I.
Introduction
Chairman
Bradley and Members of the Committee, my name is John Stephenson, and I am the
State Government Affairs Manager for the National Taxpayers Union (NTU), the
nation’s oldest and largest non-partisan advocate for overburdened taxpayers. I am honored to appear before you today
and to present these remarks on behalf of NTU’s 14,000 members in Illinois.
I commend you for holding this hearing on Senate Bill 3353, which
would amend the state tax code to establish a taxable presence for out-of-state
online retailers with affiliates in the state (popularly known as an “Amazon
tax”). NTU has serious concerns about this legislation and, therefore, I urge
you to oppose it. Under a mis-defined concept of “fairness,” SB 3353 would
expand Illinois’ taxing power beyond accepted constitutional limits and declare
this state’s hostility to business, all without yielding much revenue for the
state. Rather than impose an unconstitutional and punitive tax policy, Illinois
should pursue broad-based tax reforms to bring more stability to the state’s
finances and foster economic growth.
II. Background
SB
3353 would amend the Illinois’s tax code to establish that a person without a
physical presence in the state is presumed to engage in taxable business in the
state if that person 1) enters into an agreement with an in-state resident by
which the resident agrees, for a commission or some other consideration, to
refer customers either directly or indirectly, such as through an Internet
link, to that out-of-state person, and 2) the cumulative gross receipts of
sales from the referrals are greater than $10,000 during the preceding year.[i]
This scheme is known popularly as an “Amazon” or “affiliates” tax
because it is aimed at out-of-state online retailers like Amazon with
affiliates, namely websites, that link and market goods for the retailer.
Currently, only New York, North Carolina, and Rhode Island have enacted laws
that create an Amazon tax scheme similar to SB 3353.[ii]
Two states,
Colorado and Oklahoma, have enacted
laws that require online retailers to mail notices to their customers reminding
them that they owe use tax. Another two states, Alabama and California, have
sought to educate retailers and consumers about existing sales and use tax
laws. Although the legislatures of California and Hawaii passed Amazon tax laws,
the governors of those states vetoed the bills.[iii]
III. The
Problems with Amazon Taxes
While some may regard a bill like SB 3353 as a tax
“reform” to promote fairness, it is actually an unwise policy that does not
make a tax system fairer or more competitive. States attempting to prey upon
online businesses beyond their borders by taxing their in-state affiliates run
the risk of inviting constitutional challenges. Moreover, they have not raised
the desired revenues. What taxes aimed at online retailers do is declare a
state’s hostility to the business community.
A. Amazon Taxes Are Unconstitutional Expansions of
the Tax Power
The U.S. Supreme Court has ruled that only
retailers with a physical presence, or “nexus” to a state, such as a warehouse,
an outlet, or employees located in the state, are obligated to collect the
state’s sales tax. As the Supreme Court said in Quill v. North Dakota, there are simply too many tax rates and
rules in the United States for a retailer to keep track of them all; to do so would
impede interstate commerce.[iv]
Although the Quill case dealt with a mail-order retailer, the
same principle is true for online retail businesses. An online retailer does
not have a physical presence merely because a website in Illinois links to the
retailer.
States that have enacted Amazon taxes have been
sued for violations of the constitution and other statutes. New York, which in
2008 enacted the first Amazon tax law requiring out-of-state retailers to
collect sales taxes for online transactions through affiliates in New York, has
been sued on this very issue.[v]
The litigation continues to this day. North Carolina, which earlier this year
asked Amazon to provide the names of its customers, has been sued in a federal
district court for violations of privacy laws.[vi]
Pursuing a law that is almost guaranteed to invite an expensive, multiyear
legal challenge is not prudent and should be avoided.
B. Amazon Taxes Come Up Short in Delivering Revenue
Aside from inviting constitutional challenges,
Amazon tax laws have not yielded the promised revenues. Although New York has
collected about $70 million in revenues, this is an anomaly when compared to
other states and the constitutional challenge to its tax law raises questions
about whether the state can ultimately keep the money that’s left after
litigation costs are taken into account. Further, these collections are a drop
in the bucket when compared to New York’s $19 billion budget deficit. Finally,
when lower collections of other types of taxes from reduced economic activity
are factored in, Amazon taxes are more likely to cost the state revenue.
States
are already collecting the majority of expected revenue from online
transactions due to the physical presence of Internet retailers in most of the
states. For example, according to STORES
magazine, 13 of the top 20 favorite online retailers also have stores and
outlets in states throughout the country. [vii] Moreover, the Internet Alliance,
a trade group representing online retailers, reports that affiliate referrals
account for less than 10 percent of the annual revenues for the group’s member
companies. [viii] This means that expectations for
a large revenue windfall through taxing online retail affiliates are highly
unlikely.
In response to the new tax collection and reporting
obligations, Amazon has shut down its affiliate programs in Colorado, North
Carolina, and Rhode Island. Other online retailers that use affiliates, such as
Overstock.com, BlueNile.com, and B&H Photo Video, have followed suit by
eliminating or scaling back their affiliates programs.[ix]
As Amazon explained in an e-mail to its Colorado affiliates, the reporting
requirement “is clearly intended to increase the compliance burden to a point
where online retailers will be induced to ‘voluntarily’ collect Colorado sales
tax – a course we won’t take.”[x]
Ironically, the Amazon taxes have the effect of
depriving the states of the very revenues they sought. Without the affiliates,
there is simply no tax to collect. Rhode Island has not collected any revenue
due to the Amazon law; one business trade group in Rhode Island suggests that
the state has collected less in tax
revenue because the loss of affiliates means less in business income.[xi]
Notably, Rhode Island’s gross receipts threshold for tax liability ($5,000) is
half of what New York’s law and SB 3353 require.
Now, Frank Caprio, Rhode Island’s treasurer, has urged
the General Assembly to consider repealing the statute.[xii]
Caprio said, “The
affiliate tax has hurt Rhode Island businesses and stifled their growth, as
they’ve been shut out of some of the world’s largest marketplaces, and [it]
should be repealed immediately.”[xiii]
North Carolina reports that it is not keeping track of revenues from the Amazon
tax.[xiv]
Collection problems with the New York-style approach are, in part, what led
Colorado and Oklahoma to pursue reporting requirements instead. Even some
proponents acknowledge that Amazon tax laws do not collect desired revenues in
the short term.[xv] A
loss of business activity and revenues is the last thing any state needs during
this time of economic uncertainty.
C. Amazon Taxes Declare a State’s Hostility to
Business
By effectively shutting down affiliate activities,
Amazon taxes deliver a blunt message to the business community, especially
entrepreneurs and innovators: the state is hostile to new business. The stark
reality is that these policies precipitate business closures, leading to loss
of revenues for the state, reduced employment opportunities, and higher prices
for consumers, which deter entrepreneurs from starting new businesses in the
state.
Proponents say Amazon taxes help to “level the
playing field” between online retailers and local “brick-and-mortar” retailers.
We have heard these types of arguments before. But in reality, these laws
punish one business model to give a competitive advantage to another. While
brick-and-mortar retailers claim that the online retailers have the advantage,
the brick-and-mortars have several advantages over their online competitors,
including greater customer-retailer interactions and immediate purchases.
Amazon taxes require online businesses to shoulder
a higher cost of compliance due to the very heavy burden of complying with each
of the sales tax jurisdictions where the customers reside. The Tax Foundation
reports that 8,000 separate tax jurisdictions exist in the United States.[xvi]
Although some tools exist to provide information on sales tax requirements in
these jurisdictions, these are not always the most reliable sources of data.
Indeed in the latter area, online retailers, who represent an important segment
of the nation’s economy, are subject to a competitive disadvantage from
brick-and-mortar retailers, who only have to remit the sales tax where they are
located.
If Illinois enacts SB 3353, it will be the only
state in the Midwest to enact an Amazon tax thus far. There are nearly 9,000
affiliates in Illinois, many of them small businesses, who paid $18 million in
state income tax in 2009.[xvii]
Does this Committee really want to pass a law that would threaten the survival
of these taxpayers for revenues that likely will not appear?
IV. Illinois Should Pursue Budget and Tax Reform
Instead of Punitive Taxation
Instead of finding creative ways to collect more
tax revenue from in-state affiliates of online firms, this Committee should
examine ways to make Illinois’ tax code simpler, fairer, and more competitive.
Illinois currently has the 14th-highest per capita state and local
tax burden in the nation.[xviii]
Moreover, the state’s business climate ranks 30th out of 50 and the
combined state and local sales tax rates are the sixth-highest in the nation.[xix]
Property taxes as a percentage of median home value are also the nation’s
sixth-highest.[xx]
By taking the path of true tax reform, Illinois can attract more taxpaying
individuals and businesses, which will generate more revenue for the state and
encourage economic growth through which all Illinoisans can prosper.
V. Conclusion
NTU strongly
supports efforts to improve Illinois’s tax code for the benefit of the state
and its citizens, both current and future. But enacting SB 3353 and taxing the
affiliates of online retailers is not the correct way to proceed. NTU and its
members stand ready to work with you in devising proposals that can and will do
better. I appreciate the opportunity to present these views and I am happy to
answer any questions. Thank you.
Notes
[i]http://www.ilga.gov/legislation/BillStatus.asp?GA=96&DocTypeID=SB&DocNum=3353&GAID=10&SessionID=76&LegID=51208.
[ii]
http://www.taxfoundation.org/research/show/25949.html.
[iv]
http://www.stateline.org/live/details/story?contentId=479651.
[vii]
http://www.stores.org/2010/Favorite-50-List
[viii]
http://ctmirror.org/story/5168/amazon-threatens-fire-state-affiliates-if-connecticut-tries-collect-sales-tax
[ix]
http://www.projo.com/news/content/Amazon_law_02-26-10_21HIT5M_v16.3a62e70.html.
[x]
http://www.feld.com/wp/archives/2010/03/amazon-fires-its-affiliates-in-colorado-including-me-because-of-colorado-hb-10-1193.html.
[xi]
http://www.taxfoundation.org/research/show/25949.html.
[xii]
http://www.stateline.org/live/details/story?contentId=479651.
[xiii]
http://www.websitemagazine.com/content/blogs/posts/archive/2010/02/03/affiliate-tax-battle-heats-up-in-colorado.aspx
[xiv]
http://www.taxfoundation.org/research/show/25949.html
[xvii]
http://www.lakeshorebranding.com/company/blog/new-proposed-tax-will-terminate-thousands-of-jobs/.
[xviii]
http://www.taxfoundation.org/publications/show/2181.html.