Amazon has apparently patented a floating warehouse system to be located in what are effectively airships floating at 45,000 feet above high density delivery areas. The warehouses are to be replenished with stock by associated ballon or airship systems and staff working at 45,000 feet would arrive and depart in these same way.
I suspect that technically the system has a long way to go before it might work, but let me assume Amazon has reason for thinking this way. Suppose, just for a moment, that the airship warehouse was replenished with stock from another warehouse anchored in international waters. There, is surely, no reason why this is not my possible? Where then is tax paid on the transaction? Might this be the reason for Amazon's interest? And if so what is the appropriate tax response?
I am, in general, deeply cynical of destination based sales taxes. Does such a situation require it though, maybe as an exceptional charging basis?
Or do we require the alternative minimum corporation tax that I have already proposed?
And what about tackling the VAT issues involved?
Let alone the fact that any company using such a system might be wholly avoiding the contribution retailers with stores make to the societies in which they work through the local taxes that they pay that Amazon will claim are, quite literally, beneath them?
I am not saying Amazon cannot develop their ideas. But I do think we need to presume their goal is to subvert tax systems to secure competitive advantage when doing so and make sure we are ready to counter that.