Is KR really living on a boat???

Status
Not open for further replies.
Joined
Jun 10, 2006
Messages
1,872
Location
Denver, CO
Have you been reading Ken Rockwell's site? It seems that California has or is about to pass the new tax law that would cause his sponsors drop his site. He has made comments that he is now living off the coast of California (I assume) on a boat. What do you think???
Pete


PS: Please do NOT make this a KR bashing site! I know many of you would do something similar if your state shut down your own photography business.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Joined
Jun 15, 2006
Messages
596
Location
Oakland, California
Seems to me he ought to be paying his taxes like everyone else. If he is living off the pitence he receives from linked sponsors to his site, he couldn't afford half the toys he brags about owning on his site. Sounds like just a lot of blather about nothing.
Michael
 
Joined
Jun 10, 2006
Messages
1,872
Location
Denver, CO
Seems to me he ought to be paying his taxes like everyone else. If he is living off the pitence he receives from linked sponsors to his site, he couldn't afford half the toys he brags about owning on his site. Sounds like just a lot of blather about nothing.
Michael

He does pay his taxes or says he does. The issue is that the bill will cause him to lose his income and then he will not be able to pay taxes.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Joined
Jul 22, 2008
Messages
5,246
Location
Denver, Colorado
He does pay his taxes or says he does. The issue is that the bill will cause him to lose his income and then he will not be able to pay taxes.

but, if he loses his income, and lives on his own boat in the middle of no where ocean, then... he won't have any taxes to pay anyways... right?
 
Joined
Sep 21, 2008
Messages
6,374
Location
Alabama
Seems to me he ought to be paying his taxes like everyone else. If he is living off the pitence he receives from linked sponsors to his site, he couldn't afford half the toys he brags about owning on his site. Sounds like just a lot of blather about nothing.
Michael

The companies that support him would have to pay more taxes. If they do, then they pull out along with their sponsorships of other websites like his. It doesn't make sense to do this because the state will actually lose tax revenue.
 
Joined
Jun 15, 2006
Messages
596
Location
Oakland, California
The bill says that online retailers who sell products to people residing in California, need to collect sales tax for the purchase and pay that sales tax to California. That is not taking income away from anybody. It is however, letting California retailers have an even shot at getting a local sale. Amazon is having a kanipchin fit about it, because right now they enjoy a huge advantage on pricing, since California charges up to 9.75% sales tax. Incidentally, it would apply to Adorama and B&H as well.

There are already other states that have this requirement.

Michael
 
Joined
Jun 15, 2006
Messages
596
Location
Oakland, California
The companies that support him would have to pay more taxes.

This is incorrect. They would not pay any additional sales tax, or other tax. They would collect tax from the buyer. It is the buyer would would be spending more. Right now you can avoid paying sales tax buy buying out of state.

There is not one credible study that shows sales tax revenue will go down.

Michael
 
Joined
Jun 10, 2006
Messages
1,872
Location
Denver, CO
but, if he loses his income, and lives on his own boat in the middle of no where ocean, then... he won't have any taxes to pay anyways... right?

I am gathering that he is moving out to sea so that he can keep his website operational and have an income. I agree with Sean and think he is pulling our leg but if it passes, he will need to do something. Maybe move the business out to sea or another state to keep his sponsors and still live in CA and pay Federal and State taxes. What would you do if you were faced with a loss of income?
Pete
 
Joined
Jun 10, 2006
Messages
1,872
Location
Denver, CO
The companies that support him would have to pay more taxes.

This is incorrect. They would not pay any additional sales tax, or other tax. They would collect tax from the buyer. It is the buyer would would be spending more. Right now you can avoid paying sales tax buy buying out of state.

There is not one credible study that shows sales tax revenue will go down.

Michael

Yes the customers would pay the tax but the companies do not want to do the paperwork so they are just planning on dropping support for sites like Kens.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Joined
Jul 21, 2007
Messages
5,262
Location
NJ
This is incorrect. They would not pay any additional sales tax, or other tax. They would collect tax from the buyer. It is the buyer would would be spending more. Right now you can avoid paying sales tax buy buying out of state.

Although Amazon would not have to pay the sales tax, they would be confronted with loss of sales - not having to pay taxes is for many a reason to buy at a certain vendor. Let's say I want to buy a lens at $1000:
  • Vendor "A" will cost me $1100 because although they're based in NYC, they're shipping from NJ and I have to pay NJ sales tax
  • Vendor "B" will cost me $1000 because they're shipping from Brooklyn
  • Vendor "U" will cost me $1100 because it's a brick & mortar store in NJ

In the current scenario vendor "B" has a clear advantage, and vendor "A" a clear disadvantage. Vendor "U" is in the middle - it costs more but it's at a location convenient for me to visit.

If "A" is charging sales tax they'd definitely lose revenue as there's less of an incentive to buy through them.

That's why Amazon is against this.
 
Joined
Jun 10, 2006
Messages
1,872
Location
Denver, CO
Right Lurker and KRs point is that Amazon will just stop sponsoring his site and continue to sell lenses in California.

I buy from my 'not quite' local brick and mortar store...
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Joined
Oct 16, 2007
Messages
6,184
Location
Glens Falls, NY
The bill says that online retailers who sell products to people residing in California, need to collect sales tax for the purchase and pay that sales tax to California. That is not taking income away from anybody. It is however, letting California retailers have an even shot at getting a local sale. Amazon is having a kanipchin fit about it, because right now they enjoy a huge advantage on pricing, since California charges up to 9.75% sales tax. Incidentally, it would apply to Adorama and B&H as well.

There are already other states that have this requirement.
Michael

New York is one of those states. Amazon has tacked on NYS sales tax to online purchases from here for a few years now....
 
Joined
Jun 15, 2006
Messages
596
Location
Oakland, California
Has anyone actually read the bill? Yes, it includes websites like KR's, providing his referrals result in more than $10,000 in sales for the prior 12 months. It does not however, say that sales tax will only be collected from sales made through these types of referals.

Michael
 
Joined
Nov 21, 2009
Messages
7,261
Location
Baton Rouge, La.
IIRC, tax will be collected on everything that they sell in Ca. if they have a "presence" in the state (i.e. advertising on a "local" website that generates a threshold amount of sales) so the way to avoid collecting tax on everything sold in Ca. is to remove the "presence". That is why KR and sites like his will lose the advertising - Amazon, Adorama, B&H will survive just fine without him (and without collecting one penny in Ca. state sales tax), he may well not...
 
Joined
Feb 10, 2009
Messages
2,115
Location
Nowhereland
The bloodsuckers want to do that in Illinois now. THey all are doing everything they can to make up for loss revenue in income tax.


Well that is what government does best. They spend like drunken sailors at a strip club and have us pay for it. Actually Im waitng for every state to be passing simular laws to make up for the losses from the Income Tax revenues being down. That and the decrease in sales taxes on durable goods since people are making due for now.
 
Joined
Nov 12, 2006
Messages
1,290
Location
San Diego, Ca
There are 481 cities and towns in the state of California. Many cities have additional sales taxes added to the already high state sales tax of 8.25%. Currently, on large purchases like an automobile, a California resident pays the sale of the city in which they reside no matter what California city they buy the car. If the internet sales tax is calculated in a similar manner the paperwork alone might be enough to discourage small internet sales operators from doing business in California and the larger business will simply pass the cost on to everyone. There is also the indeterminable cost and hassle of having the California government meddling in their businesses and it won't belong before California will want the annual corporation tax from those business which are incorporated and doing business (via internet) in the state. Don't give California another dime until they can show some fiscal responsibility.
 
Joined
Jul 1, 2007
Messages
3,669
Location
Fredericksburg, VA
Bloodsuckers? How do you think state and local governments pay for things you probably wouldn't like to do without, such as fire departments, police, schools, and basic infrastructure? How many firehouses and hospitals need to be shut down to satisfy one's desire to buy things without sales tax? How many police need to work without overtime and without sufficient staffing? How many brick and mortar stores have to be closed in your area and the jobs those stores provided eliminated because you went there to handle the merchandise but then bought online to avoid sales tax? I've bought online from Adorama and B&H, but as a NY State resident I paid the sales tax. I don't like it, but I understand the need and I pay it. Many of my friends ship items to their offices in NJ, or their friends houses in NJ, and NY State falls apart. How many of you complain about potholes in your roads, but don't pay your share of state sales tax needed to repair them? I pay tax, because I want paramedics to come if my family member is in need. I pay tax, because I want my roads paved and my schools to have buses and extra curricular activities. There is, truly, no free lunch.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Links on this page may be to our affiliates. Sales through affiliate links may benefit this site.
Nikon Cafe is a fan site and not associated with Nikon Corporation.
Forum post reactions by Twemoji: https://github.com/twitter/twemoji
Forum GIFs powered by GIPHY: https://giphy.com/
Copyright © Amin Forums, LLC
Top Bottom