what, as i understand it and i have not talked to either texas or amazon, but as i understand it they have a distribution facility or they have an affiliate that has a distribution facility in texas that texas now believes creates a physical presence for amazon this that now -- because they have that presence there, amazon has an obligation to collect sales tax. and not, as i understand on a going forward basis, but texas wants to look back a little bit, too, and collect some of the tax they haven't been collecting. >> host: and it was a bill for $269 million. >> guest: if not more. it was large. >> host: and what's the situation? what's the current status on that? >> guest: i think they're going to be in court. >> guest: yes. they will be in court. and it's really a question of -- it's a corporate question, corporate law question as to whether or not there is enough ownership or whatever in the fulfillment center and then does that create the nexus where tax is due, and the number is amazon hadn't been collecting and putting in the taxes, and if, in fact, they lose, there is that tax

if i understand it, and i have not talked to texas or amazon, they have a distribution facility in texas that texas now believes creates a physical presence for amazon. and because they have that presence there, that amazon has an obligation to collect their sales tax. and not on an ongoing basis, but texas wants it look back a little, too. >> and it was a bill for like $269 political mill. >> if not more. >> what's the situation on that? >> i think they are going to be in court. >> and it is really a question of -- it is a corporate law question as to whether or not there is enough ownership in the fulfillment center. does that create the nexus where tax is due? and the number is, amazon hadn't been collecting and putting in the taxes, and in fact they lose -- there is that tax obligation which will come straight out of amazon, because i purchased it a while back, and you didn't collect the taxes, i don't think amazon will try to go back and collect the taxes from me. >> what is your vie on that issue -- view on that issue? >> it is a corporate law issue. if amazon has a presence in tex

as i understand it, i have not checked on amazon, but david distribution sorting or they have an affiliate that has a facility in texas that texas now believes creates a physical presence for amazon. now that they have at present there, amazon has the obligation of sales-tax. and as i understand on a going forward basis, but taxes on look back a little bit, too and collect some of the taxes they haven't. >> host: it was a bill for $269 billion. >> guest: if not more. >> host: what is the current status for that? >> guest: i think they're going to need a court. >> guest: and it's really a question -- it is a corporate law question as to whether or not there is enough ownership or whatever in the fulfillment center and does not create the nexus where taxes do and the number is amazon hadn't been collecting and putting in the taxes. and if in fact they lose, there is -- that tax obligation will come straight out of the amazon because i purchased a day while back and he didn't collect the taxes. cannot think amazon will go back and collect the taxes. >> host: what is your view on that issue? >> guest: is a corporate law i

texas. >> i would want a yes or no. we are providing approach boat information that has been provided to them. yes or no is the amazon cloud server. is it a recipient? is an internet service provider a recipient, yes or no. >> yes, but is unconstitutional. >> its is what? >> it is unconstitutional for purposes of criminal liability >> the medium is a recipient >> it would be moved to apply it that way >> yes, they are a recipient. the statue will apply once they disclose again. it is not a crime to recede. it is to transmit. like the professor, i think that application would be unconstitutional. >> it would be a recipient, and i think it would fall within the statute, but i think you'd be very unlikely that anybody would like to prosecute it, and while there is a provision about not returning inflation to the government, there are certain circumstances where an entity can be prosecuted. it is very unlikely that this would be prosecuted even if it in turn distributed beyond the services. >> it is a recipient. i agree that is very unlikely that due process whenever tackle it because there are more blatant leaks that ha