• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

Trump attacks Washington Post as ‘guardian’ of Amazon’s tax practices

Dittohead not! said:
If Trump would close down his Twitter account, then his opponents would have a lot less ammunition to shoot at him, but attacking the president has been an American tradition for a long time. Who was the Muslim Kenyan socialist? Who lied and people died? Who was the "rapist?" Spurious accusations launched at the president have been going on a long time, and aren't about to stop any time soon. Trump just makes himself an easy target.
Click to expand...

And those accusations are far worse than calling Trump a moron. I think the reason the snowflakes are so butt-hurt about people making fun of Trump is because they know the attacks are true and that they come from the majority.
 
JasperL said:
For the vast majority of states for which it collects tax, it really isn't voluntary because Amazon has nexus in those states. But I agree, there is no issue and Trump is using years-old talking points. Probably ought to update them....
Click to expand...


I don't have time to read up on Nexus but Amazon didn't fight it and other internet companies do not comply with it. I was asked by California to collect sales tax for them and I flatly refused. Never heard from them again. Perhaps these states should look for other funding sources or find a way to reduce spending.
 
holbritter said:
Not anymore than the constant attacks on the President
Click to expand...

This is a classic Trump attack. Completely baseless and meant only to distract.

The irony of Trump accusing someone of not paying taxes is incredibly delicious however.
 
Maybe Trump doesn't want to release his tax records for fear someone will discover he hasn't paid his internet tax.
 
fmw said:
I don't have time to read up on Nexus but Amazon didn't fight it and other internet companies do not comply with it.
Click to expand...

They fought it tooth and nails for years - several lawsuits, audits, in Tennessee I know because I live here but some high profile cases involving "click through" nexus, where states asserted nexus on Amazon and others if one of their 'associates' who they pay commissions for referrals is located in-state. Much more - they litigated everything for years, played hardball with states, threatening to cancel or pull out of planned distribution centers if forced to collect tax, etc...

And other internet companies do! I work with many of them, and states are pretty aggressive against the big sellers at least. Besides, just because someone or lots of someones gets away with tax fraud doesn't convert it to not-tax-fraud.

I was asked by California to collect sales tax for them and I flatly refused. Never heard from them again.
Click to expand...

That means you're either too small to fool with, or you don't have a physical presence in California. It does NOT mean you're not required to collect sales tax or that you have nothing to fear with an audit if you are required. If you're audited and should have been collecting sales taxes, they could assess all the taxes you should have collected but did not, plus penalties and interest. It can be a big deal - I'd never recommend anyone ignore a clear tax collection responsibility.

Perhaps these states should look for other funding sources or find a way to reduce spending.
Click to expand...

They're enforcing the law, same as they do when they audit and assess back taxes on income tax cheats. Why should a mom and pop on the corner collect and pay sales taxes, but online sellers located in the state get a 9.5% price advantage in my state by ignoring and not assessing sales tax?
 
JasperL said:
They fought it tooth and nails for years - several lawsuits, audits, in Tennessee I know because I live here but some high profile cases involving "click through" nexus, where states asserted nexus on Amazon and others if one of their 'associates' who they pay commissions for referrals is located in-state. Much more - they litigated everything for years, played hardball with states, threatening to cancel or pull out of planned distribution centers if forced to collect tax, etc...
Click to expand...

Thanks for the primer. I'm sorry they lost.

And other internet companies do! I work with many of them, and states are pretty aggressive against the big sellers at least. Besides, just because someone or lots of someones gets away with tax fraud doesn't convert it to not-tax-fraud.
Click to expand...

So you are suggesting that I engage in tax fraud because I don't collect taxes for states other than my own? That sounds a little over the top. I haven't encountered any other Amazons personally. I'm sure you are right but it hasn't affected me. Well it has, I guess. It is easier for me to compete against Amazon since I don't collect taxes nationally.

That means you're either too small to fool with, or you don't have a physical presence in California. It does NOT mean you're not required to collect sales tax or that you have nothing to fear with an audit if you are required. If you're audited and should have been collecting sales taxes, they could assess all the taxes you should have collected but did not, plus penalties and interest. It can be a big deal - I'd never recommend anyone ignore a clear tax collection responsibility.
Click to expand...

I don't have a physical presence in California. Neither does Amazon have a physical presence in my state. Sorry but I don't view that I have a clear tax responsibility for collecting California sales tax. Nor do I see a clear tax responsibility for Amazon in our state. I find it strange that states can impose state laws on people in other states. Very strange.

I went through audits both last year and this year. Both ended with no additional tax liability on my part. The government wasted its time and then came back for more. They will probably come again next year. I can understand an audit. I have a hard time understanding a repeat of one that netted them nothing. Apparently they have too many auditors and need more for them to do. Some of it goes beyond the ridiculous.

They're enforcing the law, same as they do when they audit and assess back taxes on income tax cheats. Why should a mom and pop on the corner collect and pay sales taxes, but online sellers located in the state get a 9.5% price advantage in my state by ignoring and not assessing sales tax?
Click to expand...

But it is OK that sellers in other states get that price advantage? Yes they are enforcing laws. I just don't accept that states can extend their state laws beyond their borders. So I have a serious issue with that law enforcement.
 
Last edited:
fmw said:
Thanks for the primer. I'm sorry they lost.
Click to expand...

If they're in a state, I'm not, because the locally owned corner mom and pop has to collect sales tax and that's an unfair IMO price advantage for Amazon if they don't, and the law says they should. Amazon was depending on the fact, effectively, that almost all of us evade our use tax obligations - a form of tax fraud really - to underprice bricks and mortar stores.

So you are suggesting that I engage in tax fraud because I don't collect taxes for states other than my own? That sounds a little over the top. I haven't encountered any other Amazons personally. I'm sure you are right but it hasn't affected me. Well it has, I guess. It is easier for me to compete against Amazon since I don't collect taxes nationally.
Click to expand...

No, not at all. The short answer is unless you have a physical presence like an office or warehouse or other physical asset, or employees, in a state, you have no obligation to collect sales taxes for that state. After that it gets tricky - independent contractors doing work on your behalf, etc. Laws vary by state. But if it's just you and/or a team of people in your state, you're fine.

I don't have a physical presence in California. Neither does Amazon have a physical presence in my state. Sorry but I don't view that I have a clear tax responsibility for collecting California sales tax. Nor do I see a clear tax responsibility for Amazon in our state.
Click to expand...

If you have no presence, no responsibility to collect tax. And without knowing the state, no way for me to know if Amazon has nexus. They can have it without a warehouse or a big office, depending on the law, how they operate there, etc. Some states are very aggressive - a server farm might do it in some states for example, or independent contractors.

I went through audits both last year and this year. Both ended with no additional tax liability on my part. The government wasted its time and then came back for more. They will probably come again next year. I can understand an audit. I have a hard time understanding a repeat of one that netted them nothing. Apparently they have too many auditors and need more for them to do. Some of it goes beyond the ridiculous.
Click to expand...

Could be - certainly if you're targeted and they find nothing, they can pick their audits better and should leave you alone for a long while. I'm not a fan of audits, but at least around here, most of the auditors are decent people just doing their job. Some exceptions but overall I don't have problems dealing with them.
 
Bucky said:
Trump attacks Washington Post as ‘guardian’ of Amazon’s tax practices - POLITICO

I apologize, but what is an internet tax???
Click to expand...

There is no such thing as an internet tax. Barack Obama proposed an internet tax a few years ago, and everyone had a conniption fit about it--and it never happened.

https://www.washingtonpost.com/poli...d1f78989e8a_story.html?utm_term=.b8b955fdd9fe

Amazon is definitely entering the department store market but they are buying these goods from the department stores and shipping them out. They are paying taxes on the income they earn, just like any other business, and it's becoming popular. People like to shop from their computer versus driving 20 miles to get to the nearest store. With Amazon prime you can get free shipping--so Amazon is booming and I believe their share price is up around $1000.00

As far as the Washington Post being FAKE news--Trump might want to remember that is was 2 reporters from the Washington Post that brought Nixon down. They're not FAKE news, and they are required to retract false or misleading information.
 
Last edited:
1) Amazon already pays sales taxes from every state that has one.
2) Amazon doesn't own the Washington Post.
3) Based on 1) and 2), this president has shown that his mouth and brain are disconnected and simply raves nonsense.

In Trump's mind, if the news is not stroking his ego it's fake news.
 
Interesting article. Other than Trump, the looks on the faces of the Tech firm execs, seems to show either boredom, sadness, or in the case of Microsoft CEO, Satya Nadella, a look of astonished bewilderment at the Trump ignorance.

Tech_Council.jpg
 
Dittohead not! said:
Either something from the fevered imagination of Trump, or something he wants the Congress to pass.

Does anyone else find the constant attacks on the media unsettling? Discredit the media, and we have to rely on the Ministry of Truth for information.
Click to expand...

When the media spends months on misinformation about the Russian Connection, the media does not occupy the moral high ground. The media is money driven and can no longer be 100% trusted. The government may not be any better. There is away to tell who occupies the high ground.

What I would do is set up a media truth detector business or agency to protect the consumer of information, from junk food news and news with poison additives. We should treat news like we do with our food supply; information is food for the mind.

The one fair and objective way to do this is to analyze what was said one year ago, based on what we know today. As an example, we go back to June 30, 2016 and look at all the news and opinion from the main source of TV, internet, radio and newspaper. Since a year has past and there is water under the bridge, we can objectively compare what was said then, to what we now know ends up happening This way we can see and compare who is the best and worse sources of news. We can have daily, weekly, monthly and yearly totals; baseball statistics.

This allows free speech, but it gives us a way to inform the consumers of information, the ingredient in media driven fast food. Often the bull crap can sound good in the short term, but it will turn out to be false, when given enough time to look at the data.

For example, on June 30, 2016, this was a headline: Nate Silver puts Clinton odds of beating Trump near 80 percent. Today it is one year later and we know the results of the election, and we know what was said by whom. We compile a list of media sources and compare the media output data to see who was the best source of information; organic, and who were the best sources of entertainment and con job; artificial ingredients. Money and market share will force the media to get back to its roots as a trusted source of information all with free speech protected.
 
wellwisher said:
1 When the media spends months on misinformation about the Russian Connection, the media does not occupy the moral high ground. The media is money driven and can no longer be 100% trusted. The government may not be any better. There is away to tell who occupies the high ground.

2 What I would do is set up a media truth detector business or agency to protect the consumer of information, from junk food news and news with poison additives. We should treat news like we do with our food supply; information is food for the mind.

3 The one fair and objective way to do this is to analyze what was said one year ago, based on what we know today. As an example, we go back to June 30, 2016 and look at all the news and opinion from the main source of TV, internet, radio and newspaper. Since a year has past and there is water under the bridge, we can objectively compare what was said then, to what we now know ends up happening This way we can see and compare who is the best and worse sources of news. We can have daily, weekly, monthly and yearly totals; baseball statistics.

This allows free speech, but it gives us a way to inform the consumers of information, the ingredient in media driven fast food. Often the bull crap can sound good in the short term, but it will turn out to be false, when given enough time to look at the data.

4 For example, on June 30, 2016, this was a headline: Nate Silver puts Clinton odds of beating Trump near 80 percent. Today it is one year later and we know the results of the election, and we know what was said by whom. We compile a list of media sources and compare the media output data to see who was the best source of information; organic, and who were the best sources of entertainment and con job; artificial ingredients. Money and market share will force the media to get back to its roots as a trusted source of information all with free speech protected.
Click to expand...

1 Comey, is there any doubt that Russia interfered in our election? "No doubt."

2 Already in place in the form of Politifact, Snopes, and others.

3 Good idea Let's apply that to Trump's Tweets. Did millions of illegal aliens vote for Hillary? Did thousands of Muslims cheer the attack of 9/11 in the streets of New Jersey?

4 Trump did beat the odds, didn't he? Well, never overestimate the intelligence of the average voter
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom