[RobRoy]

>>What is interesting is that Amazon (I believe) doesn’t have ANY actual business holdings in the state of North Carolina. Essentially, NC is asking to review the financials of a company for which it has no jurisdiction or oversight authority.<<

This. I think you have essentially nailed it. I wonder, though, how the state of NY successfully getting tobbacco tax info on people who bought mail order cigarrettes would play into this. Come to think of it, I think Washington state did the same thing.

And I believe they were successful at billing the residents for unpaid tax.

[OldDeckHand]

"I wonder, though, how the state of NY successfully getting tobbacco tax info on people who bought mail order cigarrettes would play into this. "

Good point. Of course, tobacco is a regulated product, like liquor. I suppose the argument could be made that the state has an explicit interest in determining the identity of the recipient of controlled/regulated items in the state, regardless of the origin of such items.

I'm not sure such an explicit interest could be asserted for the kids of items that Amazon sells - books & CDs. Then again, courts have given (mistakenly) tremendous latitude to both state and federal governments in furtherance of collecting taxes & revenues. I'm sure this will be no different.

[an amused spectator]

And I believe they were successful at billing the residents for unpaid tax.

If they pull this, the victims need to make it "revenue neutral".