Re: customs charges *after* delivery
- From: "steve robinson" <steve@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
- Date: Mon, 25 May 2009 09:02:48 GMT
Ste wrote:
On 25 May, 02:18, "steve robinson" <st...@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
wrote:
The buyer should have looked into this before buying them ignorance of the
law is no excuse ,
Here we go again with the a priori statements of what buyers "should"
do.
Ok have it your way dont bother checking out what your legal obligations are ,
rush in blunder about make a total ASS of yourself in the process then come on
this newsgroup and complain that its every one elses fault because no one told
you
Are you aware of anyone who has ever consulted their accountant before
buying £20 worth of electronic goods from Hong Kong?
I certainly wouldnt consult my accountant over a matter of law , this may be where
your going wrong .
Its doesnt matter what the value is be it £20.00 or millions , its the importers
responsiblity to make sure they comply with UK legislation .
A phone call to Customs or a quick look on the net will give you all the infomation
you need
At the end of the day Steve, there are only two possibilities here.
One, there has been an unfortunate turn of circumstances for which no
one can reasonably be blamed. Two, the seller knew full well that the
importation would attract taxes, and failed to warn the buyer. You'll
notice that I do not suggest the buyer was negligent in any way, and I
do accept cases in which the seller would not be negligent either.
If the OP's case is a case that falls under One, then my moral
position is that the buyer pays his taxes and learns his lessons. If
the case falls under Two, then I support any attempt by hook or by
crook to impose the costs of the tax on the seller; including just
cancelling the contract and sending the goods back.
Your moral position counts for nothing , its the law that counts , the moral
argument is usally the position taken by those that have exhausted all legal
argument and failed.
It is not the sellers responsiblity to collect the VAT or exise duties (exept b2b
with mobile phones computer chips etc within the EU to prevent carasoul fraud)
Now in the circumstances, even if Two above does apply, it may just be
impracticable or impossible for the buyer to impose any costs on the
seller, and he'll just have suffer his unfortunate luck and learn his
lessons. If that's the case, then fine.
But you Steve go one step further, and suggest that the seller in thisThe seller has no duty to inform the buyer about taxation outside the sellers own
case, even if he knew, ought not to have informed the buyer about the
taxes; the onus is on the buyer to consult a professional, or just
take a chance, and if he gets stung then it's tough luck. All I can
say in response, fundamentally, is that businessmen who think like you
make up the scum of the business community, because you think business
is about trickery, connivance, and deceit, and you operate on that
basis thinking that you have no moral obligation to the buyer
whatsoever.
Its nothing to do with trickery , deciet or moral obligation .
country , his /her only duty is to comply with the legislation of the country they
are tradeing in .The seller is not imposing the taxes , in this case its HM customs
It would be completly unrealistic to expect the seller to know which countries do
impose duties and which dont , it could also leave him/her open to legal action if
any advice given was incorrect.
Import tarriffs change on a daily basis around the world
would seem strange, for example, if someone could send unsolicited
goods from abroad, and the recipient would automatically be liable for
the import duties, and so one naturally suspects that liability falls
first at the feet of the seller.
Only in your world
If the goods are unsolicited (have no buyer) then the seller becomes the importer
and pays all taxes and duties , this is completely different to you ordering the
goods and having them delivered
You probably know more about import/export, and the taxes related to
it than I do. The question is does statute actually say that the buyer
is the importer, or are you just assuming that because the buyer has
"solicited" the importation, that therefore he must be the importer?
Statute defines who is responsible for the duty in these circumstances its the buyer
as he is acting as the importer too
Of course, I don't know how the law applies to this particular matter,
but I've put forth the two ways in which it presumably could apply,
and I'm interested to find out which is actually correct.
The importer pays not the seller ( unless its vat on computer chips and mobile
phones were the vat is paid at scource by the supplier under the anti carasoul
fraud scheme within the EU)
Even by your own logic, the importer is the seller if the goods are
unsolicited. So what rules govern here?
It all revolves around point of purchase and transportation of the goods across
boarders
.
- References:
- customs charges *after* delivery
- From: gaz
- Re: customs charges *after* delivery
- From: jinty . hopper
- Re: customs charges *after* delivery
- From: Mike Ross
- Re: customs charges *after* delivery
- From: jinty . hopper
- Re: customs charges *after* delivery
- From: Ste
- Re: customs charges *after* delivery
- From: steve robinson
- Re: customs charges *after* delivery
- From: Ste
- Re: customs charges *after* delivery
- From: steve robinson
- Re: customs charges *after* delivery
- From: Ste
- customs charges *after* delivery
- Prev by Date: Re: If you think MPs perks are great....consider a Plod pension
- Next by Date: Re: customs charges *after* delivery
- Previous by thread: Re: customs charges *after* delivery
- Next by thread: Re: customs charges *after* delivery
- Index(es):
Relevant Pages
|
Loading