Any map of schemes <inline-formula content-type="math/mathml"> <mml:math xmlns:mml="http://www.w3.org/1998/Math/MathML" alttext="upper X right-arrow upper Y"> <mml:semantics> <mml:mrow> <mml:mi>X</mml:mi> <mml:mo stretchy="false"> → </mml:mo> <mml:mi>Y</mml:mi> </mml:mrow> <mml:annotation encoding="application/x-tex">X\to Y</mml:annotation> </mml:semantics> </mml:math> </inline-formula> defines an equivalence relation <inline-formula content-type="math/mathml"> <mml:math xmlns:mml="http://www.w3.org/1998/Math/MathML" alttext="upper R equals upper X times Subscript upper Y Baseline upper X right-arrow upper X times upper X"> <mml:semantics> <mml:mrow> <mml:mi>R</mml:mi> <mml:mo>=</mml:mo> <mml:mi>X</mml:mi> <mml:msub> <mml:mo> × </mml:mo> <mml:mi>Y</mml:mi> </mml:msub> <mml:mi>X</mml:mi> <mml:mo stretchy="false"> → </mml:mo> <mml:mi>X</mml:mi> <mml:mo> × </mml:mo> <mml:mi>X</mml:mi> </mml:mrow> <mml:annotation encoding="application/x-tex">R=X\times _Y X\to X\times X</mml:annotation> </mml:semantics> </mml:math> </inline-formula> , the relation of “being in the same fiber”. We have shown elsewhere that not every equivalence relation has this form, even if it is assumed to be finite. By contrast, we prove here that every toric equivalence relation on an affine toric variety does come from a morphism and that quotients by finite toric equivalence relations always exist in the affine case. In special cases, this result is a consequence of the vanishing of the first cohomology group in the Amitsur complex associated to a toric map of toric algebras. We prove more generally the exactness of the Amitsur complex for maps of commutative monoid rings.