New York wants sales tax.

[electricgreen]

I don't shop online because it's cheaper..it's to find things I can't just buy in a store.

That said...99% of NY'ers are probably completely unaware of this moronic law, so fighting this is up to the big companies with the big $$. And I really, truly hope they win. Someone somewhere needs to kick NY's you-know-what for killing off viable businesses with their needless greed. Of course, they will find another way to suck us dry...

[Pfoinkle]

NYers were already "supposed" being paying the tax on purchases -- but it was up to the NY resident to keep records and pay them.

Apparently, NY lawmakers didn't think that was working out so well.

[electricgreen]

Originally posted by Pfoinkle:
NYers were already "supposed" being paying the tax on purchases -- but it was up to the NY resident to keep records and pay them.

Apparently, NY lawmakers didn't think that was working out so well.

Yeah, I know...I live in the state of taxation..err..Ny...They give free Easy Passes to the people raising the tolls, but they can't stand to lose money from people not reporting sales tax on their income tax forms..Ugh...I hate this state's politics...

[Sydneybean]

Unless I missed it, the answer to the question whether it affects NY shopkeepers hasn't been answered?

[Sag]

You better believe that other states are watching NY and will follow suit if there is no over-turn of the current legislation. In fact, TN lawmakers have been discussing the NY situation with dollar signs in their eyes. There has to be a ground-swell of protest to any sponsored legislation and lobbyists hired to combat passage, but that takes tons of money and an organized effort. I've read about Amazon stepping forward in the fight ... but honestly, I was hoping that other large corporate entities would join the battle. I've not seen that happen yet.

[Teesed]

I'm going to a local meeting with Steve Cohen and will bring this up. It's part of our livelihood and as it looks, it won't be a "well, just pay it" situation. It will be a "we aren't able to affiliate at all any longer since the current viable answer from affiliate programs is to no longer have them in these states."

[Tanith]

here has to be a ground-swell of protest to any sponsored legislation and lobbyists hired to combat passage, but that takes tons of money and an organized effort.

THAT is the key. The people can do a lot if they speak up and shout together. The legislation became law because most of us don't pay attention and don't want to get involved in politics. Ultimately, though, the people writing the law and passing the law are beholden to those who vote - but only if the voters don't act like sheep.

[Pfoinkle]

Overstock has joined the legal battle.

Sydneybean, you have't missed it. The question about NY SKs has not been answered.

[Sydneybean]

Originally posted by Pfoinkle:

Sydneybean, you have't missed it. The question about NY SKs has not been answered.

I would think they would have mentioned NY shopkeepers in the post if it included them but you never know. Those that it affects should be sent an email as a lot of people don't read these boards.

[Sag]

That's great news Pfoinkle, let's hope others follow their lead.

Jim, I've talked with Dewayne Bunch and Eric Watson as they both live here in Cleveland. Also, Steve Bivens & Associates are a big lobbyist firm and Steve is my best friend as we served on a board together for 8 years. He's keeping an eye on the situation too but he warned me that due to the fiscal situation - legislators are looking for new avenues of revenue. I'll let you know if I hear any more on it and maybe you can contact Memphis and Shelby County reps and bend their ears a bit.

[Sag]

Tanith/Diane is so right! We elect them to represent us but it is our responsibility to stand and be counted when legislation like this is brought to the floor.

[Teesed]

I'll definitely do that. I think it's key to put this on a grass roots voter level as well. Many of them will see this as "we'll get the revenue from those out of state big companies like Amazon now." and won't see how it's going to affect their constituents back home like you and me.

[Sag]

I agree, grass roots level. I've got some friends in the media and they can help us get some visibility across the state if need be. Remember the last bill I defeated on the hill and used CP products to do it? Oh mercy, I had fun and a lot of help with great slogans from shopkeepers too!

[kerbev]

There hands were not tied. They could have collected the tax and supported NY affiliates, in hopes for it to be overturned.

As far as I can see, they will have to collect the taxes anyway as NY shopkeepers are certainly a "NY presence". Would their next step be to terminate NY shopkeepers? That would be costly, and since if this sticks it will spread to other states.

I think cafepress made a poor choice in this situation.

[electricgreen]

Originally posted by kerbev:
As far as I can see, they will have to collect the taxes anyway as NY shopkeepers are certainly a "NY presence". Would their next step be to terminate NY shopkeepers? That would be costly, and since if this sticks it will spread to other states.

That was my thoughts exactly. But, then I thought about it-we aren't really "agents" (affliates) as SK's. We are selling our own designs, they are just a fulfilment company we contract with. It's complex for sure, but I think that's the fine line that kept them from cutting off NY SK's or biting the bullet and collecting the tax.

[Teesed]

There hands were not tied.

True. Poor choice of words. I'm just saying if I'm a business and I'm looking at the cost of collecting taxes vs the income rec'd from NY affiliates vs. the legal murkiness and challenges that are still up in the air, I would have a tough time making this decision.

It could be that the evil CafePress just said "the easy road is to just throw the NY affiliates down the chute. We don't need them. In fact, let them eat cake and buy a t-shirt about it."

Or it could be that the pragmatic CafePress said "we could spend hundreds of thousands of dollars to enact a tax on NY sales that come from a NY-based affiliate and explain that to a shopkeeper that has a shopping cart with one of those items and 3 non-affiliate item, then have it all be a waste if Overstock/Amazon/whoever's lawsuit is successful, so let's drop the NY affiliates for now and make a decision once we know where everything stands."

Or it could be the lazy CafePress that says "we have too much to do to make this change. (pass me a tastycake, willya?) Can we just drop the NY affiliates?"

Or it could be the business-savvy CafePress that says "NY affiliates bring us $x in profit (not sales - keep in mind CP's profit is probably much smaller than some sk's and affiliate's profits). We can't justify $x * 50 in non-budgeted expense to make that work."

It could also be a (don't have an adjective here) CafePress that said "We're working on a fix, but it won't be in place for three months. The only thing we can do is drop the NY affiliates until we have the fix in place, then we can reinstate them."

Now, it would be nice if it was a CafePress that said "All of that be damned! We love our NY affiliates and if it's a bad business decision, we'll still do it for good pr and loyalty. In fact, it's a good business decision because we may have to do this for other states down the line and if we're prepared to make it work, affiliates from other companies that can't do it will be flocking to us! Onward and upward!"

My point is that we really don't know what's going on with the decision other than that NY affiliates have been dropped. And experience tells us that CP's not going to show their cards. And experience tells us that we're going to speculate because of that. I'd just suggest that the speculation *can* go both ways.


And the shopkeeper part is still in question with regards to whether they would be considered to be a "nexus". Perhaps if a NY shopkeeper is creating the links on their site, it's the same as an affiliate, but if they are on the cafepress.com domain, then CP is making those links - who knows?

Believe me, this is a big issue for me. I've shifted my CP strategy from shopkeeper to affiliate and I've been quite successful. CP and CJ basically created our family plan to be able to "retire" to the great state of Texas in 5 yrs or so, and this seriously threatens that plan.

[sodashirts]

Can someone please try to explain to me what this law actually is doing? I am having a hard time understanding why we can't affiliate, but we can still have a cafepress store?

I live in NY, but I am moving to Texas, will I beable to rejoin the affiliate program once I live there?

Thanks

[BurnTees@CPV]

this is bad.

just started looking at digg and reddit to see if there are any articles making a splash...so far i don't see anything which says to me that this issue hasn't caught on anywhere yet.

[Teesed]

I live in NY, but I am moving to Texas, will I beable to rejoin the affiliate program once I live there?

Unless Texas has decided that the NY thing is a good idea and passes the same law and CP has the same policy in place at that time.

Someone please correct me, but from my understanding, what NY has done is shift the burden of collecting sales taxes. Previously, the NY resident was supposed to report their online sales and pay the tax to the state (like many states have). NY realized that wasn't working, so they've now put the burden of collecting the tax on the company. But they only have jurisdiction over companies or sellers in NY or that have a "nexus" in NY. That generally means a physical presence. NY has now basically said that an affiliate living in NY is a "seller" in NY, since they live there.

The argument about shopkeepers is like this in my opinion: You aren't selling. You are commissioning your designs to CafePress. CafePress is the seller, and they don't have a nexus in NY (other than affiliates, which are physical presences).

I could be totally off base there, but that's how I understand it.


(Edit: I just recalled that Linkin did a link and summary about this in the original post of this thread as well)

[garyoa1]

That's what it seems to boil down to to me as well Teesed. But it could very well be that CP is just jumping on the bandwagon of hundreds of other companies doing the same thing. Not so much the money thing but to fight back. If this does hold up in court, all states will likely get on board and it's pretty much a death knell for on line companies. It could really cut into their bottom line if every state taxes. Especially on big ticket items where the tax is a big factor in the final price of the product.

As far as SK vs aff... if the law holds, it may just come down to the SK's will be in the same boat if they can get away with an aff being a presence. The way it stands now, they're putting their own residents out of work in an economy that really sucks. It could very well spread to the SK in time.

[DesignsOutOfMind]

Mayyyyybeeeeee...Cafepress chose the customers who reside in NY over the affiliates.

I know Overstock did the same thing last week, and they put their customers in NY first by not forcing them to pay the sales tax.

http://www.reuters.com/article/press...08+PRN20080515

And by the way...Overstock did join Amazon in the lawsuit. So they are trying to make a change

http://news.cnet.com/8301-10784_3-9956576-7.html

hugs
Susan

[Teesed]

I'd love to see CP join that.

That's what it seems to boil down to to me as well Teesed. But it could very well be that CP is just jumping on the bandwagon of hundreds of other companies doing the same thing. Not so much the money thing but to fight back. If this does hold up in court, all states will likely get on board and it's pretty much a death knell for on line companies. It could really cut into their bottom line if every state taxes. Especially on big ticket items where the tax is a big factor in the final price of the product.

That is another way of looking at it. If every company "hopped to" and started taxing for NY, it would be a HUGE success for NY and the NY lawmakers. The domino effect to other states would be so fast you would miss it. I don't know if it's part of strategy or what, but I hope it gets resolved in our favor soon.

[garyoa1]

Which is why, I think, Amazon and others are fighting it. But if a company sells widgets and they're in... say Jersey with a salesman living and selling widgets in NY... they'd have to fire him or the company would have to pay taxes in NY on anything they shipped there. It's kind of what we fought for in 1776. Deja vu all over again. Right now, companies are firing the sales people (affs). But if upheld, it will trickle down to that widget salesman. Which would mean SK's as well.

[BabelFish]

Well guys: it was a pleasure selling your fantastic designs on my site! I know I've made many of you money since I've made thousands of affiliate sales. I'm currently in the process of shutting down a good chunk of my site to get ready for the July 1st cutoff. I can definitely kiss my traffic goodbye once Google and other search engines penalize me for empty/missing webpages. Looks like it's time to start over yet again.
If this idiotic tax law gets overturned I will gladly reinstate your designs! Or if I get the hell out of NY which has crossed my mind before this stupidity cropped up.

Pray that this doesn't spill over to other states or countries.

[sodashirts]

The argument about shopkeepers is like this in my opinion: You aren't selling. You are commissioning your designs to CafePress. CafePress is the seller, and they don't have a nexus in NY (other than affiliates, which are physical presences).

But isn't that the same thing? What is the difference between me having a site selling my t-shirts, than having a site that sells someone elses t-shirts? I just don't get it. And does this mean I will not be able to participate in any affiliate programs anymore? What about google adsense, and other sites?

I have been trying to get out of NY for months. I can't wait to leave.