Skip to main content

The context you need, when you need it

When news breaks, you need to understand what actually matters — and what to do about it. At Vox, our mission to help you make sense of the world has never been more vital. But we can’t do it on our own.

We rely on readers like you to fund our journalism. Will you support our work and become a Vox Member today?

Join now

Why Amazon’s retail dominance won’t be disrupted by the Supreme Court’s big tax ruling

Amazon is still the most convenient retailer — by a (last) mile.

Amazon CEO Jeff Bezos
Amazon CEO Jeff Bezos
Amazon CEO Jeff Bezos
Drew Angerer / Getty
Jason Del Rey
Jason Del Rey has been a business journalist for 15 years and has covered Amazon, Walmart, and the e-commerce industry for the last decade. He was a senior correspondent at Vox.

The U.S. Supreme Court has just overturned a decades-old tax ruling that had allowed many internet retailers to avoid having to charge their customers sales tax.

The overturned ruling only let states require businesses to collect sales tax from customers if that business had a physical presence in the state — whether it be a storefront, corporate office or warehouse — in turn creating a loophole for online retailers like Amazon, who for years had a pricing advantage since their customers did not have to pay tax. That loophole appears to be closing.

Code Commerce is coming back to New York City, Sept. 17-18.

For retailers, flux is the new business as usual. Hear from top industry leaders.

In a 5-4 decision delivered today, the Supreme Court sided with the state of South Dakota, which enacted a law requiring retailers — even if they reside out of state — to collect sales tax if they “deliver more than $100,000 of goods or services into the State or engage in 200 or more separate transactions for the delivery of goods or services into the State.”

While traditional retail trade groups like the National Retail Federation applauded the move as one that “clears the way for a fair and level playing field,” Amazon will likely be just fine. You can expect Amazon to remain dominant here in the U.S. since it has distinguished itself by focusing as much on convenience as price over the last decade.

Thursday’s ruling by the U.S.’s highest court does swing open the door for states across the country to require internet merchants to collect sales tax from online customers. As a result, stocks of publicly traded e-commerce companies like Etsy, Wayfair and Amazon dropped on the news.

But there are a few likely reasons why Amazon’s stock price dropped only a tiny bit and why I’d be very surprised if the ruling hurt Amazon’s long-term growth trajectory.

First, Amazon already collects sales tax in states across the U.S. on goods that it stores — and sells itself — known in the industry as “1P” or “first-party sales.” First-party sales account for just under half of all Amazon purchases. Amazon started collecting sales tax on 1P sales in many states in conjunction with the opening of an Amazon fulfillment center there.

When it comes to third-party sellers who hawk their wares on Amazon — which account for just over 50 percent of items sold worldwide on Amazon — things are a bit different.

Historically, these merchants have decided when and if to charge sales tax to Amazon customers. But starting this year, Amazon began collecting and remitting sales tax on third-party orders being sent to customers in Washington as well as Pennsylvania — states that have passed so-called “Marketplace Facilitator” laws requiring a marketplace like Amazon to collect tax on behalf of the merchants who sell on its platform.

A few other states have already passed similar legislation, meaning the list of places where Amazon collects tax on behalf of its sellers will grow. Amazon is prepared for this.

If that list does grow long and Congress does pass new legislation that impacts small online merchants as much as big ones, it’s possible that some Amazon merchants could become less popular with customers because their prices will rise to account for the new tax-collection rules. At the same time, Amazon’s less-powerful competitors will have to deal with this stuff, too.

But the real key here is that Amazon has spent more than a decade — since at least the creation of Amazon Prime in 2005 — differentiating itself not just through the pricing advantage it sometimes had over traditional retailers, but by focusing on becoming the most convenient place for consumers to shop for an increasing variety of products.

For years, it accomplished that through Prime’s unlimited two-day delivery promise for a flat annual fee. Over the last few years, the convenience differentiator has expanded to include a wide array of goods available for free same-day delivery, and thousands of goods available — including Whole Foods groceries — within two hours in major cities through the Prime Now program.

Add to this list new initiatives like no-checkout Amazon Go stores and in-home delivery, and you can see that convenience is at least as important to Amazon as always having the absolute lowest price.

As Amazon critic Stacy Mitchell, of the Institute for Local Self-Reliance, said on Twitter: “It’s good news but too bad the Court didn’t act years ago, before Amazon grew to rule online commerce.”

This article originally appeared on Recode.net.

More in Technology

Podcasts
Are humanoid robots all hype?Are humanoid robots all hype?
Podcast
Podcasts

AI is making them better — but they’re not going to be doing your chores anytime soon.

By Avishay Artsy and Sean Rameswaram
Future Perfect
The old tech that could help stop the next airborne pandemicThe old tech that could help stop the next airborne pandemic
Future Perfect

Glycol vapors, explained.

By Shayna Korol
Future Perfect
Elon Musk could lose his case against OpenAI — and still get what he wantsElon Musk could lose his case against OpenAI — and still get what he wants
Future Perfect

It’s not about who wins. It’s about the dirty laundry you air along the way.

By Sara Herschander
Life
Why banning kids from AI isn’t the answerWhy banning kids from AI isn’t the answer
Life

What kids really need in the age of artificial intelligence.

By Anna North
Culture
Anthropic owes authors $1.5B for pirating work — but the claims process is a Kafkaesque messAnthropic owes authors $1.5B for pirating work — but the claims process is a Kafkaesque mess
Culture

“Your AI monster ate all our work. Now you’re trying to pay us off with this piece of garbage that doesn’t work.”

By Constance Grady
Future Perfect
Some deaf children are hearing again because of a new gene therapySome deaf children are hearing again because of a new gene therapy
Future Perfect

A medical field that almost died is quietly fixing one disease at a time.

By Bryan Walsh