| Revision as of 17:50, 2 February 2015 editIliketoeatpotatoesalot (talk | contribs)217 edits →Issues← Previous edit | Latest revision as of 15:08, 29 June 2024 edit undoCitation bot (talk | contribs)Bots5,451,099 edits Altered title. | Use this bot. Report bugs. | Suggested by Spinixster | Category:Advocacy groups in the United States | #UCB_Category 116/150 | ||
| (38 intermediate revisions by 19 users not shown) | |||
| Line 1: | Line 1: | ||
| The '''Alliance for Main Street Fairness''' is an advocacy group based in the ] dedicated to ending what it sees as unfair tax advantages for online-only retailers with respect to the collection of ]. The group supports the ]. Members include retailers such as Wal-Mart, Target, Best Buy, Home Depot, and |
The '''Alliance for Main Street Fairness''' is an advocacy group based in the ] dedicated to ending what it sees as unfair tax advantages for online-only retailers with respect to the collection of ]. The group supports the ]. Members include retailers such as Wal-Mart, Target, Best Buy, Home Depot, Sears, and thousands of small retailers. | ||
| ==Mission== | |||
| The Alliance for Main Street Fairness says it "is a coalition of business owners and concerned citizens who want to bring sales tax laws up-to-date and level the playing field so all businesses can compete fairly." They argue, "Current law dates from an era before people shopped online. A loophole in this law allows online-only retailers to avoid collecting sales taxes at the point of sale, unlike brick-and-mortar retailers. This gives online-only retailers an unfair advantage over their Main Street competitors, which costs local communities jobs and tax revenue and creates significant unfairness in the marketplace for businesses and consumers alike." <ref name="Mission">{{cite web |url=http://www.standwithmainstreet.com/content.aspx?page=about |title=About the Alliance for Main Street Fairness |publisher=Alliance for Main Street Fairness |accessdate=9 December 2014}}</ref> | |||
| ==Issues== | ==Issues== | ||
| ===Alibaba=== | ===Alibaba=== | ||
| The Alliance for Main Street Fairness purchased radio and television ads in December 2014 calling for Congress to end what the group called "special tax treatment" for Alibaba and other e-commerce sites. This was one of the largest public relations campaigns ever conduct against a Chinese company in the United States. |
The Alliance for Main Street Fairness purchased radio and television ads in December 2014 calling for Congress to end what the group called "special tax treatment" for Alibaba and other e-commerce sites. This was one of the largest public relations campaigns ever conduct against a Chinese company in the United States.<ref name="Alibaba">{{cite news |last=Chan |first=Edwin |date=1 December 2014 |title=U.S. retailers warn of Chinese giant Alibaba's impact in U.S. | ||
| |url= |
|url=https://www.reuters.com/article/us-alibaba-group-usa-idUSKCN0JF2ZY20141201 |newspaper=Reuters |accessdate=1 June 2018}}</ref> | ||
| ===Amazon=== | ===Amazon=== | ||
| AMSF criticized Amazon's Price Check app and Price Check Day promotion. The AMSF stated, "This app is simply another ploy by Amazon to exploit the loophole that allows them to evade collecting state sales taxes. |
AMSF criticized Amazon's Price Check app and Price Check Day promotion. The AMSF stated, "This app is simply another ploy by Amazon to exploit the loophole that allows them to evade collecting state sales taxes." AMSF also stated, "no retailer can compete with the special treatment" Amazon receives by not being required to collect sales taxes.<ref name="LAT">{{cite news |last=Chang |first=Andrea |date=7 December 2011 |title=Retail groups lash out after Amazon announces Price Check app promotion |url=http://latimesblogs.latimes.com/technology/2011/12/retail-group-lashes-out-after-amazon-announces-price-check-app-promotion.html |newspaper=Los Angeles Times |location=Los Angeles, California |access-date=1 February 2015}}</ref> | ||
| ===Borders Books=== | ===Borders Books=== | ||
| {{main | Borders Books}} | {{main | Borders Books}} | ||
| In a statement on the bankruptcy and liquidation of Borders Books AMSF wrote, "Special treatment for Amazon.com is decimating job providers like Borders and countless small businesses across the country. It is simply not fair that one business is able to operate with a government-sanctioned advantage that allows it to undercut its competitors forcing lost jobs and business closures. Lawmakers need to level the playing field and end the special deal that gives Amazon a competitive advantage over Main Street.” <ref name="GalleyCat">{{cite news |last=Boog |first=Jason |date=19 July 2011 |title=Amazon Advantage Blamed in Borders Liquidation |url=http://www.mediabistro.com/galleycat/amazon-advantage-blamed-in-borders-liquidation_b34671|newspaper=Galley Cat, Media Bistro |accessdate=9 December 2014 }}</ref> | In a statement on the bankruptcy and liquidation of Borders Books AMSF wrote, "Special treatment for Amazon.com is decimating job providers like Borders and countless small businesses across the country. It is simply not fair that one business is able to operate with a government-sanctioned advantage that allows it to undercut its competitors forcing lost jobs and business closures. Lawmakers need to level the playing field and end the special deal that gives Amazon a competitive advantage over Main Street.” <ref name="GalleyCat">{{cite news |last=Boog |first=Jason |date=19 July 2011 |title=Amazon Advantage Blamed in Borders Liquidation |url=http://www.mediabistro.com/galleycat/amazon-advantage-blamed-in-borders-liquidation_b34671 |newspaper=Galley Cat, Media Bistro |accessdate=9 December 2014 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20141209200910/http://www.mediabistro.com/galleycat/amazon-advantage-blamed-in-borders-liquidation_b34671 |archive-date=9 December 2014 |url-status=dead }}</ref> | ||
| ===Marketplace Fairness Act=== | ===Marketplace Fairness Act=== | ||
| Line 20: | Line 18: | ||
| After eBay implicitly endorsed an exemption for businesses with $30 million or less in annual sales, AMSF attacked the online auctioneer. saying that it was only trying to protect the largest firms selling from its site.<ref name="MFA">{{cite news |author=<!--Staff writer(s); no by-line.--> |title=Online Sales Cost Cities And Counties Billions In Taxes, Mayors Say |url=http://www.gpb.org/news/2013/06/21/online-sales-cost-cities-and-counties-billions-in-taxes-mayors-say |newspaper=National Public Radio |location=Washington, DC |date=6 June 2013 |access-date=30 January 2015}}</ref> | After eBay implicitly endorsed an exemption for businesses with $30 million or less in annual sales, AMSF attacked the online auctioneer. saying that it was only trying to protect the largest firms selling from its site.<ref name="MFA">{{cite news |author=<!--Staff writer(s); no by-line.--> |title=Online Sales Cost Cities And Counties Billions In Taxes, Mayors Say |url=http://www.gpb.org/news/2013/06/21/online-sales-cost-cities-and-counties-billions-in-taxes-mayors-say |newspaper=National Public Radio |location=Washington, DC |date=6 June 2013 |access-date=30 January 2015}}</ref> | ||
| AMSF released a video in late 2014 in support of the Marketplace Fairness Act. The video showcased testimonials from conservative groups and intellectuals supporting "e-fairness." The video includes a brief statement from economist Art Laffer. Laffer released a study touting the benefits of treating online and offline commerce equally. He said that the Marketplace Fairness Act would give states the ability to reduce other taxes.<ref name="Video">{{cite news |last=O'Bannon |first=Isaac M. |date=18 November 2014 |title=Business Group Urges GOP to Reconsider Marketplace Fairness Act |url=http://www.cpapracticeadvisor.com/news/12020026/business-group-urges-gop-to-reconsider-marketplace-fairness-act |newspaper=CPA Practice Advisor |access-date=4 February 2015}}</ref> | |||
| ⚫ | ==State legislation== | ||
| AMSF criticized Senator ] in a BuzzFeed post for his opposition to the Marketplace Fairness Act. AMSF claimed that Cruz had "flip-flopped" on his conservative principles by supporting special tax treatment for online retailers. “While Ted Cruz gallivants across the country giving speeches on the American dream,” the post reads, “he denies it to the local small business owners back home.” In its post AMSF also stated, "Ted Cruz works to tilt the free market in favor of big online retailers LIKE ALIBABA..."<ref name="Buzz">{{cite news |last=Railey |first=Kimberly |date=3 December 2014 |title=U.S. retailers attack Ted Cruz as friend of China's Alibaba |url=http://trailblazersblog.dallasnews.com/2014/12/u-s-retailers-attack-ted-cruz-as-friend-of-chinas-alibaba.html/ |newspaper=The Dallas Morning News |location=Dallas, Texas |access-date=1 February 2015}}</ref> | |||
| ===Illinois=== | |||
| ⚫ | ==State legislation== | ||
| Following the March 2011 signature of Illinois' Main Street Fairness Act into law by Governor ], the Alliance issued a press release stating that "In Illinois, small business retailers are the backbone of the state's economy and are vital components of the community, and they have been operating at a significant disadvantage as online-only retailers have exploited a decades-old loophole to gain an unfair and artificial advantage in the marketplace. By signing HB 3659, Quinn ensures that all businesses will compete on the same playing field, collecting the sales tax at the point of purchase whether they operate on the Internet or in Illinois' communities." <ref>{{cite press release |title=Alliance For Main Street Fairness Praises Pat Quinn | |||
| |url=http://www.prnewswire.com/news-releases/alliance-for-main-street-fairness-praises-pat-quinn-117754073.html |publisher=Alliance for Main Street Fairness |date=10 March 2011 |accessdate=2011-03-25}}</ref> Quinn said, "This law will put Illinois-based businesses on a level playing field, protect and create jobs and help us continue to grow in the global marketplace."<ref>{{cite news |title=Illinois governor signs bill targeting Internet sales |url=http://www.reuters.com/article/2011/03/10/us-illinois-internet-tax-idUSTRE7298AC20110310 |newspaper=Reuters |date=10 March 2011 |accessdate=25 March 2011}}</ref> | |||
| ===Pennsylvania=== | ===Pennsylvania=== | ||
| In May 2011 the Alliance announced its intention to hand deliver a petition to each state legislator in order to encourage them to support legislation mandating sales taxes for online retailers.<ref>{{cite press release |
In May 2011 the Alliance announced its intention to hand deliver a petition to each state legislator in order to encourage them to support legislation mandating sales taxes for online retailers.<ref>{{cite press release|title=Hundreds Of Pennsylvania Businesses Simply Want Fairness |url=http://standwithmainstreet.com/resources/hundreds-pennsylvania-businesses-simply-want-fairness |publisher=Alliance for Main Street Fairness |date=24 May 2011 |accessdate=2011-06-01 |url-status=dead |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20110827213950/http://standwithmainstreet.com/resources/hundreds-pennsylvania-businesses-simply-want-fairness |archive-date=August 27, 2011 }}</ref> In June 2011 the Alliance launched an ad campaign in Pennsylvania featuring television, radio, and newspaper ads across the state.<ref>{{cite news |title=Alliance launches Pa. ad campaign for online sales tax | ||
| |author=BRENT BURKEY |url=http://centralpennbusiness.com/article/20110601/CPBJ01/110609983 |newspaper=Central Penn Business Journal |date=1 June 2011 |accessdate=2 June 2011}}</ref> | |author=BRENT BURKEY |url=http://centralpennbusiness.com/article/20110601/CPBJ01/110609983 |newspaper=Central Penn Business Journal |date=1 June 2011 |accessdate=2 June 2011}}</ref> | ||
| In December 2011 Pennsylvania changed its rules regarding what constitutes a physical nexus within the state to require more businesses to collect and remit sales tax.{{citation needed|date=October 2014}} Pennsylvania has also added a line on its 2011 income tax form for taxpayers to report online purchases and pay use tax.<ref name="PO"/> In February 2012 the Pennsylvania state government predicted that it would collect an additional $40 million in sales tax from internet retailers.<ref name="PO"/> Out-of-state online retailers, such as Amazon.com, were granted a one-time reprieve until September 2012 after which they could face enforcement action.<ref name="PO"/> The Alliance for Main Street Fairness praised all of these actions.<ref name="PO">{{cite news |title=Pa. expects $40 million from tax on Internet retailers |url=http://www.publicopiniononline.com/ci_19953052?source=most_viewed |newspaper=Public Opinion |date=13 February |accessdate=23 February 2012}}</ref> | In December 2011 Pennsylvania changed its rules regarding what constitutes a physical nexus within the state to require more businesses to collect and remit sales tax.{{citation needed|date=October 2014}} Pennsylvania has also added a line on its 2011 income tax form for taxpayers to report online purchases and pay use tax.<ref name="PO"/> In February 2012 the Pennsylvania state government predicted that it would collect an additional $40 million in sales tax from internet retailers.<ref name="PO"/> Out-of-state online retailers, such as Amazon.com, were granted a one-time reprieve until September 2012 after which they could face enforcement action.<ref name="PO"/> The Alliance for Main Street Fairness praised all of these actions.<ref name="PO">{{cite news |title=Pa. expects $40 million from tax on Internet retailers |url=http://www.publicopiniononline.com/ci_19953052?source=most_viewed |newspaper=Public Opinion |date=13 February 2012|accessdate=23 February 2012 |archive-url=https://archive.today/20130201015548/http://www.publicopiniononline.com/ci_19953052?source=most_viewed |archive-date=2013-02-01 |url-status=dead }}</ref> | ||
| ===South Carolina=== | |||
| In May 2011, in response to Amazon agreeing to notify South Carolina customers by email that sales tax was owed on their purchases but that shoppers would still be responsible for paying the tax by themselves,<ref>{{cite news |title=SC Senate Strikes Compromise To Get Amazon Back |author=Lisa Miller |url=http://www.istockanalyst.com/business/news/5190107/editorial-a-reversal-on-amazon |newspaper=WFAE |date=30 May 2011 |accessdate=31 May 2011}}</ref>{{dead|date=October 2014}} the Alliance called the vote “just one step in the process," but "unfortunate that the majority of the House favors special deals for one prospective retailer at the expense of state’s existing employers and their 375,000 employees."<ref>{{cite press release |title=Main Street Responds To House Vote Battle For Brick-And-Mortar Business Continues |url=http://standwithmainstreet.com/resources/main-street-responds-house-vote |publisher=Alliance for Main Street Fairness |date=18 May 2011 |accessdate=2011-06-02}}</ref>{{dead|date=October 2014}} | |||
| The Alliance expressed disapproval of the ] Senate's approval of this arrangement and called on Governor ] to veto the legislation stating that, “this special exemption only passed after backroom deals and last-minute promises were made by Amazon officials – something which should disappoint everyone interested in transparency and good government."<ref>{{cite press release |title=Main Street Responds To South Carolina Senate Vote |url=http://standwithmainstreet.com/resources/main-street-responds-south-carolina-senate-vote |publisher=Alliance for Main Street Fairness |date=27 May 2011 |accessdate=2011-06-02}}</ref>{{dead|date=October 2014}} | |||
| ===Tennessee=== | ===Tennessee=== | ||
| Line 44: | Line 35: | ||
| In March 2011 the Alliance ran advertisements opposing the efforts of Tennessee officials, including Gov. ], to finalize an agreement with ] that would exempt the company from collecting sales taxes in exchange for opening two distribution centers in the state. “Why would the state let Amazon get away with not collecting and paying the biggest source of revenue in Tennessee: its sales tax?” one ad said.<ref name="Group">{{cite news |title=Group pushes back on Amazon tax deal|url=http://www.bizjournals.com/nashville/morning_call/2011/03/groups-pushes-back-on-amazon-tax-deal.html |newspaper=Nashville Business Journal |date=24 March 2011 |accessdate=31 March 2011}}</ref> | In March 2011 the Alliance ran advertisements opposing the efforts of Tennessee officials, including Gov. ], to finalize an agreement with ] that would exempt the company from collecting sales taxes in exchange for opening two distribution centers in the state. “Why would the state let Amazon get away with not collecting and paying the biggest source of revenue in Tennessee: its sales tax?” one ad said.<ref name="Group">{{cite news |title=Group pushes back on Amazon tax deal|url=http://www.bizjournals.com/nashville/morning_call/2011/03/groups-pushes-back-on-amazon-tax-deal.html |newspaper=Nashville Business Journal |date=24 March 2011 |accessdate=31 March 2011}}</ref> | ||
| ⚫ | In June 2011, state attorney general Roy Cooper affirmed the constitutionality of a proposed bill in the state legislature that building distribution centers in a state creates a physical presence or nexus sufficient to force retailers like Amazon to collect sales tax on goods it ships to Tennessee residents.<ref name = TN/> The Alliance for Main Street Fairness called the attorney general’s opinion “encouraging news for the thousands of Tennessee small business owners who don’t want our elected officials to give Amazon special treatment.”<ref name = TN>{{cite news |title=Attorney General: State can force Amazon on taxes |author=Mike Pare |url=http://timesfreepress.com/news/2011/jun/29/attorney-general-state-can-force-amazon-taxes/ |newspaper=Times Free Press |date=29 June 2011 |accessdate=7 July 2011}}</ref> | ||
| In May 2011 the Alliance responded to testimony given to the state Senate Finance Committee by Amazon officials regarding their arrangement with the Department of Revenue for an exemption from collecting Tennessee sales taxes saying that “Secret, backroom deals would hurt Main Street jobs and give an out-of-state company a competitive advantage over mom-and-pop shops across our state.”<ref>{{cite press release |title=What Is Amazon Trying To Hide? Online Retailer’s Testimony Brings More Questions Than Answers |url=http://standwithmainstreet.com/resources/what-amazon-trying-hide |publisher=Alliance for Main Street Fairness |date=19 May 2011 |accessdate=2011-06-02}}</ref>{{dead|date=October 2014}} | |||
| ⚫ | In June 2011, state attorney general Roy Cooper affirmed the constitutionality of a proposed bill in the state legislature that building distribution centers in a state creates a physical presence or nexus sufficient to force retailers like Amazon to collect sales tax on goods it ships to Tennessee residents.<ref name = TN/> The Alliance for Main Street Fairness called the attorney general’s opinion “encouraging news for the thousands of Tennessee small business owners who don’t want our elected officials to give Amazon special treatment.”<ref name = TN>{{cite news |title=Attorney General: State can force Amazon on taxes |author= |
||
| ===Texas=== | |||
| In May 2011 despite Governor ]'s veto of House Bill 2403, which would have taxed online sales in the same manner as sales made by traditional retailers. the Alliance for Main Street Fairness expressed confidence that bill would eventually pass in some form.<ref name="Texas"/><ref name="Texas">{{cite press release |title=Despite Veto, Main Street Businesses Confident E-Fairness Language Will Be Passed In Fiscal Matters Bill During Special Session |url=http://standwithmainstreet.com/resources/despite-veto-main-street-businesses-confident-e-fairness-language-will-be-passed-fiscal-ma |publisher=Alliance for Main Street Fairness |date=31 May 2011 |accessdate=2011-06-02}}</ref> | |||
| State Senators Duncan and Shapiro amended Senate Bill 1811, a fiscal bill intended to fund education and balance the state budget, to insert the same language and the Alliance, calling for its passage, cited a study by Angelos Angelou that estimated that Texas loses $774 million in tax revenue due to the failure of online retailers to collect sales tax and full compliance with sales and use tax laws would create 13,000 jobs in the state.<ref name="Texas"/> | |||
| ===Virginia=== | ===Virginia=== | ||
| In January 2012 the Alliance announced its support for legislation introduced by State Senator Frank Wagner that would require companies with a distribution center, warehouse, fulfillment center, office, or other such location in the Commonwealth of Virginia to collect and remit sales tax.<ref>{{cite news |title=Virginia legislation targets Amazon.com |newspaper=WDBJ7.com |date=30 January 2012 |
In January 2012 the Alliance announced its support for legislation introduced by State Senator Frank Wagner that would require companies with a distribution center, warehouse, fulfillment center, office, or other such location in the Commonwealth of Virginia to collect and remit sales tax.<ref>{{cite news |title=Virginia legislation targets Amazon.com |newspaper=WDBJ7.com |date=30 January 2012 }}</ref> | ||
| In January 2012 Virginia and Amazon.com reached an agreement regarding the collection of sales tax on purchases made by Virginia residents. Under the agreement Amazon will begin collecting sales tax on purchases made by Virginia residents on 1 September 2013. Amazon will begin collecting sales tax ten months after opening distribution centers in Chesterfield and Dinwiddle counties.<ref name="VA">{{cite news |title=Amazon.com will start collecting sales tax in Virginia |author=Web staff |newspaper=WTKR.com |date=22 February 2012 |
In January 2012 Virginia and Amazon.com reached an agreement regarding the collection of sales tax on purchases made by Virginia residents. Under the agreement Amazon will begin collecting sales tax on purchases made by Virginia residents on 1 September 2013. Amazon will begin collecting sales tax ten months after opening distribution centers in Chesterfield and Dinwiddle counties.<ref name="VA">{{cite news |title=Amazon.com will start collecting sales tax in Virginia |author=Web staff |newspaper=WTKR.com |date=22 February 2012 }}</ref> | ||
| ==Membership== | ==Membership== | ||
| Alliance for Main Street members include large retailers such as |
Alliance for Main Street members include large retailers such as ], ], ], ], ], and ] but also has thousands of small-business members.<ref name="geekwire"></ref><ref>{{cite news |title=Retailers put new pressure on Amazon.com over sales taxes |author=Mark Albright |url=http://www.tampabay.com/news/business/retail/retailers-put-new-pressure-on-amazoncom-over-sales-taxes/1160264 |newspaper=St. Petersburg Times |date=29 March 2011 |accessdate=31 March 2011 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20110401035325/http://www.tampabay.com/news/business/retail/retailers-put-new-pressure-on-amazoncom-over-sales-taxes/1160264 |archive-date=1 April 2011 |url-status=dead }}</ref> AMSF has a Small Business Advisory Board with representatives from small retailers across the country.<ref name="Board">{{cite news |date=1 August 2013 |title=Level the playing field for all business |url=http://www.jsonline.com/news/opinion/level-the-playing-field-for-all-business-b9966709z1-217984001.html?ipad=y |newspaper=Journal Sentinel |location=Milwaukee, Wisconsin |access-date=4 February 2015}}</ref> | ||
| ==See also== | ==See also== | ||
| Line 72: | Line 55: | ||
| == References == | == References == | ||
| {{Reflist}} | {{Reflist}} | ||
| == External links == | |||
| * | |||
| {{DEFAULTSORT:Alliance For Main Street Fairness}} | {{DEFAULTSORT:Alliance For Main Street Fairness}} | ||
| ] | |||
| ] | ] | ||
| ] | |||
| ] | |||
Latest revision as of 15:08, 29 June 2024
The Alliance for Main Street Fairness is an advocacy group based in the United States of America dedicated to ending what it sees as unfair tax advantages for online-only retailers with respect to the collection of sales taxes. The group supports the Marketplace Fairness Act (S.1832;112th Congress). Members include retailers such as Wal-Mart, Target, Best Buy, Home Depot, Sears, and thousands of small retailers.
Issues
Alibaba
The Alliance for Main Street Fairness purchased radio and television ads in December 2014 calling for Congress to end what the group called "special tax treatment" for Alibaba and other e-commerce sites. This was one of the largest public relations campaigns ever conduct against a Chinese company in the United States.
Amazon
AMSF criticized Amazon's Price Check app and Price Check Day promotion. The AMSF stated, "This app is simply another ploy by Amazon to exploit the loophole that allows them to evade collecting state sales taxes." AMSF also stated, "no retailer can compete with the special treatment" Amazon receives by not being required to collect sales taxes.
Borders Books
Main article: Borders BooksIn a statement on the bankruptcy and liquidation of Borders Books AMSF wrote, "Special treatment for Amazon.com is decimating job providers like Borders and countless small businesses across the country. It is simply not fair that one business is able to operate with a government-sanctioned advantage that allows it to undercut its competitors forcing lost jobs and business closures. Lawmakers need to level the playing field and end the special deal that gives Amazon a competitive advantage over Main Street.”
Marketplace Fairness Act
Main article: Marketplace Fairness ActAfter eBay implicitly endorsed an exemption for businesses with $30 million or less in annual sales, AMSF attacked the online auctioneer. saying that it was only trying to protect the largest firms selling from its site.
AMSF released a video in late 2014 in support of the Marketplace Fairness Act. The video showcased testimonials from conservative groups and intellectuals supporting "e-fairness." The video includes a brief statement from economist Art Laffer. Laffer released a study touting the benefits of treating online and offline commerce equally. He said that the Marketplace Fairness Act would give states the ability to reduce other taxes.
AMSF criticized Senator Ted Cruz in a BuzzFeed post for his opposition to the Marketplace Fairness Act. AMSF claimed that Cruz had "flip-flopped" on his conservative principles by supporting special tax treatment for online retailers. “While Ted Cruz gallivants across the country giving speeches on the American dream,” the post reads, “he denies it to the local small business owners back home.” In its post AMSF also stated, "Ted Cruz works to tilt the free market in favor of big online retailers LIKE ALIBABA..."
State legislation
Pennsylvania
In May 2011 the Alliance announced its intention to hand deliver a petition to each state legislator in order to encourage them to support legislation mandating sales taxes for online retailers. In June 2011 the Alliance launched an ad campaign in Pennsylvania featuring television, radio, and newspaper ads across the state.
In December 2011 Pennsylvania changed its rules regarding what constitutes a physical nexus within the state to require more businesses to collect and remit sales tax. Pennsylvania has also added a line on its 2011 income tax form for taxpayers to report online purchases and pay use tax. In February 2012 the Pennsylvania state government predicted that it would collect an additional $40 million in sales tax from internet retailers. Out-of-state online retailers, such as Amazon.com, were granted a one-time reprieve until September 2012 after which they could face enforcement action. The Alliance for Main Street Fairness praised all of these actions.
Tennessee
In March 2011 the Alliance ran advertisements opposing the efforts of Tennessee officials, including Gov. Bill Haslam, to finalize an agreement with Amazon.com that would exempt the company from collecting sales taxes in exchange for opening two distribution centers in the state. “Why would the state let Amazon get away with not collecting and paying the biggest source of revenue in Tennessee: its sales tax?” one ad said.
In June 2011, state attorney general Roy Cooper affirmed the constitutionality of a proposed bill in the state legislature that building distribution centers in a state creates a physical presence or nexus sufficient to force retailers like Amazon to collect sales tax on goods it ships to Tennessee residents. The Alliance for Main Street Fairness called the attorney general’s opinion “encouraging news for the thousands of Tennessee small business owners who don’t want our elected officials to give Amazon special treatment.”
Virginia
In January 2012 the Alliance announced its support for legislation introduced by State Senator Frank Wagner that would require companies with a distribution center, warehouse, fulfillment center, office, or other such location in the Commonwealth of Virginia to collect and remit sales tax.
In January 2012 Virginia and Amazon.com reached an agreement regarding the collection of sales tax on purchases made by Virginia residents. Under the agreement Amazon will begin collecting sales tax on purchases made by Virginia residents on 1 September 2013. Amazon will begin collecting sales tax ten months after opening distribution centers in Chesterfield and Dinwiddle counties.
Membership
Alliance for Main Street members include large retailers such as AutoZone, Best Buy, Home Depot, Sears, Target, and Wal-Mart but also has thousands of small-business members. AMSF has a Small Business Advisory Board with representatives from small retailers across the country.
See also
- Streamlined Sales Tax Project
- Quill Corp. v. North Dakota
- National Bellas Hess v. Illinois
- Sales taxes in the United States
- Amazon tax
References
- Chan, Edwin (1 December 2014). "U.S. retailers warn of Chinese giant Alibaba's impact in U.S." Reuters. Retrieved 1 June 2018.
- Chang, Andrea (7 December 2011). "Retail groups lash out after Amazon announces Price Check app promotion". Los Angeles Times. Los Angeles, California. Retrieved 1 February 2015.
- Boog, Jason (19 July 2011). "Amazon Advantage Blamed in Borders Liquidation". Galley Cat, Media Bistro. Archived from the original on 9 December 2014. Retrieved 9 December 2014.
- "Online Sales Cost Cities And Counties Billions In Taxes, Mayors Say". National Public Radio. Washington, DC. 6 June 2013. Retrieved 30 January 2015.
- O'Bannon, Isaac M. (18 November 2014). "Business Group Urges GOP to Reconsider Marketplace Fairness Act". CPA Practice Advisor. Retrieved 4 February 2015.
- Railey, Kimberly (3 December 2014). "U.S. retailers attack Ted Cruz as friend of China's Alibaba". The Dallas Morning News. Dallas, Texas. Retrieved 1 February 2015.
- "Hundreds Of Pennsylvania Businesses Simply Want Fairness" (Press release). Alliance for Main Street Fairness. 24 May 2011. Archived from the original on August 27, 2011. Retrieved 2011-06-01.
- BRENT BURKEY (1 June 2011). "Alliance launches Pa. ad campaign for online sales tax". Central Penn Business Journal. Retrieved 2 June 2011.
- ^ "Pa. expects $40 million from tax on Internet retailers". Public Opinion. 13 February 2012. Archived from the original on 2013-02-01. Retrieved 23 February 2012.
- "Group pushes back on Amazon tax deal". Nashville Business Journal. 24 March 2011. Retrieved 31 March 2011.
- ^ Mike Pare (29 June 2011). "Attorney General: State can force Amazon on taxes". Times Free Press. Retrieved 7 July 2011.
- "Virginia legislation targets Amazon.com". WDBJ7.com. 30 January 2012.
- Web staff (22 February 2012). "Amazon.com will start collecting sales tax in Virginia". WTKR.com.
- http://www.geekwire.com/2011/guide-amazon-losing-tax-battle
- Mark Albright (29 March 2011). "Retailers put new pressure on Amazon.com over sales taxes". St. Petersburg Times. Archived from the original on 1 April 2011. Retrieved 31 March 2011.
- "Level the playing field for all business". Journal Sentinel. Milwaukee, Wisconsin. 1 August 2013. Retrieved 4 February 2015.