IBJNews

Earlier online sales tax collection clears Indiana House

Back to TopCommentsE-mailPrintBookmark and Share

Amazon.com and other online-only retailers would have to start collecting Indiana's 7-percent sales tax this summer under legislation overwhelmingly approved Monday by the Indiana House that would negate an agreement between Amazon and former Gov. Mitch Daniels.

The House voted 79-18 in favor of requiring online retailers to start sales tax collections in July — six months earlier than planned under the deal Daniels reached with Amazon last year.

While supporters in the House argued that the state's current policy gives online-only retailers an unfair advantage over traditional stores, the bill faces uncertain prospects in the Senate, where some leaders are worried about the consequences of breaking the deal with Amazon.

Rep. David Wolkins, R-Winona Lake, said during Monday's House debate that Amazon had met its obligations to the state by opening five large warehouses and that forcing the earlier tax collection would undermine Indiana's reputation when it comes to business negotiations.

"If I were the CEO of a company looking at Indiana, I'd say 'Why should I believe you?'" Wolkins said.

The state's current policy dates to a 2007 deal with Amazon, which agreed to open its first warehouse in Indiana with the promise that lawmakers wouldn't push for online sales tax collection.

The bill would require all online-only retailers with a physical presence in Indiana to collect sales taxes, while exempting online retailers doing less than $10,000 in business a year in the state. Retailers with Indiana stores are already required to collect sales taxes for online transactions.

Rep. Matt Pierce, D-Bloomington, told House members he didn't believe Daniels ever had the authority to allow Amazon to ignore a state law requiring sales tax collections without involving the Legislature in the decision.

"I think that we need to send a message to all the governors going forward ... that you need to come here and ask us to change the law," Pierce said.

Republican Gov. Mike Pence, who succeeded Daniels last month, and Lt. Gov. Sue Ellspermann on Friday visited a new Amazon distribution center in Jeffersonville, where the company says it will eventually have some 1,000 workers.

Ellspermann said Monday that she didn't know of any discussions with Amazon officials about the sales tax issue and that she didn't know whether Pence had an opinion about the bill approved by the House. Pence spokeswoman Kara Brooks said the governor's office didn't have any immediate comment.

The Associated Press left messages seeking comment Monday from Amazon officials and the Indiana Economic Development Corp.

Republican House Speaker Brian Bosma, who frequently doesn't vote on bills, was among those voting in favor of the online sales tax bill.

It isn't clear how much money the state might receive from additional sales tax collections.

A study completed last year by the Indiana Fiscal Policy Institute and Ball State University researchers estimates the state doesn't receive up to $114 million a year in uncollected sales taxes on Internet purchases, while the state collected about $6.6 billion in sales taxes during the 2012 budget year.

Rep. Tom Dermody, R-LaPorte, said he sponsored the sales tax bill because Amazon has had plenty of time to prepare for collecting sales taxes and has agreements with five states to start doing so earlier than its Indiana deal.

Dermody said the July start date would help Indiana retailers better compete during this year's back-to-school and Christmas shopping seasons.

"This is about fairness," he said. "This is trying to put everybody on a level playing field."

ADVERTISEMENT

  • Taxing online business is a big mistake
    This is not going to end well. Online companies already have shipment costs that brick and mortar stores do not. The playing field is already level. Taxing online sales is a very bad idea and will only lead to further business loss. I avoid Best Buy and similar stores because they gouge customers.
  • $$$ Re: Charlie
    Charlie, This simply isn't about protecting brick and mortar joints, it's about collecting money. The state doesn't really care if you shop at an actual facility or online, but if they can collect $ from you on every online purchase, then they'll rake in a pretty penny. I'm curious as to how this applies to out of country online sales.
  • not helping
    stores like best buy are getting beatup by online retailers not because of sales tax isn't charged, but because they have ridiculously high prices compared to online. The sales tax being free is only a very small fraction of why people use Amazon over many brick and mortar stores.

Post a comment to this story

COMMENTS POLICY
We reserve the right to remove any post that we feel is obscene, profane, vulgar, racist, sexually explicit, abusive, or hateful.
 
You are legally responsible for what you post and your anonymity is not guaranteed.
 
Posts that insult, defame, threaten, harass or abuse other readers or people mentioned in IBJ editorial content are also subject to removal. Please respect the privacy of individuals and refrain from posting personal information.
 
No solicitations, spamming or advertisements are allowed. Readers may post links to other informational websites that are relevant to the topic at hand, but please do not link to objectionable material.
 
We may remove messages that are unrelated to the topic, encourage illegal activity, use all capital letters or are unreadable.
 

Messages that are flagged by readers as objectionable will be reviewed and may or may not be removed. Please do not flag a post simply because you disagree with it.

Sponsored by
ADVERTISEMENT

facebook - twitter on Facebook & Twitter

Follow on TwitterFollow IBJ on Facebook:
Follow on TwitterFollow IBJ's Tweets on these topics:
 
Subscribe to IBJ
  1. The $104K to CRC would go toward debts service on $486M of existing debt they already have from other things outside this project. Keystone buys the bonds for 3.8M from CRC, and CRC in turn pays for the parking and site work, and some time later CRC buys them back (with interest) from the projected annual property tax revenue from the entire TIF district (est. $415K / yr. from just this property, plus more from all the other property in the TIF district), which in theory would be about a 10-year term, give-or-take. CRC is basically betting on the future, that property values will increase, driving up the tax revenue to the limit of the annual increase cap on commercial property (I think that's 3%). It should be noted that Keystone can't print money (unlike the Federal Treasury) so commercial property tax can only come from consumers, in this case the apartment renters and consumers of the goods and services offered by the ground floor retailers, and employees in the form of lower non-mandatory compensation items, such as bonuses, benefits, 401K match, etc.

  2. $3B would hurt Lilly's bottom line if there were no insurance or Indemnity Agreement, but there is no way that large an award will be upheld on appeal. What's surprising is that the trial judge refused to reduce it. She must have thought there was evidence of a flagrant, unconscionable coverup and wanted to send a message.

  3. As a self-employed individual, I always saw outrageous price increases every year in a health insurance plan with preexisting condition costs -- something most employed groups never had to worry about. With spouse, I saw ALL Indiana "free market answer" plans' premiums raise 25%-45% each year.

  4. It's not who you chose to build it's how they build it. Architects and engineers decide how and what to use to build. builders just do the work. Architects & engineers still think the tarp over the escalators out at airport will hold for third time when it snows, ice storms.

  5. http://www.abcactionnews.com/news/duke-energy-customers-angry-about-money-for-nothing

ADVERTISEMENT