Feeds:
Posts
Comments

Posts Tagged ‘physical presence’

In a legislative action that could be mirrored in the future by even more states currently implementing internet sales taxes, lawmakers in Texas are poised to send a bill to the governor’s desk that would once and for all put to rest the physical presence defense that Amazon and other retailers have used to argue against taxing online sales based on their affiliates and subsidiaries.

This latest development certainly raises the stakes in Texas.  As our regular readers well know, the Lone Star State is one of a handful of U.S. battlegrounds for the ongoing saga over taxing internet purchases.  It’s also one that Amazon has already withdrawn from over the issue.

House Bill 2043, which was authored and introduced by state Rep. John Otto (R), leaves no doubt over how out-of-state retailer’s physical presence in Texas is defined.  As a result, it essentially kills the argument made by the e-commerce community that subsidiaries don’t constitute a physical presence in the state and thus are exempt from complying with state law over the collection of sales tax for online purchases.

The bill recently got a unanimous stamp of approval from the Texas House Ways and Means committee and supporters hope to send it to the governor before May 31, when the current legislative session comes to a close.

Otto and supporters claim that the new bill was not designed specifically in response to Amazon’s decision to sever its ties with Texas based affiliates, but instead, to offer a more “level playing field” among both online and offline retailers.

At its core, the legislation is an attempt at fairness and legalizing what the state’s comptroller’s office already practices.  The resulting legislation will make it impossible for any merchant to operate a subsidiary in the state that supports its overall retail operation and then claim no physical presence when the tax man comes calling.

And, perhaps anticipating the legal wrangling and maneuvering that could ensue if or when the bill is finally enacted into law, Otto made a point to craft legislation that will withstand any legal challenges to it.

“I drafted what I believe will outlast any Supreme Court challenge,” he said, pointing out that he brought on a constitutional law attorney to help review the ins and outs of the bill itself.

Since Amazon has already left Texas behind, it’s hard to see this new development affecting the web’s top retailer.  But if passed (and the consensus is that it will), it will certainly give other retailers in similar situations reason to pause and consider the value of their operations in Texas.

As always, leave us your thoughts and comments!

Read Full Post »

We’ll say this about the people in Texas. They don’t shy away from going after big companies when they feel like they’ve been slighted.  Early in September we told you about the state’s attorney general opening up an investigation into Google for possibly manipulating its own search results for a competitive advantage.

Now, Internet Retailer is reporting that the state of Texas has another tech giant in its crosshairs: Amazon, which once again finds itself at the center of a firestorm over online sales taxes.

Apparently, the Texas Comptroller’s office sent Amazon a bill back in August for a cool $269 million.  Let’s let that sink in for just a second: $269 MILLION.  The bill is for uncollected sales taxes on transactions made by Texas residents between December 2005 and December of last year, according to an Amazon filing with the Securities and Exchange Commission.

Now, our regular readers know we’ve spent plenty of time analyzing the internet taxation issue. But to find out that a single company is supposedly on the hook for $269 million in unpaid taxes to a single state is shocking even to us!

A spokesperson for the Comptroller says the bill came about as the result of a routine audit by that office of retailers and other such companies operating within the state, an audit that is specifically designed to determine whether companies have a physical presence in the state.  That physical presence issue, which has arisen time and time again in the online sales tax debate, determines whether or not the Comptroller’s office can collect sales taxes from a company.

There’s speculation that the audit arose in large part because of some reporting by the Dallas Morning News back in 2008 questioning why Amazon wasn’t collecting sales taxes even though it was operating a distribution in the Dallas suburb of Irving through an entity called Kydc LLC.   Of course, this wouldn’t be the first anyone’s heard of this.  Amazon has already come under attack for not collecting sales taxes in other states where it operates distribution centers, notably Pennsylvania, Virginia, Nevada and others.

Nevertheless, many tax experts agree that retailing and distribution centers are generally regarded as separate lines of business under U.S. law and that a retailer’s ownership and operation of a separate distribution facility does not, by itself, create the ‘nexus’ (aka physical presence) needed to levy sales taxes against that retailer.

So the question really becomes, is Texas making a power grab like so many states have before it? Or is Amazon in the wrong here?

The retailer has asked for a re-determination of the state’s findings, which makes the audit an ongoing affair.  Beyond that, the company hasn’t said much on the record about the matter except to claim that the assessment by Texas is without merit but that it will defend itself regardless. Amazon did admit  however, that an unfavorable resolution to this issue could “materially affect business.”  With a bill of $269 million potentially due, we’d say that’s a pretty accurate statement.

This thing is far from over.   When we hear more, we’ll let you know.  As always, leave us your thoughts and comments.

Read Full Post »

Follow

Get every new post delivered to your Inbox.

%d bloggers like this: