上周四，美國總統(tǒng)唐納德·特朗普在推特上抱怨說，在線零售巨頭亞馬遜“沒有或者幾乎沒有向聯(lián)邦和地方政府納過稅”。此言一出，亞馬遜股價應(yīng)聲下跌。

然而，這番對亞馬遜的指責(zé)表面上看是在為實(shí)體零售店說話，實(shí)際上卻有誤導(dǎo)作用。

雖然亞馬遜以前只在它設(shè)有倉庫和辦公室的幾個州納稅，但現(xiàn)在它的交稅范圍已全面覆蓋45個征收消費(fèi)稅的州。

大選還遙遙無期時我就表達(dá)過對亞馬遜的顧慮。和其他公司不同，他們沒有或者幾乎沒有向聯(lián)邦和地方政府納稅，而且讓我們的郵政系統(tǒng)給他們當(dāng)快遞員（這給美國造成了巨大損失），還造成數(shù)以千計的零售商倒閉！

— 唐納德·J·特朗普(@realDonaldTrump)，2018年3月29日

有一點(diǎn)特朗普說對了——智囊機(jī)構(gòu)稅收和經(jīng)濟(jì)政策研究所（ITEP）指出，亞馬遜并未代表第三方供應(yīng)商納稅，而且可能仍不繳納某些地方稅收，這讓它在面對部分傳統(tǒng)零售商時獲得了優(yōu)勢。

ITEP的分析顯示，某些地方政府部門征收的稅率和亞馬遜承擔(dān)的稅率之間存在差異，在阿拉斯加州荷馬市，二者的差距高達(dá)7.5個百分點(diǎn)。

ITEP在亞馬遜網(wǎng)站上填寫了幾十個送貨地址，結(jié)果發(fā)現(xiàn)“相關(guān)分析表明亞馬遜不在當(dāng)?shù)亟欢惢蚨惵实陀诋?dāng)?shù)亓闶凵痰闹萦衅邆€（阿拉巴馬、阿拉斯加、愛達(dá)荷、愛荷華、密西西比、新墨西哥和賓夕法尼亞）”。某些“地區(qū)由于聯(lián)邦或地方法律的不恰當(dāng)限制，不對出州甚至出城的交易征稅。”

但I(xiàn)TEP也指出，下個月之后地方和聯(lián)邦政府也許能更容易地征收此類稅款，因?yàn)轭A(yù)計屆時美國高等法院將重新檢討1992年奎爾公司（Quill）和家具電商Wayfair那場官司留下的判例。該案裁定零售商只需在它們有實(shí)體業(yè)務(wù)的州繳納消費(fèi)稅。

上周四早些時候，白宮副新聞秘書拉什·沙阿做客?？怂剐侣勁_的《Fox and Friends》節(jié)目時為特朗普的推特做了補(bǔ)充。

沙阿說：“現(xiàn)在還沒有互聯(lián)網(wǎng)消費(fèi)稅。”這句話讓他在亞馬遜納稅問題上也發(fā)揮了誤導(dǎo)作用?！耙虼耍瑏嗰R遜等公司就可以在做買賣時不繳納基本的零售稅，而零售店、便利店以及在座的各位都要繳這個稅——當(dāng)你走出演播室，然后去拿一些商品時，就得交稅。這讓實(shí)體零售店處于不利位置?！?

盡管收盤時反彈了1%左右，但上周四盤中亞馬遜股價一度下挫6%。

特朗普瞄上亞馬遜或許還跟他和亞馬遜創(chuàng)始人兼首席執(zhí)行官杰夫·貝佐斯之間的不愉快有關(guān)。貝佐斯還擁有《華盛頓郵報》，而特朗普對這家媒體的報道感到不滿，斥其為“騙子”和“假新聞”。

2016年5月，特朗普接受保守派訪談節(jié)目主持人西恩·漢尼提采訪時說：“從稅收角度講，亞馬遜就像是殺了人卻逍遙法外。（貝佐斯）正在利用《華盛頓郵報》的力量，這樣華盛頓政界人士就不會向亞馬遜征收它應(yīng)該繳的稅?！?

這并不是亞馬遜的納稅行為首次成為攻擊目標(biāo)。尤其是歐洲政府，他們一直對亞馬遜的公司所得稅緊追不舍。比如，2月初亞馬遜和法國政府就稅收糾紛達(dá)成和解。雖未披露和解費(fèi)用，但法國的目標(biāo)接近2億歐元（2.5億美元）。同時，歐盟也以“非法稅收優(yōu)勢”為由命令亞馬遜向其繳納2.94億美元（2.5億歐元）稅款。另據(jù)報道，意大利也對亞馬遜做出了類似指控。（財富中文網(wǎng)）

譯者：Charlie

審校：夏林

?

In a move that sent Amazon’s shares reeling, President Donald Trump complained on Twitter Thursday that the online retail giant pays “l(fā)ittle or no taxes to state & local governments.”

But his attack on the company, ostensibly in defense of brick-and-mortar retailers, was misleading.

Although Amazon had once collected sales tax in only a few states—those in which it had warehouses or offices—it now collects those taxes in all 45 states that have a sales tax.

I have stated my concerns with Amazon long before the Election. Unlike others, they pay little or no taxes to state & local governments, use our Postal System as their Delivery Boy (causing tremendous loss to the U.S.), and are putting many thousands of retailers out of business!

— Donald J. Trump (@realDonaldTrump) March 29, 2018

Where Trump is correct: Amazon doesn’t collect taxes on behalf of third-party vendors, and it still may not collect some local taxes, giving it an advantage over some traditional retailers, according to the Institute on Taxation and Economic Policy, a think tank.

According to an analysis from the ITEP, the gap between the tax rate that some local tax jurisdictions impose and what Amazon collects can be as much as 7.5 percentage points in Homer, AK., for example.

“This analysis reveals that in seven states (Alabama, Alaska, Idaho, Iowa, Mississippi, New Mexico, and Pennsylvania), Amazon is either not collecting local taxes or is charging a lower tax rate than local retailers,” the ITEP found by entering dozens of shipping addresses into Amazon’s website. Some “l(fā)ocalities, however, are not collecting tax from out-of-state or even out-of-town businesses because of problematic restrictions in state or local law.”

Though according to the ITEP, localities and states may have an easier time collecting those taxes after next month, when the Supreme Court is expected to revisit a precedent set by the 1992 Quill vs. Wayfair ruling. That ruling said that retailers must collect sales taxes only in states in which they have a physical presence.

Early Thursday, Deputy Press Secretary Raj Shah added to the President’s tweet during a segment on Fox News’ Fox and Friends.

“Right now there is no internet sales tax,” said Shah, adding his own misdirection about Amazon’s tax collecting. “And as a result companies like Amazon can buy and sell goods without having to pay basic retail taxes that your stores and your convenience stores and all the folks around—when you walk out of the studio over there and grab something, you have to pay. And that puts brick-and-mortar retail stores at a disadvantage.”

Shares of the company fell as much as 6% in trading Thursday, though rebounded by about 1% by the day’s end.

Trump’s interest in Amazon may also be linked to his displeasure with Amazon founder and CEO, Jeff Bezos, who owns of the Washington Post. Unhappy with its reporting, Trump has accused the newspaper of being “phony” and “fake news.”

“Amazon is getting away with murder, tax-wise. (Bezos is) using the Washington Postfor power,” Trump said in a May 2016 interview with conservative talk show host Sean Hannity. “So that the politicians in Washington don’t tax Amazon like they should be taxed.”

This isn’t the first time that Amazon’s been in the crosshairs over its tax practices. European governments, in particular, have gone after the e-commerce giant over its corporate incomes taxes. Amazon, for instance, settled a tax dispute with French authorities in early February. While the amount of settlement was not disclosed, France had been seeking nearly 200 million euros, or $250 million. Additionally, the European Union also ordered Amazon to pay $294 million, 250 million euros, to Luxembourg over an “illegal tax advantage.” Italy has also reportedly made similar allegations.