Law.com Subscribers SAVE 30%
Call 855-808-4530 or email [email protected] to receive your discount on a new subscription.
NY Judge Rejects Amazon's Claim Against Web Sales Tax Statute
A state judge has ruled that Amazon.com did “not come close” to demonstrating the unconstitutionality of a new state tax statute that requires many online retailers to collect state sales tax on purchases by New York residents.
Manhattan Supreme Court Justice Eileen Bransten dismissed the Internet giant's claim that the law, enacted last April, violates the Commerce Clause of the U.S. Constitution, and the Due Process and Equal Protection Clauses of the state and the federal constitution.
The Judge's Ruling
Justice Bransten held that the statute contains the requisite requirement that an online retailer must do a substantial amount of business in New York before companies can be forced to collect and remit state sales tax.
“It requires a substantial nexus between an out-of-state seller and New York through a contract to pay commissions for referrals with a New York resident along with realization of more than $10,000 of revenue from New York sales earned through the arrangement,” Bransten wrote in Amazon.com v. New York State Department of Taxation and Finance, 601247/08 (see, www.nylawyer.com/adgifs/decisions/011409bransten.pdf). “The neutral statute simply obligates out-of-state sellers to shoulder their fair share of the tax-collection burden when using New Yorkers to earn profit from other New Yorkers.”
Governor David A. Paterson approved the new tax when he signed the 2008-09 state budget in April. It contains a “commission-agreement” provision, Tax Law '1101[b][8][i][C], that subjects transactions by online retailers to state sales tax if companies use independent contractors or other New York residents to solicit sales in excess of $10,000 from New York residents.
State officials estimated that the tax would raise about $50 million a year on Internet purchases by New Yorkers.
Tax officials contended that Amazon.com's methods of marketing itself in New York makes it subject to collecting state sales tax on sales to New York residents.
The Back and Forth
Seattle-based Amazon.com employs thousands of “associates” in New York ' or Web sites containing links to Amazon.com. The associates receive “bounties” and other compensation when customers link to Amazon.com through their sites.
While Amazon.com argued that the links through “associates” amount to nothing more than advertising, state tax officials contended that they demonstrate the necessary nexus between the company and New York to make the company liable for collecting sales taxes on everything it sells in New York ' whether through the associates or directly through Amazon.com.
The company did not detail its New York sales in court filings. It did disclose that sales funneled to it through its “associates” amounted to less than 1.5% of all its sales to New Yorkers.
The company argued that the new tax law violates the Commerce Clause of the U.S. Constitution because a substantial nexus is not established between Amazon.com and New York through the associate arrangement defined by the state's “commission-agreement” provision.
“Amazon is wrong,” Bransten concluded. “The Commission-Agreement Provision is carefully crafted to ensure that there is a sufficient basis for requiring collection of New York taxes and, if such a basis does not exist, it gives the seller an out.”
As to Amazon.com's assertion that the law violates the Equal Protection Clause, Bransten held that, contrary to the company's contention, it is not being singled out by the new tax law. Any out-of-state retailer using agents or independent contractors to solicit $10,000 or more worth of sales in New York is also subject to the sales-tax collection requirement, Bransten determined.
She also rejected Amazon.com's claim that the tax statute violates the company's due-process rights because it is unconstitutionally vague. The statute is “not so vague and standardless as to leave the public uncertain about its reach,” the judge wrote.
Following enactment of the statute in April, 32 of the nation's 100 largest online vendors registered with the state and have been collecting New York sales taxes on purchases by New Yorkers, according to Thomas Bergin, a Tax Department spokesman. They include Amazon.com, which has been collecting the tax as it has also challenged the statute, Bergin said.
Many Firms Are Registered
As Tax-Collecting Entities
Seventy-six of the largest Internet retailers are now registered with the state because they are either based in New York or recognized that the proper nexus has been established between their companies and the state to make them obligated to collect sales taxes, according to Bergin. He says many Internet retailers have “associate” arrangements with New Yorkers similar to Amazon.com's.
Even where companies are not required to collect sales taxes on purchases by New York residents, New Yorkers are obligated to report the sales themselves and pay the proper taxes. A sales-tax obligation line added to state tax forms in 2003 was at first largely ignored by taxpayers, but Bergin says tax officials expect to collect $45 million on that line in the 2008-09 fiscal year.
Of Bransten's decision, Bergin says: “We felt that the legislation was built on a solid foundation and, obviously, the court seems to agree.”
Assistant Attorney General Elizabeth Forman argued on behalf of the Department of Taxation and Finance.
Randy Mastro of Gibson, Dunn & Crutcher represented Amazon.com.
Patty Smith, an Amazon.com spokeswoman, said last month that Amazon would have no comment on the ruling or on whether an appeal was under consideration.
Joel Stashenko writes for The New York Law Journal, an Incisive Media affiliate of e-Commerce Law & Strategy.
A state judge has ruled that
Manhattan Supreme Court Justice
The Judge's Ruling
Justice Bransten held that the statute contains the requisite requirement that an online retailer must do a substantial amount of business in
“It requires a substantial nexus between an out-of-state seller and
Governor David A. Paterson approved the new tax when he signed the 2008-09 state budget in April. It contains a “commission-agreement” provision, Tax Law '1101[b][8][i][C], that subjects transactions by online retailers to state sales tax if companies use independent contractors or other
State officials estimated that the tax would raise about $50 million a year on Internet purchases by New Yorkers.
Tax officials contended that
The Back and Forth
Seattle-based
While
The company did not detail its
The company argued that the new tax law violates the Commerce Clause of the U.S. Constitution because a substantial nexus is not established between
“Amazon is wrong,” Bransten concluded. “The Commission-Agreement Provision is carefully crafted to ensure that there is a sufficient basis for requiring collection of
As to
She also rejected
Following enactment of the statute in April, 32 of the nation's 100 largest online vendors registered with the state and have been collecting
Many Firms Are Registered
As Tax-Collecting Entities
Seventy-six of the largest Internet retailers are now registered with the state because they are either based in
Even where companies are not required to collect sales taxes on purchases by
Of Bransten's decision, Bergin says: “We felt that the legislation was built on a solid foundation and, obviously, the court seems to agree.”
Assistant Attorney General Elizabeth Forman argued on behalf of the Department of Taxation and Finance.
Randy Mastro of
Patty Smith, an
Joel Stashenko writes for The
Major Differences In UK, U.S. Copyright Laws
This article highlights how copyright law in the United Kingdom differs from U.S. copyright law, and points out differences that may be crucial to entertainment and media businesses familiar with U.S law that are interested in operating in the United Kingdom or under UK law. The article also briefly addresses contrasts in UK and U.S. trademark law.
The Article 8 Opt In
The Article 8 opt-in election adds an additional layer of complexity to the already labyrinthine rules governing perfection of security interests under the UCC. A lender that is unaware of the nuances created by the opt in (may find its security interest vulnerable to being primed by another party that has taken steps to perfect in a superior manner under the circumstances.
Strategy vs. Tactics: Two Sides of a Difficult Coin
With each successive large-scale cyber attack, it is slowly becoming clear that ransomware attacks are targeting the critical infrastructure of the most powerful country on the planet. Understanding the strategy, and tactics of our opponents, as well as the strategy and the tactics we implement as a response are vital to victory.
Legal Possession: What Does It Mean?
Possession of real property is a matter of physical fact. Having the right or legal entitlement to possession is not "possession," possession is "the fact of having or holding property in one's power." That power means having physical dominion and control over the property.
The Stranger to the Deed Rule
In 1987, a unanimous Court of Appeals reaffirmed the vitality of the "stranger to the deed" rule, which holds that if a grantor executes a deed to a grantee purporting to create an easement in a third party, the easement is invalid. Daniello v. Wagner, decided by the Second Department on November 29th, makes it clear that not all grantors (or their lawyers) have received the Court of Appeals' message, suggesting that the rule needs re-examination.