Projo Biz Blog

Rhode Island's Amazon law a model for other states, report says

5:27 PM Fri, Jul 24, 2009 |
By Neil Downing    Email this author |   Email this entry

By NEIL DOWNING
Journal Staff Writer

A national think tank that studies state budgets says that all states should pass an "Amazon law" similar to the one adopted by Rhode Island and New York to help recover sales-tax revenue that they miss out on when consumers make certain purchases online.

"The action taken by New York and Rhode Island is an important strategy for states to adopt on their own behalf," according to a report issued Thursday by the Center on Budget and Policy Priorities, a group in Washington, D.C., that focuses mainly on the impact of government budget decisions on people with low income.

The report says that the so-called "Amazon law" adopted by Rhode Island this year and by New York last year is an important tool for collecting taxes owed on Internet purchases.

In general, a state cannot force a retailer to collect the state's sales tax unless the retailer has some sort of physical presence in that state, such as an office, store or warehouse.

But a new Rhode Island law generally says that a physical presence is established if enough purchases are made through a Rhode Island Web site that is somehow affiliated or associated with the retailer. (For example, it is established when a Rhode Islander visiting a Rhode Island Web site clicks on a link to an out-of-state online retailer and makes a purchase.)

The provision is the result of legislation introduced by Rep. Steven M. Costantino, D-Providence, chairman of the House Finance Committee, passed by the General Assembly, and signed into law by Governor Carcieri on June 30.

Rhode Island's law, similar to one enacted in New York last year, has come to be known as the Amazon law partly because it involves Amazon.com, the nation's largest Internet retailer, and other such companies.

Without such laws, states lose out on billions of dollars in sales tax revenue, according to the report's author, Michael Mazerov, who also served on Carcieri's tax-reform panel earlier this year.

The Rhode Island Division of Taxation recently issued notices to more than 100 online retailers, the latest salvo in the growing national battle over collection of state sales tax.

The agency issued the notices to advise the retailers about Rhode Island's newly adopted Amazon law and tell them that they may be obligated to collect the state's 7-percent sales tax on certain online purchases made by Rhode Islanders, said state Tax Administrator David M. Sullivan.

"If we discover that [a retailer] is not collecting sales tax and they should be, we will take necessary compliance and enforcement efforts," including auditing a company's books and records, assessing tax owed, and applying penalties and interest, Sullivan said Friday.

Costantino has said that the law is intended to help "level the playing field" for local retailers who collect the tax and are at a competitive disadvantage with online retailers who do not.

Gary S. Sasse, director of the state Department of Revenue, said that how state sales tax applies to online purchases has "become an issue that all of the states need to face."

It could be resolved by Congress, but "unfortunately, Congress has punted" on the issue, he said.

"Short of Congress exercising the necessary leadership on this issue, you'll have states responding to this issue . . . [by passing] this type of legislation," Sasse said in an interview at his office on Friday.

In response to Rhode Island's new law, at least three online retailers -- Amazon.com, Overstock.com and BlueNile.com -- have severed their links with their affiliates or associates in Rhode Island rather than face the requirement to collect Rhode Island sales tax.

Sullivan said, "It's a shame that companies like Amazon and Overstock would stop doing business with Rhode Island companies simply because they're being asked to comply with our state's sales tax law."

He characterized the companies' decision to end their business relationships with Rhode Island affiliates as "harsh" and "unfair."

Kate Brewster, executive director of The Poverty Institute at the Rhode Island College School of Social Work, which analyzes tax and budget policies on behalf of low-income people, said Friday that "Amazon's reaction to Rhode Island's law is a good indication of how dearly it holds the unfair price advantage that it has over Main Street retailers in our state. Our hope is that other states will get on board and make it more difficult for Internet retailers to drop affiliates."

Amazon and some other online retailers have asserted that the Rhode Island and New York Amazon laws are unconstitutional.

Rhode Island does not have an estimate of how much in sales tax it will collect as a result of the new law, Sasse said. The group's report said that as a result of New York's Amazon law, that state "is already raising tens of millions of dollars a year" in sales taxes.

social bookmarking

Comments

Dennis said:

Since Amazon, Overstock and other internet retailers have dropped Rhode Island affiliate websites the state will collect no taxes. Not only that but the state will actually lose the income taxes that the Rhode Island website owners would have paid. According to Rebecca Madigan, founder of the affiliate trade group Performance Marketing Alliance, there are an estimated 2,000 online affiliates in Rhode Island who pay about $3 million in income taxes. So we have a law that not only doesn't collect the taxes intended, but actually loses $3,000,000 which will have to be made up by more taxes or spendind cuts. Is it any wonder that Rhode island has the 2nd highest unemployment rate at 12.4% and is looking at a 400 million budget deficit next year!



Max said:

Dennis is absolutely right. On top of everything he said above, these tax laws are unconstitutional. It is in every other state's best interest to not follow suite.



Mark Welch said:

This is an offensively one-sided article. I won't bother posting any substantive reply, because it's clear that this author won't consider any viewpoints that aren't completely aligned with his preconceived notions.



Peter Walsh said:

I hope this website is paying the tax on all of it's lovely google ads and such. An utterly ridiculous law that, as dennis comments has pointed out.

Your article hasn't said what threshold an website would start to pay the tax? In New York, it's over $10,000 of affiliate income.

These lobbyist flavoured reports by 'think tanks' really don't know anything about how much "revenue" a state could make. (as if tax is a real 'revenue' instead of really just another form of extortion, in this case.)

i applaud the affiliate programs for pulling them from these wretchedly unfair states who seek to hurt their own citizens well being. If you have a deficit, cut programs.



I just want to thank my home State for causing my best and highest-paying Affiliate Program to dump me which has caused me a loss of an income that had become important during these difficult economic times. It's not a comfort to know when things get rough, my State does not have my back.

Poorly played, Rhode Island, poorly played...




Leave a comment





Type the characters you see in the picture above.