One could argue that consumers are the ones paying every tax.

Sure. But what is taxed does steer society. Imagine only taxing on pollution (so not on wages/sales/home ownership).

Currently we tax on wages/ sales/ home ownership and not on Amazon an little on pollution. Look around to see the result.

I don't get your point. Are you suggesting that Amazon alone should pay a tax on revenue (steering business to its competitors and reducing consumption slightly), that every company should pay a tax on revenue (steering business from more expensive and less vertically-integreated competitors to Amazon, but reducing overall consumption) or something else entirely?

Im saying all tax is paid by consumers in the end. But what is being taxed is still interesting.

I'm suggesting Amazon is currently doing what it does because of taxation law. It simply complies/optimizes. Profit taxed? Dont make profit. Pollution free, dont worry about pollution.

I don't understand: What's the difference in them passing on the sales taxes and passing on the corp. taxes, or indeed any other expense?

Agreed. But where the tax is coming from pushes society in one direction or another.

Picture this: all tax for the budget collected from pollution taxes, so: zero sales tax, zero wage tax, zero home owner taxes.

What do you think society will optimize in that case?

Yet currently we tax on labour and on home ownership, but not on Amazon. Look around an see the result.

This assumes tech giants aren't the giant colluding monopolies that they are, and actually need to be competitive in quality or price to survive. The tax will be payed by consumers, and shareholders aren't going to see a difference in their dividends.