Seagate 3TB External USB 3.0 - $99.99 Shipped @ Amazon.com

Seagate 3TB External USB 3.0 - $99.99 Amazon.com

Amazon dropped the Seagate STCA3000101 3TB USB 3.0 External to 99.99 Shipped To Your Door.

http://www.amazon.com/gp/product/B00829THQE

fritze op

is costco going to have the same drive for $90 during BF?

raider73 said:   Amazon sucks, it was $89.99 several months ago and I ordered 4 and they claim price mistake and shipped only 1, and now they charge tax also.

Yes, Amazon sucks because they had a price mistake that you tried to take advantage of (really...buying 4?), and actually sent you one anyway. And they suck for complying with government laws. Imagine that.

Better deal than Costco because 1) I just bought it in my pajamas, 2) I didn't have to wait until next weekend, and 3) 5% Discover CB (better than 3% Costco True Earnings AMEX CB).

geowrian said:   raider73 said:   Amazon sucks, it was $89.99 several months ago and I ordered 4 and they claim price mistake and shipped only 1, and now they charge tax also.

Yes, Amazon sucks because they had a price mistake that you tried to take advantage of (really...buying 4?), and actually sent you one anyway. And they suck for complying with government laws. Imagine that.

That's not accurate. People have a right to be upset with Amazon over this. There was no law that said they had to do it. Amazon could have continued to avoid sales tax in CA but they negotiated an agreement to do it.

"Amazon and the state tax collector, who have been at loggerheads for years over the issue of Internet sales taxes...

Amazon last year struck a deal with Gov. Jerry Brown. The company promised to open two 1-million-square-foot distribution centers in Northern and Southern California and to start charging sales tax..."

OOS

Sorry double posted

I just saved a little more than $100.

namlook said:   IrfanPathan said:   for opening 1M sq ft center, they got money from state which now every resident is paying for in the form of taxes! I cancelled my prime once Amazon started charging taxes in CA

Yeah it sucks that Amazon cashed on this sales tax issue and decided to take money in exchange for agreeing to sales tax.

Guys, it is not Amazon decided to take money in exchange for agreeing to sales tax. Amazon needed physical presence. And by the law, you're obligated to charge tax in state where you have physical presence.

Same specs, but $89 (even cheaper than OP's!).

Buy it quickly:
http://www.amazon.com/gp/product/B00834SJU8/

RMAC said:   Are you sure you are not looking at the 1TB.Yes, but you didn't buy quickly enough

http://www.fatwallet.com/forums/expired-deals/1234611/

namlook said:   geowrian said:   raider73 said:   Amazon sucks, it was $89.99 several months ago and I ordered 4 and they claim price mistake and shipped only 1, and now they charge tax also.

Yes, Amazon sucks because they had a price mistake that you tried to take advantage of (really...buying 4?), and actually sent you one anyway. And they suck for complying with government laws. Imagine that.

That's not accurate. People have a right to be upset with Amazon over this. There was no law that said they had to do it. Amazon could have continued to avoid sales tax in CA but they negotiated an agreement to do it.

"Amazon and the state tax collector, who have been at loggerheads for years over the issue of Internet sales taxes...

Amazon last year struck a deal with Gov. Jerry Brown. The company promised to open two 1-million-square-foot distribution centers in Northern and Southern California and to start charging sales tax..."

Amazon was being threatened to have a law created that would unquestionably require them to collect sales tax, if they didn't do voluntarily. Instead of doing it via legislation, and after several years passed, they worked out a deal to get warehouses at reduced tax rates (which created jobs). Since they would then have the physical presence in-state, they were now required to collect sales tax. Amazon was forced to either do it at a tax break, or have it forced upon them via legislation.

Also, it's very questionable if they were allowed to not collect sales taxes for all those years. The law, as written, isn't entirely clear on the matter. The government said the law does include Amazon's sales, and Amazon's legal team said it doesn't. Amazon stood to owe millions in back taxes and fees if it went through the courts.

Keep in mind that purchasing something without sales tax is legally required (as it has been for decades) to be claimed and reported under a Use tax. If you lived in CA and purchased form Amazon prior to the change and were not claiming it, you were technically illegally evading taxes. That's where this whole thing started - the state was loosing sales taxes on items sold to people in CA, for usage in CA, by a nontrivial amount. The state was still owed said taxes, but companies were not collecting them under sales tax and claimed it was up to the consumers to report them under a Use tax.

Note: Sales tax and use tax are essentially the same thing. One applies at the time of sale and is collected by the seller for later turnover (sales tax), and the other applies to the purchaser who is required to pay said tax on their returns (either quarterly for businesses or annually for personal taxes). Use taxes aren't "new", and they aren't any higher. It's just pushing the responsibility of who collects and turns over to somebody else.