Impacts of the Wayfair Case with Scott Peterson of Avalara
The Wayfair decision made in 2018 by the United States Supreme Court was a phenomenal overturning of longstanding court ruling on taxable businesses. This recent court ruling impacts many businesses, not only in South Dakota but also in the other United States; and whenever new court decisions are finalized and become executory, it’s a challenging time not just for the implementers but for those who need to implement them in their own businesses and activities.
The ones most affected by this ruling are online sellers who use online marketplaces like Amazon to sell their products. These often small-time business owners suddenly need to be more acquainted with their tax remittances from the sales they make in their online stores and it can be pretty taxing.
In this episode of Sales Tax and More, Michael Fleming is joined by Scott Peterson, Vice President of U.S. Tax Policy and Government Relations at Avalara to discuss how the Wayfair decision affects various players in the United States, what the grounds for the ruling are, the transaction thresholds it covers, and how you can ensure that your business remains state compliant to avoid headaches in the future. Stay tuned.
Here’s a glimpse of what you’ll learn:
Michael Fleming introduces his guest, Scott Peterson and talks about Avalara
Scott talks about how the Wayfair case decision came about and how it affects businesses
Scott's opinion on whether states should keep transaction thresholds and whether more lawsuits are likely to be filed because of them
Michael and Scott address the topic of taxation from sales made through the Amazon marketplace
How the Wayfair case has taken a lot of incentive to get states doing the same thing and the sellers’ expectations from Congress regarding the uniformity that the ruling imposes
Are other states inclined to follow in the footsteps of Oregon in creating nexus?
Scott talks about past tax exposure and how states can ask you to go backward in your timeline
Why you need to listen to your trusted advisors to make sure that you are tax compliant
Where to learn more about Scott Peterson and Avalara
Resources Mentioned in This Episode
Connect with Michael
Sponsor for This Episode
Sales Tax and More assists companies and their trusted advisors like CPAs with sales tax needs. They offer consulting and research, registrations, returns, and so much more. Over the years they have assisted thousands of sellers both foreign and domestic with their tax issues in the United States and in Canada.
Episode Transcript - Audio Version
[0:10] Intro: Welcome to Sales Tax and More, your go-to resource for all things state tax-related. Now here is your host, Michael Fleming.
[0:26] Mike: Hi, I'm Mike Fleming, Founder of Sales Tax and More. I’m today's host of the Sales Tax and More Podcast, where we talk about everyone's favorite topic, which is of course sales tax. And we've got a phenomenal guest today. His name is Scott Peterson and Accounting Today actually named him as one of the top 100 Most Influential People in Accounting in 2018 and 19. And we're going to discuss the Wayfair case, where we’ve been, where we are, where we're going. Before we start, though, I want to share a little information about Avalara, that's where Scott currently is employed. You all have varying levels of familiarity with the Avalara. So I'm going to bring everyone up to speed very quickly. They're a leading provider of cloud-based tax compliance solutions. And you know, they help businesses of all sizes. And they help them achieve compliance with transaction taxes, you know, including a sales and use, that excise communications, constantly adding new tax types and services. Solutions are designed to be very fast, accurate and easy to use. And their vision is to touch every transaction in the world. It's a great visionary, you know. I was amazed, you know, Scott, you know, trying to look back at prepare for this, how long I've actually had a relationship with Avalara and it's, it's 10 years now. So, time flies. So I've seen Avalara grow and you know, I'm just amazed at the quality of services that they put out there. And by the way, Avalara is now a public company. They trade under the symbol AVLR. They went public back in 2018 and they’re, they've almost doubled since that time. So a lot of growth, a lot of good things going on there. And Scott is the Vice President of US tax policy and Government Relations for Avalara. But prior to working for Avalara, Scott was the first executive director of the streamlined sales tax governing board. And prior to that, he was the director of the South Dakota sales tax division. So Scott's truly an expert. I mean, you know, with Scott, you get a perspective that we don't often hear. And on top of that, he's a really great guy. So, Scott, you want to say hello to the audience?
[2:53] Scott: Hey, everybody. Thank you, Mike. I appreciate the introduction and the nice things about Avalara. Yeah, I'm with you. I've, I met, you know, the founders back in 2004. Even though I've worked for him for seven years, I've known them for what was it? Gosh, going on 15 years, 16 years.
[3:14] Mike: It's amazing, you know, how they've grown and you know, how much they've added and how many people they are helping. I'm just truly amazed myself. So anyway, let's, let's talk Wayfair, I mean, talk about changes. Yeah, well, you know, you've been around for a while. What, how did Wayfair come about? Why don't we start there? Okay.
[3:40] Scott: Ok, yeah. Yeah, I had been around for a while. I remember I worked for the state of South Dakota when the states were trying to get back to the Supreme Court the last time in 92 and the Quill versus North Dakota case. You know, there was a lot of rivalry between South Dakota, North Dakota, and South Dakota was mad that they were the case that got or the state that got picked for that for that lawsuit.
[4:06] Mike: Well, they got picked this time
[4:08] Scott: Well they got picked this time, yeah, it's kind of weird. It's really quite weird. You’ve got the two Dakotas, these two tiny little states that that are, you know, lawsuit driven apparently. But so, you know, the Supreme Court's decision in 1967, and then again in 1992, created this world where retailers got to playing where they're going to be sales tax compliant. You knew before the Wayfair case that you're going to have to know something about a state sales tax when you put an employee in that state or when you open a store in that state. Those are all decisions that you the business got to choose. I mean, you got to know what you had to know because you made a conscious choice of what you needed to know. Wayfair, you know, when the Supreme Court simply said that, you know, the physical presence test that everybody relied on for 50 plus years was wrong, kind of, well, completely, turn the apple card. But it didn't really leave anything in its wake. I mean, so, you know, 67 make the court created the, you know, the bright-line test a physical presence? Well, when they get rid of the bright-line, they didn't leave any line at all. And all anybody was left with is, you know, what the South Dakota law said, which is if you make more than $100,000 in sales, or if you have more than 200 sales that, you know, that's not, I suppose that's a bright line. It certainly could have been a bright line had the states decided that they were going to follow that exactly. And the downside is that in the 18 months, since we've had the Wayfair decision, we've you know, 43 states today have adopted something similar to the South Dakota law. In a couple of cases, it’s exactly like South Dakota law. In many cases, it's only similar to South Dakota law. So it's, we go from a world where you the retailer, you the business, decide where you're going to collect sales, what, where you collect sales tax because you decided we're going to because we present, to a world now where customers decide where retailers have to collect sales tax because it's that marginal sale that, you know, that that person that you sell to in South Dakota that takes you over $100,000 is a person who's chosen that you need to understand South Dakota sales tax.
[6:40] Mike: Yeah, absolutely. And we're still seeing this evolve. I mean, a lot of companies played follow the excuse me, a lot of states played follow the leader and jumped out there with $100,000 or 200 transactions, but lately we've been seeing, you know, move away from the transactions in a lot of states, you know, states like Washington, you know, California, they've done away with their transactions. Now, we've got a bill in Florida that it looks like they're going to include transactions as part of their thresholds, and we've got a bill in Missouri, that appears to be the last two states without transaction threshold, where they're not going to have a transaction threshold. So do you think that transaction thresholds are here to stay? Or do you think that eventually they'll go away, or you just don't have a crystal ball?
[7:36] Scott: I don't really have a feel for it. But if I were going to guide state tax policy, I've been doing it for a long time, I would encourage states to get rid of the transaction things. It creates, just you know, the Supreme Court in the Wayfair decision said physical presence created anomaly. You could be the world's smallest retailer and have to collect sales tax everywhere because you had to be physically present to do what you do, whereas the world's largest retailer wouldn't have to collect sales tax anywhere, because they never have to be physically present anywhere. Well, with transactions, you get kind of the same thing, you could get, you could be, I mean, we've got a customer that sells things that cost 75 cents, and they sell lots and lots of them. But they, in a bunch of states, where they never exceed the dollar threshold, but they blow through that 200 within the first month of the year.
[8:28] Mike: Yeah.
[8:29] Scott: You know, so that, you know, that, these are folks that are going to remit, you know, into South Dakota or Wyoming, they're going to remit, you know, $400 or $500 in sales tax through an entire year and never exceed the dollar threshold. But you know, just go way past the actual, the actual transaction. So you, you have individuals, and it's at some point, there needs to be, at some point we need to go back to the balancing act the states used to have, and probably still have for certain types of retailers. I mean, if you're physically present inside of the state, but you are just too small, a lot of states would say - Pay sales tax on the things you buy, and when you get big, you call us and then we'll give you a license. And we'll do this the right way. So they did a based upon the amount of sale, they kind of did a cost-benefit ratio analysis on - Okay, it cost us four and a half thousand dollars to get somebody licensed, educated, and to keep them compliant. Well, if you aren't going to collect four and a half thousand dollars in sales tax, you're not worth the effort. You know, it's a rational thing, perhaps. And so I think, and at least I hope that the transaction thing goes down that same cost-benefit analysis, because there's going to be a lot of people that remit practically no sales tax at all at the end of the year.
[9:58] Mike: Yeah, absolutely. Like you're saying earlier, the US Supreme Court didn't come out and explicitly say $100,000 or 200 transactions was acceptable, you know, for South Dakota, they sort of said - Makes, seems like it makes sense. But they sent it back to the lower court for it to be decided, and they settled the case before that was actually decided. So, do you anticipate, you know, more lawsuits along these lines?
[10:27] Scott: You know, I, yes. And for a couple of different reasons. I think the transaction thing is, a, maybe a place that people could, you know, rest their head on a lawsuit, because surely we're going to have people who are paying somebody to do, paying either an employee or, you know, someone like Avalara to do sales tax compliance for them, and the cost of compliance far exceeds the tax that gets collected. So in that point, You know, then maybe you've got an undue burden argument. Maybe go to the Supreme Court and say, you know, I get it. If I were big, this would make perfect sense. But it costs me more to file a return than the tax that I remit on the return. That doesn't make any sense. That looks to me like a burden. And it's an undue burden, who knows. If I got to do it in 25 states, maybe. The other areas where we have these really well, we have states today that are treating in-state retailers better than out-of-state retailers. The example is Illinois. Illinois, origin sourcing state. If you're an in-state retailer, you collect whatever their
[11:44] Mike: Retailers occupation tax.
[11:46] Scott: And we just have a normal day. But if you're not a retailer, we gotta collect state use tax. There's going to be situations in there where the out-of-state retailer pays a higher tax rate and the same thing in Tennessee. In Tennessee, where I live, you know, the legislature adopted a law that said if you're not a retailer you gotta collect on destination. In-state retailers collect on origin. And while there's every spot in Tennessee has a local sales tax, there's lots of spots in Tennessee where the local sales tax rate differs from each other. It can be nine and a quarter percent or nine and three-quarter percent. I mean, you could have an out-of-state retailer having to collect a higher rate and spend more money doing the compliance than you do an in-state retail. So I think those two areas are, are I think, maybe not quite right for a lawsuit, but I would think they're going to come along sometime.
[12:46] Mike: I'm not sure if you're familiar with this. Amazon just, you know, created a mess, along with Illinois, with the marketplace facilitator laws. So Amazon is marketplace, they need to collect tax from their third party sellers, or on behalf of their third-party sellers, and remit it to the state of Illinois. But Illinois in their infinite wisdom, just assumed that all of these marketplaces are outside the state, so they've got to collect the use tax, and remit that to the state. Illinois came out the other day, and they said - If you have inventory in an Amazon warehouse, you still have to, you're subject to the retailer's occupation tax. And, you know, you can't recoup it from your customer because Amazon's already collecting the use tax. So now the tax is getting paid basically double taxation, and use taxes being paid, and a retailer's occupation tax is supposed to be getting paid. So to me, that's absolutely ludicrous. So. . .
[13:58] Scott: Yeah, we've been studying that. We're trying to see how we, you know, how we help people deal with that. It's complicated. I mean, it's, it's, yeah. So it seems to me that Illinois ought to be a pretty easy target for somebody that wants to, you know, start another lawsuit. Maybe we go back to where we started. Remember, Bellas Hess versus Illinois.
[14:24] Mike: Full Circle. Yeah, that's, lots of, lots of problems out there. So what do you, what do you think, you know, where do we go from here? What, you know, are you telling people, what are you hearing from your contacts at the States? What, what do you think the big takeaways are?
[14:45] Scott: Well, the big takeaway is that they're getting more money than they ever have, and they think it's working. There's a, there is a, I'm surprised at how quickly my friends at the states have created a new normal. And they just think - oh, well, your marketplace seller, okay, that's fine. This is what we do. Oh, you're a remote seller. Okay, that's fine. This is what we do. You’re marketplace, that's fine. This is what we do. Without giving one second thought to how those two things interact with each other, and how they're different from their neighbor. You know, when we created the streamlined sales tax, the whole point of that was - You're different from your neighbor, why? Can’t we fixed that? Because that difference creates creating chaos. Well, yeah, now we're back to the same spot. We've got people with different thresholds for sellers, different threshold for marketplaces. They, some of them, some of them require the marketplace seller to include their marketplace sales in their own threshold. Some of them don't, some of them lobby to include sales for resale, some don't. But the states of all thinking - Well, I know what my law is, we’re good.
[15:52] Mike: Yeah, and, you know, they taken a, you know, Wayfair’s really taken away a lot of incentive to get the states all doing the same thing.
[16:03] Scott: Yeah. And that's, you know, when I was, you know, the last few years I was with South Dakota, and then the seven years I was with the streamlined sales tax I, I lobbied Congress. And one of my jobs was to lobby Congress, to get Congress to give states this same authority they got into the Supreme Court, but with conditions, right, and no one for a second thought we'd have the Supreme Court take this case again and make a decision, you know, as broad as they did. So throughout this whole, you know, last 15 years, all anybody's ever thought about was - Okay, state you may get this authority someday, this Congress is gonna let you have it. But they're going to make you do A, B, C, and D and A is uniformity. You got to do it exactly the same way. And now, now, the states have stopped lobbying. Now they lobby Congress the opposite way. We got everything under control. You know, trust us, we can deal with this in a rational way.
[17:04] Mike: You know, in we hear from a lot of sellers out there, a lot of e-commerce sellers, and actually, you know, other people who have this new economic nexus, that they're waiting for Congress to do something. They're not going to move. I mean, they know what the risks are, but they’re still not going to do anything because they believe Congress is going to step in and come up with some sort of uniformity yet, you could say it, I can't, but make life easier for them. You know, I just don't see it happening anytime soon. There's, I just don't think there's an appetite for it. Are you seeing anything different or?
[17:49] Scott: No, and we, you know, we're, we follow what the people in Congress are doing on this issue. And there, I mean, for the last year, yeah, for the last year, there's a there's a small group in Congress that wants to hold a hearing. There is legislation pending in Congress. But it's, you know, it's in committees where the, you know, the, the chair of the committee likes the world the way it is. And, which was the problem that the states had before when, you know, there was somebody else in charge of those committees. So now, all they're talking about is holding the hearing. And I, just the last Friday, I was part of a conversation where the Senate is thinking about holding the hearing. But that is simply just that. They're going to get together. They're going to get some people from one side, and people from the other side and they’re going to talk about how things are going.
[18:43] Mike: Yeah. I mean, you know, we've seen this happen, how many times over the past couple of years? You know, mainstream fairness, marketplace fairness. You know, all they do is talk.
[18:58] Scott: Yeah, I mean, so actually from a congressional historical perspective, it's, um, you know, the Senate, back in 2013, adopted the Mainstream Fairness Act. I mean, they had 67 votes, and sent that over to the house. You know, if I were somebody, if I were a retailer out there thinking - Oh, Congress is gonna save me, I look at that 2013 vote, and look at the 67 senators have voted for that piece of legislation. Almost all of them are still in the Senate. Now, they're, the, so all the people that thought that was a good idea, and thought that what the Supreme Court did was a good idea in 2013, they’re still in the senate.
[19:40] Mike: Yeah, so that would not have saved people, that, people, that would have done pretty much exactly what the Wayfair case did.
[19:48] Scott: Yeah, it would have done exactly the same thing. There'd be there'd be more uniformity, and that's about it. But oh, yeah, no, it's yeah, I don't think Congress is gonna save anybody.
[19:56] Mike: Now, they, you know, I bring up the northwestern cement case, and you know how we got Public Law 86-272, Congress came out and said - Hey, this is a temporary solution. We're going to form committees and study this. And that was in 1959. We still have this antiquated temporary solution out there. So on some topics, you know, Congress's been do nothing for a long, long time
[20:23] Scott: You know, in a suit, and I feel bad, frankly, I really feel bad for businesses, you know, Public Law 86-272 was probably perfectly crafted for its time, but it protects almost no one now. Oh, my goodness. I mean, and then the analysis is so complicated. To determine whether or not you could not have to file an income tax return in the state. You can do some pretty serious gymnastics
[20:51] Mike: Absolutely. And now, you know, for some of these companies that have a pure economic nexus, it may apply. But now you've got states like Oregon coming out and saying - Okay, we want a piece of this. We don't have a sales tax, so we can't get, you know, our income tax to work, but let's create a gross receipts tax so that we can join the party also. What do you think, you think we're going to see, you know, states play follow the leader behind Oregon
[21:21] Scott: I don't know. You know, so Ohio kind of started this with their CAT tax and activity tax, and it's funny that all Oregon calls there's a CAT tax, you know, it's the same same, two different states, two entirely, you know, different historical and political backgrounds. They both do the same darn thing. Well, they both do something very similar. But, you know, in the last 10 years, that Oregon taxes, the only new state tax, we've got, San Francisco's got something and either Philadelphia or Pennsylvania has something like that. But we haven't seen much.
[21:59] Mike: They just added it
[22:01] Scott: Thank you. It's Philly. So I haven't seen much effort in the stateside. What we are going to see on the state corporate income side is, you know, there's been a 25 year movement away from the old three-factor formula payroll, property and sales, to just sales. And you know, every state is moving that direction. And I don't know how you have, if you're, if your corporate income tax is apportioned solely on sales, I think you have to have an economic nexus test. I mean, I think it has to be economics, otherwise, I mean, what's the point of having sales as your only apportionment factor, if you're not going to see sales as creating nexus? That doesn't make any sense. So I can start, so all, I think all the states that use sales, either wholly or predominantly, will start to adopt use Wayfair as an excuse to go to economic nexus. May not, may not increase their tax bucks at all, but will certainly increase the number of returns they get.
[23:03] Mike: Absolutely. So, you know, a lot of people are talking about perspective enforcement. I saw an article in Accounting Today. And, you know, people are accusing California of going backwards, but that's going backwards for physical presence. But some states like Maine are going back to the first day that their economic nexus became effective, like, that's July 1, 2018. And they're going backward at this point. So what we're telling people is, you know, when these laws become effective, you've got no past exposure unless you have some sort of physical presence, and why in the world are you going to wait and let all of this past exposure build? I mean, if you've got potential exposure, be proactive. Don't wait for a state to find you, or is Avalara saying anything different? Or, what's your position on that?
[24:03] Scott: You know, we're not giving people to tax advice. We were counting on you to do that. But, the states aren't really going to have much choice. In the in the early days of a tax, a new tax, or a big change in the tax states, that department having to have a fair amount of political latitude, and it’s political attitude, it's not legal attitudes, it’s political attitude, to slow-walk enforcement. But after a certain period of time, they, the legislature or the governor's that can say, how is this, you know, I invested a lot of political capital getting this law changed, and, you know, we're going to spend that money, how you guys do in collecting that money? And when when that call comes in, that department of revenue is stuck. At that point in time, slow walking ends. And they start to look for people, and at that point, if they, one of the problems with tax administration is somebody always follows the law. Somebody, looks at the law and said - Oh, that's me. And they follow them. So you have to, you have the tax commissioner, and you're sitting there, you think - Okay, well, I'm gonna, you know, I'm going to start really enforcing this thing, you know, on March first, and it gets in the newspaper. And all those people that started a year ago, they're saying - Hmm, so why did I bother to do this last year? And then they call their legislators, they call the governor, tax commissioner's in trouble that tax commissioner then has to start going backwards. At that point in time, the tax commissioner says, okay, on March first, I'm going to really get aggressive on this, but I have to go back to the beginning of time. I haven't have any choice. That's what the law says, and where, this will be the year that that happens. South Dakota's governor's already, in her budget, she's giving them new think she call them agents, whose only job is to find remote sellers. Kentucky, Kentucky’s governor just released his budget last week, he's going to double the number of auditors and the Kentucky Department Revenue.
[26:10] Mike: Yeah. And that's what we're telling people. We're saying - Hey, number one, when you do a registration in South Dakota now, they pretty much make you, you know, prove that you didn't have nexus as of November first of 2018. And if you can't, they make you go backwards. Maine’s letting you get registered, but then they're auditing you. Those are the two most aggressive states, but we're starting to see other states, just like you're saying, and we think the next 18 months is going to be a bloodbath. And the problem is, while these states, this is what I believe, while they're primarily looking for economic nexus, they're going to stumble across all types of nexus.
[26:50] Scott: Yeah, it concerns me. I mean, I, and I tell people that all the time, I said, you know, you might get a bit of a free ride if all you've got is economic nexus, but if they asked you the right question, or you answered the right question the wrong way, physical presence is a guaranteed automatic look back.
[27:10] Mike: Yeah, absolutely.
[27:12] Scott: Automatic.
[27:13] Mike: So, Scott, you have any, you know, parting wisdom for, you know, what people should be doing?
[27:21] Scott: Well, we're, thank you, Mike. I appreciate the time today. You know, it's a, it's critical that folks listen to their trusted advisors. I mean, there is no, it's, if you call the state, the state's going to tell you what the law is. And that's it. You gotta call your trusted advisor and ask them - Okay, the laws, tell me what the law is. And tell me what I need to do to become compliant. Because the state's answer is going to be very simple. This is what you have to do. You have the opportunity to give them some advice. Maybe there's some planning that can happen. And maybe there's some, some ways to mitigate the past, maybe you've got relationships you can use, the states have none of that. They have what they have, and they have the law. And when you work in a department of revenue, the law becomes, not, it's your friend, because it keeps you from having to feel bad about having very bad news for people.
[28:24] Mike: Absolutely.
[28:25] Scott: And they use it all the time. So it's important, people need to take this issue seriously. Every month that goes by is a month of taxes that they owe, that they could have collected from their customer.
[28:37] Mike: And excellent point there. I mean, you know, that's, that's so important, and it's getting old. I mean, we're coming up. And some of these, I mean, some of the bigger states may have been just last November, but other states have been since July first of 2018, and that's what gets me the most, is it why let it continue to grow? So I thank you for sharing that bit of information. One thing that we say too, is, you know, especially for smaller sellers, you know, just because the state says you should do something, doesn't mean it makes good business sense. So until we get some relief for the smaller sellers, I said, we gotta use common sense. You know, if you, if you're selling $205 items, you got $1,000 worth of sales, and you know, you owe $60 the tax, let this state come and find you. I mean, my hand gets slapped. We do webinars, and I have auditors on those those webinars, and they'll say - You can't tell people that. Well, why not? Chase them down. It's, you know, they’ll be better off in the long run. So
[29:49] Scott: Yeah, $50, $60 in tax, plus, you know, 12% interest and a $10 penalty.
[29:58] Mike: Yeah, I mean even five years later you’re till doing better by letting the state track you down. So I think that we need to use some common sense when we're deciding whether we should do this, but like you were saying, if you do have material exposure, the time factor’s now. Don't wait any longer.
[30:15] Scott: No, no, it's, it, every, like I said every month, and it's not every day, but every month, every month, the problem just makes your problem deeper.
[30:23] Mike: Absolutely. So Scott, if someone wants to follow up with you, or learn more information about Avalara, what's the best way to do so?
[30:33] Scott: Well, you know, a couple different ways. They want to talk to me, you know, it's scott.peterson@avalara.com, happy to talk to people. You know, I actually like talking to businesses, it's, it's, I learned things that I then turn around and use to teach other people because I do a lot of teaching. Uh, you know, our website is really good. You know, avalara.com, great website. We have lots of different products. We have a really good chat system on our website if you just want to go out there and chat with a, you know, chat with a computer for a while, but we, you know, we can get you into the queue and get you to talk into a salesperson. Explain, you know, explain it all, or explain how the streamlined sales tax works, you know, and the pricing, because you know, that system, frankly, is really good when it comes to offsetting some of the costs that goes along with this. And then there's, because, this isn't a kind of a concept where you can just, it's not like plugging your computer in, or your phone, and plugging your phone in having the battery start charging automatically. It takes a little time to, to get, you know, a retailer's sale system to talk to the Avalara tax engine and have that turned into a return that gets filed to the end of the month. You know, that's a, you know, it takes a little time to go through that process. So the sooner they can get talking to us, or one of our competitors, the sooner they're going to be compliant.
[32:00] Mike: Absolutely, and we can help with that also, Scott, I mean, we, we have a lot of services that are complementary that you know, support a lot of the services you do. That's why we've had a relationship for so many years, because our clients need the products and tools they have Avalara does offer. So I want to really thank you for taking the time today. This has been great. And you know, you're welcome to come back. We'd love to have you again when it's time for an update. But as of this point, I want to say thanks for being here, and I want to thank all of our listeners for tuning in.
[32:42] Scott: Thank you very much, Mike. Appreciate it.
[32:43] Mike: You're welcome, Scott.
[32:44] Outro: Take care everyone. Thanks for listening. Be sure to click subscribe and check out all of the resources we have out on the web.