Word is out... if you are a CA resident and have an Amazon associateship, you should be seeing an email very soon canceling said account. Amazon just sent out a press release,
http://www.boingboing.net/2011/06/29/am … socia.html
There's a SMALL chance the law can still be stopped -- Jerry Brown hasn't signed it yet (but has indicated he will). So if you're in CA and want to keep your Amazon revenue, email the governor now.
Yes, I received my notice as well! Looks like we all did in California at the same time! Since it doesn't take affect for a couple of months, they may be counting on all of us taking a stand against it!? Interesting times! Blessings, Earth Angel!
Not a surprise.
It just goes to show that State and Federal government hasn't a clue on how to actually fix the entire mess that they created through poor government policies and ineffectively operation.
So, now they claim that by taxing everyone under the sun is going to fix the problem and the brand name companies are going to do whatever they can to protect their profits and generate revenue.
It continues to get worse, regardless of what government does, and still too many people are failing to see it. Not a good day in the life of being a citizen.
The tax laws didn't change. They just stepped up enforcement.
This is a new one
" a potential new law that may be signed by Governor Brown compels us to terminate this program for California-based participants."
I think they are being a little devious, because in all these states the fundamental problem is that Amazon does not collect state sales tax.
States sales taxes were always intended to apply to anyone buying a product in that state to use in that state. The only reason the law did not specify online sales is that the web didn't exist back then.
No, psych - the reason the law did not specify any out of state sales is that it violates federal laws. States cannot interfere in interstate commerce.
States are simply finding a loophole in those federal laws now by maintaining that affiliates such as hubbers are a part of Amazon. In that manner Amazon now has a physical presence in the state and it is no longer strictly interstate purchasing. It is no more and no less than an end run around the intent of the federal laws.
I just got my notice. If the law is enacted, and that is probable, we Californians have about three months to earn from Amazon Associates. Very sad.
The PMA says the budget must be signed by July 1 and will go into effective immediately:
http://performancemarketingassociation. … mmediately
Yeah this sucks. I just got my notice too. Big guys squeezing every penny they can out of the little guy.
Calif. is broke and looking to tax everything you do- tax upon tax upon tax. And it's going to get worse.
I was just about to post a similar thread, but saw yours first, relache.
I received an e-mail. No particular harm to me, anyway, as I have yet to have a single result from my Amazon referrals.
That aside, it still sucks, because I know there are many who do realize a fair chunk of change from this source, and if they live here in CA, they are "S.O.L."
As the law used to read, (and so far, still does), sales taxes are due only if the retailer has a physical STORE within the state (as applies to CA). Amazon does not have any physical presence here in CA. They have a warehouse in TX. That is still not a STORE, becuase they are not physically opening the warehouse doors to walk-in traffic. It is a storage facility and does not fall under the definition of a store.
It is time for a call to arms and demand our legislators go back to school and learn the definitions of honor, respect and integrity, with extra emphasis on the psychology of greed (of which they are all guilty).
It is neither the consumer's nor the retailer's fault that the government mismangages and wastes the tax monies they do collect, with the biggest waste being spent as an obscene amount on thier own salaries! And then they have the gall to accuse every other agency of greed, and make cuts to vital services and education as "punishment."
WHAT'S WRONG WITH THAT PICTURE???!!
I believe this attempt at a new law will face serious court challenges, and I'm not so sure it will win.
"psychology of greed" - I like that. It shoudl be a new degree in schools that would put specialists in police and FBI etc to help prevent exactly this corperate nonsense. Good call.
I did post a thread and then saw this one...but am very glad to see it being addressed regardless.
Maryland is proposing a similar law too! and using the same (il)logic as Ca.
HubPages is based in California. Where does it leave them?
I'm not sure it affects HP staff so much. . . .they've got the rest of the world with authors who can sell amazon products.
I am sure that they would lose something - but the new ad program probably would compensate for that, or has boosted them in income already. A lot of us are regaining our lost Google traffic now, and so adsense revenues are surely getting closer to what they were pre panda.
Of course I'm speculating a lot right here.
Just goes to show you where Amazon's interests are...and it ain't California!
How will Hubpages be dealing with this?
I suggest that as a company Hubpages contacts the relevant people in their state government to object to this.
I also suggest that anybody who uses affiliate programs in California contacts tehir local government representative and also outlines how this will be affecting you.
Remember, this is a new legislation that is being pushed by companies such as Walmart, best Buy and Target.
They are hiding behind the mainstreet fairness alliance and small businesses, and are telling local governement that they are suffering because they cannot compete with sales tax free prices.
Remember though that the Amazon affiliates that sell a lot of products, generally get a larger commission than the local sales tax, so Amazon are at a disadvantage.
You might also want to point out that associates in California are not competing locally, but nationally, and globaly, you are litterally bringing in money from other states and countries, you are spending that money at local businesses, you are infact helping to stimulate the economy by bringing money in to teh state.
I don't believe yet another country has passed this godawful law though.
Maybe I'm not looking at this right, but if our contracts are canceled, we will not be earning anything from them, so the state won't be getting any tax from our incomes. And Amazon will be way down on advertising and sales that come through affiliates. Who wins?
Also if Californians buy through Amazon directly, not through an affiliate, will Amazon add CA sales tax? Or will they just not sell to us?
California cannot force Amazon to collect sales tax unless they have a physical presence in the state. We affiliates are now being defined as being that presence, but if Amazon cancels those affiliates they will not have the required presence and thus will not collect the tax.
They will still happily sell to californians, just without the hassle of keeping track of hundreds of different and constantly changing sales tax laws, collecting and forwarding the monies.
It is an obvious loss for the states unless they hope that enough states will enact similar legislation that Amazon (and others like them) will capitulate and collect taxes. Of course if that happens Amazon will simply go offshore, relieving them of any requirement to pay any tax at all.
Well, wilderness, IMO, the affiliates are not a 'presence' in the usual sense of the word; i.e., they are not a 'store.' Besides which, sales tax is not normally due on sales out-of-state, so if someone clicks on an affiliate link and buys that product, but they don't live in CA, then no taxes should be due. Period.
Sales taxes are due to CA when a person physically present in this state makes a purchase from a physical store they visited in person. Mail orders don't count. So, a person visiting here from, say, Oregon, must pay the sales tax on any items purchased from stores while they are here. They currenty do not, and should not, owe taxes because of an online purchase from an affiliate program that is by no definition whatsoever, a physical store.
*** stepping down from soapbox ***
In Mass, which is where I live, even if I buy something from out of state, I am to put it on my tax forms, so I can be taxed on it.
Just a thought.
Pfft... right. as if.... but...I once traveled in Canada, and received a form to fill out with a copy of my purchase receipts to get a REFUND of their general sales tax becasue I was not a Canadian...
The US is not that magnanimous, and CA wants to go the opposite direction. A pox on them!
Of course it is not a presence. This is merely legislators finding a loophole in the laws and making an end run around their intent.
However, I think you are mistaken about purchasing online. Every time I have purchased by mail or internet and live in the same state as the company selling the product, tax is due and collected. If I buy from the internet Sears store, for instance, I owe sales tax and pay it because there is a Sears store just down the road.
The wonderful, caring politicians of California have now declared that your home is an Amazon brick and mortar store if you are an affiliate. Although the experience of other states trying this same ridiculous stunt all show 0 or negative additional income they seem sure that it will make their state rich beyond wildest dreams. Smarter people that we are, no doubt.
The "who wins" part is easy.
Least of all, Californians.
Reminds me of the Postal Service's attempt back in the day to get the Government to impose a tax on every email sent to "make up" for money they were "entitled to."
Funny how we've gone from a nation with zero income tax to one with upper bounds in the 40's, plus corporate taxes, plus capital gains taxes, plus property taxes, plus state taxes, plus city taxes, plus county taxes, plus the largest profit on every gallon of gas going to the government plus, plus, plus...
... and we've begun to actually believe that anything that isn't taxed is something due the government that we're "getting away with."
Mercantilist myopia at it's best. Now if we could just triple the taxes on everything being imported in the name of "saving American jobs", we could really relearn every history lesson the hard way.
Can someone explain how the State of California's effort to get Amazon to charge sales tax results in the canceling of the Associates program? I don't see that they are related.
Tina - the law basically makes affiliate markets equivalent to a "store" within the state. Right now, online retailers such as Amazon and Overstock don't have to pay state sales tax because they don't have stores here. But if the law passes, they will have to pay sales tax. So what they will do here - as they've already done in other states that have passed these type of laws - is terminate all their affiliate relationships in the state to avoid the tax. No one wins. And it's not just Amazon. I've already gotten termination notices from Overstock, Zappos and a half dozen other merchants.
So it's not just Amazon, but any affiliate program?
Way to go Governor Brown...this guy is really ticking me off! Justifying a "no win" situation is pure politics and greed at its very best. Again, who is running the asylum? Oh yea,...big box stores and greedy politicians.
Yes, ALL online merchants, not just Amazon, will be affected, which is why many of them are already sending out termination notices. They could choose to pay the tax rather than terminate their affiliate relationships, but most won't.
And yeah, it is the big box stores that are running the asylum. Wal-Mart is one of the driving forces behind these bills across the country because they want to make it harder for the online merchants to compete. They don't want to lose business to Amazon and Overstock, etc., so they're trying to convince the states to tax the etailers. But the etailers just pass the pain along to their affiliates by canceling their affiliate programs.
It makes me wonder. Could Amazon simply let it be known that IF someone wished to sign up and post links to Amazon products out of the goodness of their heart that Amazon would make all efforts to report back what products sold, how many clicks, etc.
And that Amazon MIGHT, out of the goodness of their heart, provide a small token of their appreciation. No obligation to actually do so.
I'd continue posting links....
Any lawyers out there?
Right, K9Keystrokes! And then, to "balance the budget" they cut human services, fire, rescue, and education!! I say we hang all the legislators in effigy, then vote them ALL out next time around!
My son made this video for me. This is kind of how I feel right now
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wFnV3M1Y … r_embedded
But wont other states SOON adopt a very similar legislation? Requiring Taxes on ALL online purchases? And when they do, what will Amazon and other merchants (that don't want to pay) do then?
Go offshore, find a country that will let them do business without undue work and requirements.
And no guarantee that other states will follow suit. As their income actually decreases and their constituents become increasingly unhappy the politicians might actually wake up.
Weird. I am literally moving from California to Virginia now. Good timing I suspect.
I am still having problems understanding the problem. In the US, each state determines what is taxable and what isn't, is that right?
In the UK, on the other hand, everything is taxable, and is taxed. So Amazon.co.uk have complied and charge V.A.T on the goods which is then passed on to the consumer.
So, if they can do it in the UK, why can't they do it in the U.S.?
Am I missing something here?
They could, but the US has no sales (of VAT) tax. Rather, each state (and often cities and counties) impose their own sales taxes.
Each state is different on what they tax as well as how much the tax is. Add in that city residents may own a city sales tax of varying amounts and that taxes continually change according to the current political climate and it becomes very difficult to collect and submit the proper tax.
Amazon is not actually required to pay the tax, just collect it in all its varied forms and amounts and remit that sum to the state or city or county that levied it.
Thats right and, for instance, California has a basic sales tax rate, each of the 52 (I think) counties add on their little percentage, which varies from county to county, and each county may have cities that have another fraction of a percentage to the total state tax.
(All of this is in addition to a state income tax and a federal income tax, which has nothing to do with this particular issue.)
If you have a retail business in California you must have a state resale number and collect taxes on all of your retail transactions according to the tax rates in your particular county and municipality. If you go to another county (like when you go to a show or a fair) you have to collect taxes on any sales done there according to their local tax rate.
If Amazon were required to collect taxes through the sales of CA affiliates they would have to know which of the rates to apply to each sale based on affiliate locations, which would be a huge and complex undertaking.
After my initial reactions I'm now thinking straight.
I remember reading something a while ago from someone (and I think it was RyanKett but I'm not sure) who said they could collect Amazon money for people in states where it was banned, take a percentage and pay out.
First, can anyone find the article?
Second, is that legal?
Now, what if HubPages had an office in New York (almost anywhere except California) and they collected the Amazon money and then paid it out to individuals. Would that be possible?
Hubpages is in the same boat as everyone else is and they are on the chopping block for losing their Amazon affiliate account as well. If and when that happens they will probably eliminate the Amazon monetization modules all together since it would provide no value to them.
Getting other affiliates to replace Amazon would do no good either since the nexus laws affect all affiliates in the effected states.
Hubbers will just have to make due with their Adsense accounts, the HP ad program, and those of us that still have EPN accounts.
HubPages' office is in California.
Amazon splits 60/40 with HubPages and the Hubber.
If you DON'T live in California will Amazon ads be allowed on your hubs, or will you get 100%?
What about eBay affiliates? Shouldn't they pay sales tax? Will they still be allowed?
It's going to be an interesting few months in the online writing world.
Not 60/40 earnings! 60/40 time share is different!
Good point. It can cost HP nothing but a very minor amount of work and computer time to allow hubbers to continue.
It would be interesting to see HP advertise statewide how much income they have lost (will lose) and the taxes they would have paid on that income. Perhaps with the number of hubbers in that state that will also lose. I'd bet they could even provide a good estimate of how much those hubbers will lose as well.
Of course that is money that will no longer be coming into the state, and with the multiplier effect should provide a goodly number of jobs.
If HP loses its amazon affiliate account then they cannot receive their share of the profit from amazon referrals. If they are not earning a share there is no incentive for them to even allow amazon modules to continue. They cannot even donate their share.
Ebay does not follow the same affiliate model as amazon they have a quality click program. Ebay affiliates do not earn from referrals they earn from the clicks advertising the referrals which is similar to the way adsense works but without any adwords users bidding on advertising.
It seems like HP would be considered to be a 'just' another Amazon affiliate in California,-- though possibly one of the largest earning ones. If Amazon cancels contracts with CA affiliates, they presumably would not be able to offer it. ??
I don't see why not. HP "contracts" with us to provide a platform to write on in return for the ability to put their own Amazon code on 40% of the referrals. They also put our code on the other 60%.
HP won't have a valid code anymore, but could possible re-program to remove Amazon ads from their 40% share. Or leave them and put our code on them.
Well, then, there's the solution, right there! All Amazon has to do is change its model to a 'per clickthrough' instead of sales-based, and presto! Problem solved; income source for Hubbers preserved; nose thumbed at state!
Lets simplify this a bit, The big stores are saying that having an affiliate in the state, means that is a physical presence in the state.
Now, lets take a look at what an affiliate is, they are, in the simplest form a marketer.
Now, if Amazon contracted a californian marketing company to do a TV advertisement for them, should this represent a physical presence in the state of california?
lets make it even more related, if Amazon buys a banner advertisement on a site owned by someone in california, should Amazon be subject to Californian sales tax?
Affilliate marketers compete on a global scale, or at the very least a national sale. The good news is that states that are not subject to the Nexus tax laws will benefit greatly, because many current amazon affiliates will go out of business.
Just so you know, There are organizations fighting this law, the even better news is that states which have enacted this law are seeing 0 benefit. Even better, teh governemnt economies predicted this 0 benefit, most assuming it would lose the states money.
This is nothing more than corporate ruled America.
I just got my notice today from Amazon terminating the affiliate relationship with every California affiliate. Bummer.
I am learning more about this by seeing and reading other reports.
The state of California hopes to gain millions in sales tax by requiring companies such as Amazon who have affiliate marketers, to collect state sales tax.
I now think Amazon is doing the right thing by terminating affiliate contracts. They are probably the largest entity affected by this.
The state will collect NO sales tax from them if they have no contracted affiliates in the state. The law will not bring in the revenue expected. People who earn here will have less income and less to spend.
I think Amazon is fighting it the best way they can, by denying the state the extra taxes it hopes to gain from taxing interstate internet commerce.
I agree - I completely support Amazon's stance and hope the other large internet retailers do the same thing. Smaller retailers could not follow these laws if they wanted to - the cost would be prohibitive.
On the down side, I rather expect some kind of federal law to come through to make it legal to do for all states, without need for the end run and silly definitions.
Whereupon the US will lose another large number of jobs and income as these companies go overseas. An in-country location just isn't very advantageous for an internet seller. Freight will be cheaper, but when you add in the egregious taxes we apply to corporations, the extra work and higher wages it just doesn't add up.
-- THE BILL HAS NOW BEEN SIGNED AND WILL BE LAW BEGINNING JULY 1, 2011 --
I'm a lifelong California resident. When I got my email notice this morning, I felt like I had been punched hard in the gut, and I don't even earn much from Amazon. The principle alone is wrong, wrong, wrong and very likely unconstitutional, just as Amazon asserts.
California's governor, Jerry Brown has, in fact, now signed this bill, which will become the LAW effective in two days on July 1st. In addition to its impact on Amazon sales, this new law also increases DMV registration rates (rates which had just been relieved of a 5-year "temporary" extra tax!), charges residents in mountain communities an extra $150/year for "fire protection" (when those folks already pay higher property and insurance rates for the same reason), appropriates (read: steals) money from communities and redirects it to the state*, and more.
On the non-affiliate side, there are other questions. For example, all over the radio this afternoon, hosts on various shows were all saying that California residents who order something through Amazon from a retailer in, say, Idaho, would still have to pay the California tax on such a purchase. Now, I don't see how that could possibly be enforced--what; get the store in Idaho to collect the purchaser's locally-calculated taxes on behalf of California and ship it over to the Golden State? How likely is that to happen, and how does California hope to enforce that?!?
The whole thing makes me sick to my stomach, especially considering that this brilliant move on Mr. Brown's part affects not only Amazon, but any affiliate marketing. Fewer Californians will earn money, which means they will have less to spend in the local brick-n-mortar Mart stores, and will have less taxes to donate to our fair state. I'm thinking Mr. Brown didn't think his cunning plan through all the way, since that's a sizable amount of tax earnings he's tossing out of California. Maybe he decided our state didn't need so much money, after all?
So we Californians have just one more day, June 30th, to earn from our Amazon modules, and then: pfffffft -- out like a light. Anyone want to do any shopping today, feel free to stop by any of my hubs during my Going Out of Amazon Business Special Sale.
On the plus side, guess we Californians will no longer be in danger of getting cited for having too many Amazon links, eh?
I'd say more on the topic, but I need to go write a hub, earn 04 cents on Adsense clicks, and put that toward my increased DMV registration fees due next month.
* Reference: http://poway.patch.com/articles/jerry-b … chools-cut
I have earned about $100 in the pat year from Amazon, but I know what you mean.
However-- after reading and learning more, I think this is the only way they can fight back. See my post above.
No, California cannot collect sales tax on a purchase from Idaho through Amazon.
Not only will no Idaho business collect it for them, Amazon has no legal obligation to collect sales taxes for them either as of tomorrow night. Californians just lose all the way around, all in the glorious name of higher taxes that won't happen.
Nor do I believe that the big box stores (Wal-Mart, etc.) will gain business - few people shop online just to avoid sales tax. Freight alone generally eats up any lower price, plus you can't see the merchandise or handle it plus you have to wait for it.
HP will be fine and will get their attorneys and people together in order to continue to be an Amazon affiliate... I have no doubt about that as it would be silly not to...
For now if you are a California resident this is a horrible blow. I do enough Amazon business that I would consider moving or incorporating in another state if I was in a similar situation... (thankfully I'm not)
I'm not sure what percentage of their income Amazon is but rest assured it's a huge chunk... and HP will not let this go by the way side - it's not in their nature.
One question remains. Is EVERYONE on HubPages who has affiliate links through HubPages knocked out of their HP affiliated earnings, since HP is a California company?
I'm pretty sure people with other site accounts are OK for now on Amazon, but I'm thinking that HP accounts no matter where they are, may be affected.
What makes you think that HP is any different from any other affiliate. They got the same email as everyone else, and will be treated just the same. Why? Because if Amazon has just ONE affiliate then there is a physical presence and they have to pay sales tax on EVERY purchase.
Large Illinois affiliates such as Fat Wallet had to leave the state, so they wouldn't lose their business. I believe they took their $12 million in revenue and 60 jobs with them. HP lawyers know of no more legal maneuvers that the rest the lawyers do. And it just isn't Amazon, California affiliates can plan on losing 80% of the affiliate programs that they've been working with.
The time for HP to do something was before this passed. While they were busy with their redesign of the frontpage, they should have been mobilizing their CA members to fight this. It very well is too late now.
This could actually be interesting. HP may lose its affiliation, but that doesn't mean the rest of us will.
On the other hand, our content is on the hardware in California. Does Amazon still have a presence there through an Idaho resident with content on the computers in California? How far can the states go to push their ridiculous claims of physical presence? What about hosts with the same problem?
I sell books on Amazon. Isn't that a real Amazon store? Yet I haven't heard anything about selling or not selling through Amazon. Why wasn't that hit?
We got the same notice in Arkansas. It's a bummer, too.
Arkansas got the ax as well.
sucks. First Google adsense on Hubpages dies, the Hubpages program make nothing and now Amazon gone. I really feel for those who write online for a living. Gets harder and harder.
This really sucks as I too am in California and was making little money from Amazon.
Does anyone has alternative plans? ebay is one but they have become too strict, suspending accounts of less traffic. I do not have ebay, but friend of mine does.
adsense, ebay and amazon seemed to work for many new blogger.
It depends on the definition of nexus as written in the law. If it is just the affiliate's physical presence - no. If it is the server or hardware then yes. In that case, it's time to take your Amazon ID off of your account.
I'm actually considering do that, just to be safe. Keep my other sites safe. Probably will have to delete the Amazon hubs. I've not been writing many in anticipation of this.
Just got the affirmation from Amazon that they did pull the plug on CA Amazon Associates effective ASAP.
Yup...so much for having a final day for a "blow out" sale of Amazon items. From Amazon's website (http://forums.prosperotechnologies.com/ … mp;ctx=128) --
California Amazon Associates are Officially Terminated, June 29, 2011 "Update"
Associates Program Operating Agreement
Recent Updates to the Associates Operating Agreement
UPDATED: June 29, 2011 version:
In addition, if at any time following your enrollment in the Program you become a resident of California, Colorado, Illinois, North Carolina, or Rhode Island, you will become ineligible to participate in the Program, and this Operating Agreement will automatically terminate, on the date you establish residency in that state. In addition, you must promptly notify us in writing of your California, Colorado, Illinois, North Carolina, or Rhode Island residency, which you may do via the Contact Associates Customer Service form available here.
Didn't realize this policy was already the case in four other states. Oddly enough, although donotfear posted (just above here) that Arkansas also received the same Amazon notice, Arkansas is not named in Amazon's updated list. (??)
On a separate but definitely related note: what happens to monies that Californians earned via Amazon if the hubbers haven't yet reached the payout threshold?
Just found the answer to the Arkansas question on Amazon's website: Arkansas goes dark 7/24/11 (http://forums.prosperotechnologies.com/ … sg=36009.3)
I've read about associates being dropped from Amazon because their state got 'taxed'. Since I'm in another country, I'm not affected (unless our government plugs the 'tax leak' on online earners who are not paying taxes).
But I'm just wondering how the sales tax will apply if a company has a physical store and an online store at the same time (i.e., Barnes & Noble)? And what will happen to Amazon if all states (or majority of them) in the U. S. pass the same tax law? They will cancel all their U. S. - based affiliates? isn't that a loss - loss situation for them?
Can we have an official staff statement about whether or not HP's own Amazon account has been terminated, and how this will affect all of us?
I second this.
What an unbelievably stupid, short sighted piece of legislation.
A statement from HP would indeed be quite helpful for all hubbers, not just those in affected states, given HP's location in CA.
Just tried to sign in to my Amazon account...it was sad to see this: "The e-mail address and password you entered do not match any accounts on record. Please make sure that you have correctly entered the e-mail address associated with your account. If you've forgotten your password, click the help link below."
Every Amazon Affiliate account in California has been terminated. Just like those in Connecticut, Illinois Rhode Island, and North Carolina. Hubbers have been warned repeatedly by other hubbers about these things and have ignored them. More interested in religion, politics and sexual innuendo.
I've taken my Amazon ID off of my account to protect it.
I am not linking my Amazon account to a California account in any manner. HubPages silence speaks volumes. It is time for Hubbers to think for themselves. And that's what I'm doing. I'm off to write at Wizzley and Excerptz and my own sites.
Blogspot is also based in California, and there is no question of me taking my affiliate code of my blogs.
So why removed it from HP?
I don't think it NEEDS to be removed unless HP recommends it., of course they won't be earnings anything. The contract for Californians is cancelled. That was a decision of Amazon in response to the CA law. Other affiliates may respond differently.
Now I am wondering about Google Ads and others-- will they also give up on states who want to tax purchases? Will HP and it's users be left high and dry?
There is no logical reason to remove your id from Hubpages (if you live in an unaffected region). Its not "being safe" Its just ..well..pointless.
No one is policing your id and its use from Amazon - they just simply drop you based on your address on file. Simple.
If I lived in an affected state I would look for a family member or friend in another location and ask them to create an amazon account - you would have to give them a sizable percentage since they will be officially responsible for that income on their own taxes.
Come to Nevada, Hubpages. Amazon has a warehouse here. Amazon is safe in Nevada.
You can just put headquarters here, but bring a jacket.
If we're wondering about the impact in HP, how about blogger.com? Google is also based in California.
From what I can see, Blogger aren't bothered, after all, it's not their affiliate ID showing in blogs.
HP is affected because their affiliate ID shows 40% of the time in all our hubs.
I am worried here for Hubpages, not myself. These are real people, working in real jobs. I've been an employer too, I can see both sides here.
The only way this can impact on most hubbers worldwide is if HP folds.
And, coming on top of everything else, they might.
Or maybe they can set a wholly owned subsidiary in another state (Nevada maybe) called "HP Gives The Finger To California" with nothing but a postal drop and a bank account to receive Amazon payments.
Don't know about anyone else but I'd love it!
Okay, it is the physical presence of the affiliate in the state that causes nexus. So setting up a dummy corporation in another state doesn't work - unless your willing to committ fraud.
As I wrote earlier, a major Illinois affiliate - Fat Wallet -with millions in revenues and 60 employees had to leave the state of Illinois. It is the only way to cope with this type of Law.
Cagsil - you do realize that this same type of bill is under consideration in Massachusetts - although at this point it seems to be losing steam. I hope you've contacted your state rep.
Wilderness have you contacted your state rep and senator and explained why these bills are bad? It's good to get to them before Wal-Mart and their henchmen arrive with the Main Street Fairness drivel.
Absolutely. You know affiliate nexus passed last year in CA but the Governor vetoed it and I guess people got complacent. It's a good way to get to know your reps, before the emergency hits.
by Laura Schneider2 years ago
I tried to add an amazon capsule to a hub the other day. Hm. No results. In fact, a search on "book" turned up no results. Very interesting. The hub tool must be broken.Later, I went to check on my Amazon...
by Robin Egerton2 years ago
Can anyone explain why Arkansas is not eligible to participate in the Amazon Affiliate program? Is there a way around that? Are there other ways I can monetize my hubs?
by Lena Kovadlo6 years ago
What is the minimum I have to earn on Amazon Affiliate Program in order to actually get paid?Lena
by Christin Sander2 years ago
http://illinoispolicy.org/amazon-associ … -decision/ According to the story above released yesterday, the supreme court has struck down the "Amazon tax" that caused Amazon to pull the plug on the...
by Cardia4 years ago
I'm seriously considering signing up for the Amazon Affiliate program. However, I live in Barbados, and the FAQs aren't really telling me anything. Have you found the program to be profitable? Also, do you have a...
by path-finder3 years ago
Hi all. I have set up Amazon Affiliate program on hubpages and featured Amazon products on a number of my hubs. Looking at it after a while, the link-type report in the Amazon account shows that no one has clicked on...
Copyright © 2016 HubPages Inc. and respective owners.
Other product and company names shown may be trademarks of their respective owners.
HubPages® is a registered Service Mark of HubPages, Inc.
HubPages and Hubbers (authors) may earn revenue on this page based on affiliate relationships and advertisements with partners including Amazon, Google, and others.