U.S. Senate See Full Big Line

(D) J. Hickenlooper*

(R) Somebody

80%

20%

(D) Phil Weiser

(D) Joe Neguse

(D) Jena Griswold

60%

60%

40%↓

Att. General See Full Big Line

(D) M. Dougherty

(D) Alexis King

(D) Brian Mason

40%

40%

30%

Sec. of State See Full Big Line
(D) A. Gonzalez

(D) George Stern

(R) Sheri Davis

50%↑

40%

30%

State Treasurer See Full Big Line

(D) Brianna Titone

(R) Kevin Grantham

(D) Jerry DiTullio

60%

30%

20%

CO-01 (Denver) See Full Big Line

(D) Diana DeGette*

(R) Somebody

90%

2%

CO-02 (Boulder-ish) See Full Big Line

(D) Joe Neguse*

(R) Somebody

90%

2%

CO-03 (West & Southern CO) See Full Big Line

(R) Jeff Hurd*

(D) Somebody

80%

40%

CO-04 (Northeast-ish Colorado) See Full Big Line

(R) Lauren Boebert*

(D) Somebody

90%

10%

CO-05 (Colorado Springs) See Full Big Line

(R) Jeff Crank*

(D) Somebody

80%

20%

CO-06 (Aurora) See Full Big Line

(D) Jason Crow*

(R) Somebody

90%

10%

CO-07 (Jefferson County) See Full Big Line

(D) B. Pettersen*

(R) Somebody

90%

10%

CO-08 (Northern Colo.) See Full Big Line

(R) Gabe Evans*

(D) Yadira Caraveo

(D) Joe Salazar

50%

40%

40%

State Senate Majority See Full Big Line

DEMOCRATS

REPUBLICANS

80%

20%

State House Majority See Full Big Line

DEMOCRATS

REPUBLICANS

95%

5%

Generic selectors
Exact matches only
Search in title
Search in content
Post Type Selectors
March 10, 2010 03:41 AM UTC

The Real Story on Amazon and Colorado

  • 4 Comments
  • by: COFPI

(Cross posted at HuffingtonPost Denver)

On Monday, Amazon.com notified its Colorado business associates that it had terminated all business relations with them effective immediately.  According to Amazon, the reason for this sudden “firing” of Colorado affiliates was because the state had “enacted a law to impose sales tax regulations on online retailers.”  The announcement sent ripples through the online community and made a splash at the Colorado Capitol.  Finger pointing started immediately, with the Republicans blaming the Democrats and the Democrats blaming Amazon.  

However, firing the Colorado affiliates in no way changes Amazon’s obligation under Colorado law.  The law did not depend on local affiliates at all; they were taken out of the equation long ago.  

So why did Amazon.com end business relations with Colorado affiliates?  

1. To put political pressure on Colorado legislators to change the new tax law and

2. To use Colorado as an example to scare other states from doing the same

The answer appears easy, but the explanation is a little more complicated.  To explain it, I’m going to start from the beginning.

Under Colorado law, everything you buy on the Internet is subject to tax.  In fact, you already pay tax for most of what you buy on the Internet.  If you buy pants from Sears.com or shoes from Target.com, you automatically pay tax (and you probably haven’t noticed).  That is because these stores have a physical presence in the state, so they are legally compelled to collect the tax.

However, if an Internet retailer does not have a physical presence in the state, it is are not compelled to collect tax, even though the consumer still technically owes the tax.  The law in question (HB10-1193) states that out-of-state retailers need to either collect the tax or make the consumer aware they owe the tax to Colorado.

This bill had several positive outcomes.  First, it attempted to level the playing field between Colorado businesses and out-of-state Internet giants.  For this reason, the Colorado Retail Council supported the bill.  Colorado businesses were at a competitive disadvantage because they were obeying the law and collecting sales taxes.  Amazon.com did not have to collect this tax, giving them a price advantage over in-state stores.  Collecting the tax it was due would also help Colorado avoid making deeper service cuts to K-12, higher education, and other public services.

Obeying the law is not overly burdensome for Amazon.  Target.com already collects tax; in fact Amazon makes the online checkout software for Target.com.

Amazon said that it did not intend to follow this new Colorado law.  Instead of simply trying to reverse the law in courts, Amazon went a step further and needlessly fired all of its Colorado affiliates, apparently out of spite.  Amazon took out its anger on Colorado affiliates to make a political point.  

Amazon is trying to bully Colorado to keep the state from collecting the sales tax it’s due.  Are we going to succumb to Amazon’s pressure and forget about the sales tax? Or can we convince Amazon to obey the law?

Comments

4 thoughts on “The Real Story on Amazon and Colorado

  1. This is what I’ve heard: Congress says no state sales tax on interstate internet sales, yes? but 1193 says _if you live in CO and you purchase something online from out of state, you must pay CO state sales tax either at point of purchase or later on.

    Also, since I have your e-ear, why don’t we charge state sales tax according to the address it is either shipped to, or the address on the purchasing bank account?

    Thanks so much for this diary 🙂

  2. An animal protection group (can’t remember if it was the Humane Society or ASPCA or another) took Amazon to court for selling pro-dog-fighting books. It is illegal to conspire with dog-fighting in anyway.  Amazon said it was a free speech issue. If they wanted to sell books to teach people to fight dogs, or kill humans, or molest orphans, or organize a Nazi party group in your neighborhood, it wasn’t the point, they argued. It was about free speech. I have no idea how the court case turned out, and frankly, I don’t care. They are scum in my book, just because they could have easily quietly taken the books off their cyber-shelves, out of their concern for sentient beings.

    I’ve never ordered anything from Amazon again. They have no conscience. I hope a viscious, scared dog bites them all in the ass…. again and again and again.

  3. Amazon is trying to bully Colorado to keep the state from collecting the sales tax it’s due.

    No one is claiming that Colorado is due sales tax. It’s due use tax. And use tax is the responsibility of the purchaser. In addition, no one is claiming that Amazon has a legal obligation to collect sales tax. Yes they can, but they are under no obligation to do so.

    Finally you say:

    Obeying the law is not overly burdensome for Amazon.

    Have you ever tried to get answers out of our Department of Not Answering Questions Revenue? The DoR makes everything incredibly difficult.

    I’m not saying Amazon is a saint in this. But neither is the state of Colorado. Especially considering that this bill was designed with the stated purpose of being such a pain, Amazon would instead collect sales tax.

    In other words, we tried to strong-arm them. Now we’re mad that they replied in a like manner.

    1. why do others do it? You’d think that with all of Amazon’s resources, it wouldn’t be such a terrible thing.

      Look, it’s very simple: Amazon doesn’t want Colorado to set an example by taking on the big boys, therefore Amazon will make the legislature look like enemy #1 and since every one is so reluctant to think they get anything out of government and so willing to believe everything good is from business, they’ll unquestioningly go along with it.  

Leave a Comment

Recent Comments


Posts about

Donald Trump
SEE MORE

Posts about

Rep. Lauren Boebert
SEE MORE

Posts about

Rep. Gabe Evans
SEE MORE

Posts about

Colorado House
SEE MORE

Posts about

Colorado Senate
SEE MORE

203 readers online now

Newsletter

Subscribe to our monthly newsletter to stay in the loop with regular updates!