. OH, and different addresses to send the checks to with different required documentation and forms to fill out. Each and every one of them will claim that their tax is very simple and effortless to collect. None will recognize that the sheer volume and lack of standardization makes the matter impossible.
Got the email that it will happen shortly here in Hawai'i too.
Where was Amazon when New York passed a similar law? I guess cutting off the entirety of NYC from Amazon.com would prove to be too costly, so they wait for a smaller (and therefore less profitable) state before they decide to play political hardball. It is Amazon's right to pick and choose their battles, I just can't help but think the US would be better off if they would have started this with the first state to try such a stunt rather than picking on the easiest.
I went to eat some animal crackers and the box said, "Do not eat if seal is broken." I opened the box and sure enough..
Trouble is...most of those people will still buy TV's first, and then complain they can't feel their kids.
Light travels faster than sound. This is why some people appear bright until you hear them speak.........
It doesn't matter whether the person in question is a customer, employee, or visiting dignitary. The only criteria that matters is that they entered the property willingly, knowing the conditions. That is as true for employees as it is for customers.
That fact that the business in your anecdote settled doesn't mean they would have been found liable in court--or that they were actually liable, which isn't always the same thing. The customer was liable, if anyone, for breaking the glass and thus creating the situation. However, it doesn't look good for employees to sue customers even when doing so would be justified, so I'm not particularly surprised that the employer settled the matter itself as an act of goodwill.
"The state is that great fiction by which everyone tries to live at the expense of everyone else." - Bastiat
if you don't want blacklung don't be a coal miner, eh?
Yes, it is unfortunate that N.C. sellers had to suffer for it, but I have to agree with Amazon's action on this. At every turn, government at all levels seek more and more money rather than taking a hard look at where they are spending it. Ultimately, I believe, they simply want more money to vote themselves higher pay and to return favors of their campaign donors. I wish there were a better way to run government. I vaguely recall one or more SciFi movies in the past where a city became a business or something to that end... the prospect was frightening, but I have to wonder if such a project were applied properly, if it wouldn't be run more efficiently. One problem with current styles of government is that there is little to no incentive to save money or to use it wisely. They have no profit motive and clearly no personal integrity or desire to serve motives. So I have to wonder, what motives would cause governments at local, state and even federal levels to deliver "good service" to the people at the lowest cost possible?
A better example than a patron would be an employee - the vast majority of bars i've frequented left their employees in situations where the had no choice but to breathe in second hand smoke. I know the free-market extremists will disagree, but i think your employer should be responsible for a safe working environment.
I certainly know of someone who got a nasty laceration in his foot from broken glass from a customer spill. The bar settled and covered his medical costs.
That's certainly a different situation than being exposed to second hand smoke, though. If you apply to work at a bar/restaurant where smoking is allowed (which you could easily tell when you were picking up your application), I think you should expect that you'll be around second hand smoke and if that is objectionable - choose not to work there! If you object to working outside in the heat, perhaps you shouldn't apply for a construction job in California - it's not the hiring construction companies job to provide a portable air conditioning unit for you. If you object to working with children - you should probably not try to become a second grade teacher. If you object to working around alcohol - you should not apply to a liquor store. If you object to working around smoke, you should choose not to work at a place WHERE PEOPLE FREQUENTLY SMOKE. You are not entitled to work at whatever job you want with whatever conditions you want, no one owes you the type of job you dream of.
Track your TV Shows with your iPhone - FREE
Amazon does not use any resources provided by the local state government. And yet they would be expected to pay for them? That's called "theft". They use no public roads (delivery companies pay for those through gasoline taxes and vehicle registration payments). They use no police services (they have no physical presence in NC so they have nothing to protect there). They can't take advantage of NC education (since they don't live there, their children can't go to school there). And yet NC thinks they have the right to shake down Amazon? Every honest men hopes this withdrawal of Amazon affiliation takes as heavy toll on NC economy as possible. This type of punishment of thieves would only be just.
Any guest worker system is indistinguishable from indentured servitude.
Without any kind of business expenses, I would be taxed 89% on every dollar I made. eighty. nine. fucking. percent.
Bullshit. If that were true, there would be no employers in NC.
"We returned the General to El Salvador, or maybe Guatemala, it's difficult to tell from 10,000 feet"
So if you're an affiliate don't do business with Amazon if you don't like it. I'm not saying I think what Amazon did was a good thing but they have the right and they're making a strong point. You also have the right to not do business with them because you don't like how they do business. They vote with their feet you can vote with yours. I actually like to see this kind of thing not because I think Amazon should or shouldn't pay tax but because this is how the market is supposed to solve things.
What should he have said? "People who can't afford to buy TVs?" When those are the people you're talking about, it's easier to say "those people." There's no reason to bring your insecurities or sensitivities into this.
"Our two-party system is like a bowl of shit looking at itself in a mirror." - Lewis Black
That's been tried many times. People always ignore it until it's too late. By actively and immediately halting business, you can bet the affiliates will raise hell in a timely fashion.
There are better ways to argue against a law than hurting people not responsible for it.
I agree, but I think it is a bit much for you to claim the people of N.C. (whom are responsible for it, by voting the people whom passed this law into office and supported it by inaction) are hurting Amazon (A company who is not responsible for it) one little bit. Amazon will be fine, don't worry.
Oh, I get it, you meant that the other way around.. Ha, that's funny
How and why is Amazon supposed to be treated differently than say, Walmart?
Walmart seems to be able to handle the tax issue, why is it Amazon can't do the same?
Persistent Volume manager for Kubernetes - https://github.com/dwimsey/openshift-pvmanager
Unfortunately, Amazon probably needed to demonstrate how serious they were, or NC might well have called their "bluff," leaving the affiliates out in the cold for much longer, if not permanently. Once some government erects a new law / regulation / tax / bureaucracy / program, it's harder to get rid of than mildew.
In fact, these things really are quite like an aggressive mildew. Do nothing, and they grow, advance, and encroach on your clean space. Work really really diligently and consistently, and you can sometimes beat them back to manageable levels. But get a little lazy once or twice, and boom... they're ba-ack, worse than ever.
If Amazon had merely warned their affiliates, there would be a big "yeah, right" factor on the affiliates' parts, and a big "yeah, right" factor on the legislators' parts. The tax might well pass, and Amazon's negotiating position would become that much weaker. Amazon *needs* big numbers of pissed off people -- really pissed off right this minute people -- to beat this thing. People who are merely imagining being pissed off in some potential future just don't act. Legislators need to see a thunderstorm, not a possible drizzle advisory; a storm of phone calls, not a flurry of tweets and a new Facebook group called "stop the tax."
With private economies shrinking but public spending expanding most everywhere, we are going to see more egregious tax grab strategies popping up more and more often over the coming months and years. The ones who don't get their pockets picked clean will be the ones who get brutal, or have someone get brutal on their behalf as Amazon did in this case.
Pi Ran Out
When you walk into a restaurant, you walk into a PRIVATE establishment. Claiming public health concerns to regulate behavior on private property is at the very least disingenuous.
Any guest worker system is indistinguishable from indentured servitude.
Perhaps North Carolina is upset because local business are closing due to the tax disparity?
Chicago infamously addressed an automobile tax disparity by forcing suburban car dealerships to collect City taxes. City dwellers could no longer escape the inordinate tax by buying in the suburbs; Chicago argued that place of residence, not place of purchase, determined the sales tax. Except, that is, for suburban dwellers who might have bought a car in the city. For them, it was the other way around. Now they're trying the same thing with *all* car rentals in the entire 6-county suburban area. (They *might* be driven into the city at some point, don'tcha know.)
Mightn't NC address the tax disparity by competing with the surrounding tax environment, or by using residence-based sources like real-estate taxes to shore up their shortfalls? People often feel it's their right to seek relief from (what they feel are) unfair or inordinate taxes by not purchasing in that jurisdiction. Without such competitive pressure, there is insufficient drive for any kind of fiscal responsibility by governments (though if you know of a better way to incent governments to efficiency, please share; I personally trust neither corporate leaders nor government leaders to innately have my financial best interests at heart). At any rate, if jurisdictions can start taxing beyond their boundaries left and right, we might as well just turn governing over to Bernie Madoff or Enron or Halliburton. At least then we'll know there's going to be a-screwin' coming our way.
Pi Ran Out
Right! Public health inspectors have no place coming into PRIVATE restaurants! Just think of how much money the poor restaurateurs could save if they didn't have to put up with those intrusive inspections, citing them for things like 'chefs not washing hands' or 'seafood kept in unrefrigerated piles on a dirt floor next to the catbox.'
Long? What do you mean the signature at the bottom of every comment I post on Slashdot is too lo
WHO IS JOHN GALT?
Granting all your arguments for the sake of argument, what would be the limiting factor against this annexing power? In my experience, the further the power center gets away from the individual, the less responsive it is to individual needs. It may be that this is a good thing in your view... that the individual should subordinate his or her individual needs to the needs of society at large. In the current state of affairs, the limiting factor is the inconvenience of moving; if a city's fiscal penalties to its residents (compared to surrounding jurisdictions) aren't sufficiently harmful to overcome the costs of uprooting & moving, then the residents will endure them. If they are, then the city will have to take notice and take corresponding steps to lure residents back. These same factors apply at a lesser scale to the act of making a purchase, e.g. gas, cigarettes, automobiles and such.
I tend to think that cities often create the conditions that lead to crappy schools, higher unemployment, and higher unit taxes despite a higher population density (and thus presumably better economy of scale). I guess I'm wondering why you think it is that a large city as a system unto itself couldn't blow the doors off a nearby suburb (also as a system unto itself). As a city grows, if it's governed as you envision, shouldn't people want to move into it rather than away from it?
Pi Ran Out
Usually, it comes down to the question of who has more guns.