[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: Amazon boycott
- To: liblicense-l@lists.yale.edu
- Subject: Re: Amazon boycott
- From: John Buschman <jeb224@Georgetown.edu>
- Date: Tue, 23 Aug 2011 22:02:22 EDT
- Reply-to: liblicense-l@lists.yale.edu
- Sender: owner-liblicense-l@lists.yale.edu
Without turning up the rhetorical heat, I'd like to answer the two objections to my point. It is not that Amazon generated business does not produce some taxes, it is that they do not produce the whole amount nor the type of tax revenues. When trucks deliver to your local hardware store (or bookstore if you have one left), they indeed pay taxes on fuel, highway surcharges, income tax for the drivers and and so on. But when your local hardware store sells the item, they also collect sales tax. Amazon, being relieved of both this duty and this accounting cost, is thus doubly privileged. That UPS pays some taxes is besides the point. This system of commerce will not support the infrastructure it depends upon for business. Conversely, if we federalize those taxes and distribute those taxes that way... - well, we're in the midst of a huge revolt against such redistributions, no matter how fair-minded or rational (or misguided and misdirected if you will). As to discouraging business because of various tax laws, collecting and disbursing taxes is a cost of doing business - except for the Amazons of this world. Let me make a wager: if Amazon offered to design a widget that would automatically charge and disburse taxes to the states where the credit card address is housed, how many of us think a) the states would turn that down? b) that the states wouldn't generate a system to take in the revenues and credit them properly, pronto? And how easily could such a widget be developed for your small, garden-variety startup? Tax accountants do a version of this all the time - mine will do returns for all 50 states. He just buys the software program and then checks over the results after inputting the data. This is no big deal. The argument is over politically privileging one form of commerce with an admixture of magical thinking that the increased consumption and the road taxes will somehow replace the sales tax revenues. I don't even want to get into sales taxes vs. other, more progressive forms of taxation. Right now, we're starving the states of revenue through this artificial rule designed to stimulate internet commerce. It worked. Time for that to end. John Buschman
- Prev by Date: survey on the application of data to collections work
- Next by Date: Re: Librarians who pay for nothing (Re: Economics of Green OA)
- Previous by thread: Amazon boycott
- Next by thread: Only 2 weeks left to register for COASP 2011 (OASPA)
- Index(es):