Sales Tax Dispute – Amazon Relies on the First Amendment


The US Constitution protects the disclosure of what reading and video materials citizens read and view, in spite of the North Carolina Department of Revenue’s best efforts. US District Judge Marsha Pechman granted Amazon’s summary judgment that precludes disclosure of Amazon’s “customers’ names, addresses or any other personal information.” The order states that “Amazon has conducted nearly 50 million transactions with North Carolina residents from August 1, 2003 to February 28, 2010, apparently without collecting or remitting North Carolina sales and use taxes.” As result of these sales transactions there was a sales tax dispute and Amazon has already provided “order ID number, seller, ship-to city, county, postal code, the non-taxable amount of the purchase, and the tax audit record identification.” Amazon filed its lawsuit in Washington State to avoid disclosing the customer personal information, and the American Civil Liberties Union joined Amazon. Luckily the Constitution protects the information that we read and view, however we will clearly see more challenges of this sort to learn about personal information.

Texas Bills Amazon $269 Million for Unpaid Sales Taxes

Amazon started operations in Texas in 2005 and not paid any sales taxes, so the Texas Comptroller of Public Accounts recently demanded that Amazon pay Texas $269 million. It’s easy to understand why state and local governments want sales tax revenue, but whether there’s a taxable transaction is not that easy to figure out. Amazon is a big target since 2009 sales were $25 billion. Recently I bought a book from Amazon, but where the taxable transaction took place is what’s hard to determine. Amazon is in Washington State, but the server could be in California, and the book shipped from Kansas to me in Texas. What difference does it make that Amazon has any business operations in Texas since it was not part of my purchase? Surely we can count on Internet sales tax issues to continue for some time.

The publications contained in this site do not constitute legal advice. Legal advice can only be given with knowledge of the client's specific facts. By putting these publications on our website we do not intend to create a lawyer-client relationship with the user. Materials may not reflect the most current legal developments, verdicts or settlements. This information should in no way be taken as an indication of future results.

Search Tips:

You may use the wildcard symbol (*) as a root expander.  A search for "anti*" will find not only "anti", but also "anti-trust", "antique", etc.

Entering two terms together in a search field will behave as though an "OR" is being used.  For example, entering "Antique Motorcars" as a Client Name search will find results with either word in the Client Name.


AND and OR may be used in a search.  Note: they must be capitalized, e.g., "Project AND Finance." 

The + and - sign operators may be used.  The + sign indicates that the term immediately following is required, while the - sign indicates to omit results that contain that term. E.g., "+real -estate" says results must have "real" but not "estate".

To perform an exact phrase search, surround your search phrase with quotation marks.  For example, "Project Finance".

Searches are not case sensitive.

back to top