Letitia James harassing B&H

[Yammer]

If it's so common, can someone link to a current product from any other retailer that lists products like this and isn't collecting the tax?

[shaulyaakov]

Amazon and best buy are not labeled instant rebate.

[shapsam]

Amazon and best buy are not labeled instant rebate.

So the problem is how they label it?

[aygart]

So the problem is how they label it?

Very possibly.

[shaulyaakov]

I thr the nafka Mina of the labeling is hoe the sale is recorded for other accounting purposes. If b and h originally carried inventory at 800 intending to sell it for 1000, and the the manufacturer has a rebate so now the sale is 800 to the customer, b and h still recognizes the 200 profit off the 800 carrying value.

A discount would be b and h buys the ite for 700 to sell at 800 and recognizes only 100 in profit. Or b and h decides to sell it at breakeven and kick in the entirety of the discount.

[Dovdovmoneytree]

I guess NYC losing Amazon was not enough. They're looking for more.

[CountValentine]

So they are using the "but officer he was speeding to" defense?  Must be a DDF member. 

[aygart]

So they are using the "but officer he was speeding to" defense?  Must be a DDF member. 

@Something Fishy

[avromie7]

Sounds like a terrible law, but doesn't look good for B&H.
Surprising that they admitted to doing it so quickly.

There's nothing to deny, it's very clearly the way they do business.

[Dan]

There's nothing to deny, it's very clearly the way they do business.

I hear ya, but the first rule in most cases is admit nothing.
Saying others are going against the law isn't a winning strategy.

[CountValentine]

Saying others are doing against the law isn't a winning strategy.

...but officer 

[shaulyaakov]

There's nothing to deny, it's very clearly the way they do business.

Generally in legal proceedings, you wouldn't admit to something - you'd make the prosecutor prove it, which due to the complexity of tax records, could be expensive and time consuming. That gives the defendent a chance pay a smaller settlement. By admitting it publically, they are helping the AG build her case.

[Dan]

Generally in legal proceedings, you wouldn't admit to something - you'd make the prosecutor prove it, which due to the complexity of tax records, could be expensive and time consuming. That gives the defendent a chance pay a smaller settlement. By admitting it publically, they are helping the AG build her case.

Yup, seems like the statement was sent out in haste without being vetted by a lawyer.

[kayef]

Yup, seems like the statement was sent out in haste without being vetted by a lawyer.

From what I heard, this “battle” has been going on for a while already. The AG probably wanted to use bad press to pressure B&H. I doubt anything B&H said was news to anyone, just PR.

[yitzgar]

The government has unlimited time and resources. If you are wrong, you will lose, and the more you fight, the harder they will throw the book at you. Best way is to come clean asap

[mb1]

From what I heard, this “battle” has been going on for a while already. The AG probably wanted to use bad press to pressure B&H. I doubt anything B&H said was news to anyone, just PR.

True, the whistle blower complaint was filed in January 2016.

[EliJelly]

The government has unlimited time and resources. If you are wrong, you will lose, and the more you fight, the harder they will throw the book at you. Best way is to come clean asap

I'm sure B&H can afford the top lawyers as well. This is such a fundamental tax question I wonder why it wasn't clarified by now, so far we have giant retailers each playing by their own interpretation of the tax laws, I guess this case will result in a concrete law, possibly by climbing up to the supreme court.

[EJB]

I'm sure B&H can afford the top lawyers as well. This is such a fundamental tax question I wonder why it wasn't clarified by now, so far we have giant retailers each playing by their own interpretation of the tax laws, I guess this case will result in a concrete law, possibly by climbing up to the supreme court.

But BH will be footing the lawyer bill, and if it is ruled against B&H, chances are they will be the only company hit with significant back taxes and penalties (unless fraud hits other companies as well).

[chff]

https://m.dpreview.com/news/3798275254/b-h-photo-releases-statement-refuting-allegations-it-defrauded-ny-out-of-millions-in-sales-tax

[shaulyaakov]

https://m.dpreview.com/news/3798275254/b-h-photo-releases-statement-refuting-allegations-it-defrauded-ny-out-of-millions-in-sales-tax

What this and every other statement from b&h has ignored is that discounts =/= instant rebates.