patching...
Welcome back, Patch Blogger!

Local Mayors Urge Patrick to Force Amazon to Collect State Sales Tax

Mayors who are part of a state coalition argue giant online retailers are being allowed to avoid collecting millions in state sales tax, and that's unfair to local businesses that do collect, especially as the holiday shopping season approaches.

 

It's only fair -- that's the argument from advocates behind an effort to get giant online retailers, such as Amazon.com or Overstock.com, to collect the 6.25 percent state sales tax on purchases by Massachusetts customers.

The Massachusetts Main Street Fairness Coalition (MMSFC), an organization made up of retailers, local elected officials, labor unions, trade and business associations and individuals, says these online retailers are exploiting a legal loophole that allows them to not charge sales taxes unless they have a physical presence in that particular state.

It's a "huge advantage" local brick-and-mortar businesses -- the "lifeblood" of cities and towns -- can't compete with, the coalition argues.

The coalition is led by Salem Mayor Kim Driscoll as co-chairperson and counts among its supporters retail giants such as Best Buy and Walmart, along with numerous individual small businesses.

Driscoll pledged her support to the effort this spring, saying it will help local businesses stay competitive and therefore benefit cities and towns across the state. Not long after, Peabody Mayor Ted Bettencourt joined the effort as well.

“We have to level the playing field for local businesses,” said Bettencourt at the time. “Closing this loophole will help smaller retailers be more competitive, which will spur economic development in downtown Peabody and in cities and towns across Massachusetts.”

Now, Driscoll, Bettencourt and six other mayors are asking Gov. Deval Patrick to take "aggressive" action with Amazon.com in particular -- it recently established a physical presence in Massachusetts -- and try to force the company into compliance with state sales tax laws before the holiday shopping season arrives.

According to the coalition's estimates, Massachusetts could net an additional $25 million to $45 million from Amazon alone if the company starts collecting sales tax.

“We have read the news reports that you are in contact with Amazon and have plans to discuss this matter with them. We applaud you for your leadership and urge you to move aggressively this fall so that Amazon is in full compliance with Massachusetts tax laws by the time the all important Christmas shopping season begins,” reads a letter to Patrick signed by eight mayors last week.

In addition to Driscoll and Bettencourt, mayors Tom Menino (Boston), Joseph Sullivan (Braintree), Michael Tautznik (Easthampton), Gary Christenson (Malden), Stephen Zanni (Methuen) and Daniel Rizzo (Revere) all signed the letter.

MMSFC notes that earlier this year, Amazon purchased a robotics company in North Reading and opened a research office in Cambridge, which therefore establishes a physical presence in-state for Amazon and requires the company to comply with sales tax laws.

Nevada and New Jersey recently announced that Amazon will begin collecting state sales taxes after locating operations in those states and being pressed by governors and other state leaders, says the MMSFC. The company began doing the same in Texas in July and in California and Pennsylvania earlier this month. More than a dozen states in total have reached agreements with Amazon.

The MMSFC notes that many "brick-and-mortar" businesses in Massachusetts do a large amount of sales online as well, yet they don't avoid collecting sales taxes from those customers and neither should online-only retailers.

The MMSFC says that a previous letter on this issue dated May 31 to state Department of Revenue Commissioner Amy Pitter has so far gone unanswered.

The State House News Service reports that Patrick spoke positively about tax agreements with Amazon back in June, saying his administration would begin those talks, but as of last week, it appeared only minimal progress had been made.

Patrick said only his staff has spoken with Amazon officials to date and otherwise offered scant details on the negotiations.

Back to the loophole


The MMFSC says large e-commerce companies hide behind a 1992 U.S. Supreme Court ruling, Quill v. North Dakotawhich prohibits states from requiring retailers without a physical presence in the state to collect sales tax on their behalf.

"At the time of that decision, the Internet was in its infancy, and companies such as Amazon did not exist," argues the coalition. "Clearly, times have changed, and our antiquated system is in need of a modern-day overhaul."

According to the Alliance for Main Street Fairness, the Bay State has lost out on $600 million in sales tax revenue from e-commerce since 2007.

"We understand that the ultimate solution to this problem rests with the federal government and we hope, in time, it acts appropriately to correct this imbalance. But Congress is not going to act unless pushed, and Massachusetts -- like we have on healthcare reform and many other issues in the past – can once again demonstrate national leadership on this vital issue," the mayors wrote to Patrick.

They say individual states can try and simplify state tax codes, facilitate collecting sales taxes and eliminate any loopholes they can that are being exploited by remote e-commerce companies. In Massachusetts, for example, the legislature is looking at the Streamlined Sales Tax project.

For more information from MMSFC, visit www.massmainstreet.com.

Related Topics: Amazon.com, E-Commerce, Online Retailers, and sales tax loophole

J

9:00 am on Monday, September 24, 2012

Most people shop online because the prices can't be beat, not to save the 6.25% sales tax. Electronics are a great example. Something that costs $50 at Best Buy will usually go for $15-$25 online for the same brand name. The same cheap Chinese made junk that you find online you will also find at Best Buy, so it's not like you're getting a better product. I'm surprised they're targeting Amazon specifically and not Ebay.

Reply

John Smith

9:40 am on Monday, September 24, 2012

Yeah.. I don't think imposing sales tax on interstate internet sales is really going to solve the problem. With online shopping, I can look at a huge range of products, easily compare features, read reviews from other shoppers.. and I don't even have to get out of my chair to do it. That's kind of tough to beat.

Reply

Steve

9:49 am on Monday, September 24, 2012

Well, if support of Tierney had not pushed me completely away from Bettencourt, this does. What a disappointment. I will never vote for this man again.

Reply

Jimmy S

10:49 am on Monday, September 24, 2012

Competition....Legality....

Massachusetts calls it a "sales" tax until they get argued that the business you are buying from is not in Massachusetts. Then Massachusetts calls it a "user" tax since you will use it mostly in Massachusetts. So ultimately if you go to NH and purchase something you should be paying the tax to Massachusetts...

If Massachusetts wants to compete then lower the sales tax. Legally they are attempting to manipulate to steal your money so they can pay for their poorly run budget. Cities and towns are fighting the wrong entity. If I was one of these Mayors, I would be doing everything in my power to get an Amazon Center placed in the city to create jobs and revenues via property taxes...Not play the card that this is unfair.

The Mayors make the arguement that these smaller businesses cant compete...Then they should attempt to. They need to be competitive by finding their niche to have a business. I look at the Northshore Mall and do not see this impact of Amazon. The last time I checked, I had to drive around for quite some time to get a parking space. The mall continues to bring in high quality stores and you could get a lot of the stuff online and cheaper....

The reality is that the retail business is transforming but state governement attempts to use their laws to limit our ability as a consumer to purchase at a better price. This is a major TAX on the MIDDLE CLASS...

Reply

Keith Yockey

11:24 am on Monday, September 24, 2012

Taxes are now collected on CA and TX for Amazon purchases. The move has done nothing to increase B&M sales. Can't compete? A $100 item @ a B&M can still be bought for $75 online. What do they want next? Fed. Mandated price fixing?

Reply

Karl

11:26 am on Monday, September 24, 2012

Want to make the state a better place to do business? This isn't the answer, it's just another money grab from politicians who can't seem to control their zest for spending. Try making the state a better place to do business instead by lowering taxes and doing some much needed regulatory reform.

Reply

Karl

11:28 am on Monday, September 24, 2012

I forgot to add you won't catch me voting for Bettencourt again either. He is exactly what I feared he would be when I took a chance and voted for him...a big time liberal free spender.

Reply

Susan Sturgeon

11:31 am on Monday, September 24, 2012

It's not quite fair to cite online shopping as having every advantage since the buyer has to pay shipping which is often padded.

Reply

Saber Walsh

11:40 am on Monday, September 24, 2012

Politicians are getting painfully close to having to make the tough decisions we need them to make but which are not politically expedient. As someone once said, "if it moves, tax it" and identifying more avenues for pols to tax us is like an addict looking for their next hit.

It's not about buying tax free (we go to New Hampshire for that). It's about price and availability. Period.

Maybe if they actually CUT spending in areas outside of public safety and schools we might have a solution.

Reply

Rob Lyons

1:44 pm on Monday, September 24, 2012

It's funny how Bettencourt thinks people will shop in that dump we call downtown Peabody if he slows traffic and taxes my Amazon purchases. Not a chance, Teddy boy.

Reply
Comment_arrow

Sue

5:46 pm on Monday, September 24, 2012

That plan was passed down to Ted from our last mayor but I agree with you about the downtown project.

Jimmy W

5:31 pm on Monday, September 24, 2012

How is this any different than forcing businesses in NH to charge sales tax to MA residents? That will never happen, and neither should this.

Reply
Comment_arrow

Sue

5:47 pm on Monday, September 24, 2012

it's no different...they just want more of our money to "balance the budget" at our expense...as usual

Saber Walsh

12:29 pm on Friday, October 12, 2012

It's time for an "intervention." We need to wean our politicians off the "find something new to tax!" trend and get them to start cutting the things that need to be cut (and put money back to where it needs to be put like schools/public safety)

It didn't take Driscoll long to become a "tax addict," did it? Maybe if Salem got more revenue than tourism and parking tickets she wouldn't care as much. How about adding some jobs? And getting our downtowns worth stopping in?

Reply

Leave a comment