A recent article in the New York Times is raising the question as to whether or not online stores such as Amazon must make sure that their vendors collect taxes on behalf of the state to which they are affiliated with. Whether we know it or not, we do pay taxes when we buy products from online sources, they are just hidden or nicely worded (such as use taxes). Aren’t taxes good for the state though? For example this new law that was signed by Gov. David Patterson, is expected to raise about $50 million. Yet on the flip side ( and there is more than one), online stores may start to increase their prices if they have to start dealing with more taxes. Vendors as well may hurt from this new law if they need to shell out extra money. 

So the reason we’re so concerned about this? Editorial Campana sells its books in different ways, both physically and digitally. Many of the books though can be bought through the website or through Amazon and Barnes & Noble. This new law put into affect, as suggested by Amazon:

“violate[s] the equal-protection clause of the Constitution because they specifically took aim at Amazon. “It was carefully crafted to increase state tax revenues by forcing Amazon to collect sales and use taxes,” the complaint says, noting that “state officials have described the statute as the ‘Amazon Tax.’”

From this it would seem as though the law targets Amazon. As online stores become more and more popular and as more small businesses start to move away from traditional physical shops and venture into the “digital store” realm, what will they have to face? It would seem more like this law is taxation due to representation. What impact will this new law have and what will be done with the money that law collects?