Import from USA & VAT
- Thread starter mlbtheshow
- Start date
No. You don't pay import duty as there is no import duty on most computer parts/systems.
If you imported something readily produced in the EU then you'd pay duty (e.g. clothing is normally 12% last time I checked).
But not if it's not available over here?
I'd thought you got stung regardless, but if it's only when the item is available here that's a bit better.
Strictly, VAT is paid regardless unless it's something that wouldn't normally be paid on e.g. books or childrens' clothing.
Import duty depends on how prevalent that industry is in the EU, it's basically designed to ensure cheap foreign goods don't ruin EU industries, or to encourage cheap foreign imports if we don't produce ourselves.
Well, no, evading is wrong and really shouldn't be done. It only leads to government spending being harmed. May as well go around saying at least you can be thankful that shoplifting is so easy, because let's face it, times are tough.
If duty didn't exist cheap foreign imports would flood the EU killing many industries. The basic way to tell is the higher the duty the more is produced in the EU. It's to put our own manufacturing and jobs on level pegging with places like China and India that can mass produce at insanely cheap levels.
And if we didn't have VAT we'd just have sales tax. At least VAT is regulated on an EU wide scale.
Last edited:
Yes because the government drove companies out of the country forcing people to import, it's largely irrelevant to the fact that it's extortionate though.
Evasion is the public's defence to astronomical taxes, when taxes are raised the black market increases and overall tax revenue falls, this keeps the government in check. The last part of your statement is purely straw man.
You forget that many items imported are not actually available in the UK, this infuriates people most.
No need for tax on goods at all.
Last edited:
No, the last part is my scorn for encouraging breaking the law for something, that to an individual consumer, is rather minimal. On a corporate level it's even worse.
Theft from the revenue is same as theft from the shop. You can pretend it's some form of "balancing" of a governments power, but you know what? You have the right to vote, to demand an MP speaks on your behalf in parliament. THAT'S how you deal with government, not breaking the law.
While frankly I speed in my car, I know I'm breaking the law, I certainly don't feel that I'm right to do so, or above it.
Duty is EU, not UK. So not being UK produced is irrelevant to an EU based taxation system (VAT being governed by the EU as well).
So no, I didn't forget.
No, but that would necessitate higher income tax or a substantially smaller form of government, neither of which are going to happen.
You can't seriously compare lost revenue from forced taxation to that of stealing something from a shop, that's all I really have to say. The last part I'm afraid is idealistic and does not work in reality unless you want to petition something that works in the governments favour, though I did actually vote.
The UK government chose to enter into such a system, hence it is their doing. When I order something from the USA not available anywhere in the EU I have to pay extra VAT and duty, even though no UK business has lost out.
You're right, I can't.
Mainly because defrauding the exchequer or tax evasion are far more serious crimes than shoplifting.
You may try to give yourself moral authority to do so, but unfortunately the factual position is completely different. The fact you don't like it is irrelevant.
You have every right for your MP speaks on your behalf. You have every right to go to the houses of parliament and demand your MP sees you. That is not idealistic. They are your rights.
What exactly do you order from the USA that you pay duty on that isn't produced in the EU? To forestall you saying computer parts etc you don't pay duty on them.
As for VAT if you didn't pay on import that of course would hurt UK businesses. Why would consumers purchase from the UK where they have to pay VAT if they could order from abroad and save themselves? And how wouldn't that hurt businesses?
I'm not saying it's moral, I'm saying they are incomparable, ethics are irrelevant.
But it doesn't make a difference.
Artwork for one, anything that is not generic essentially.
It would only harm businesses in cases where the items are actually sold in the UK. That's what capitalism is all about though.
They're just different magnitudes of theft.
It's still a better option than defrauding the exchequer.
Ooh, here I can be helpful
Original pieces of artwork (i.e. not copies) should be imported as such and entered duty free with the reduced rate of VAT (5%). If you're paying more the people entering your customs details (most likely the couriers) are being lazy (probably) and have done it wrong. If they are doing this then any additional costs are the couriers "handling" fees which are extortionate but aren't actually a tax.
But by harming businesses you harm individuals as the demand for jobs decreases.
The theft act clearly defines theft as something entirely different.
Ooh, here I can be helpful
Original pieces of artwork (i.e. not copies) should be imported as such and entered duty free with the reduced rate of VAT (5%). If you're paying more the people entering your customs details (most likely the couriers) are being lazy (probably) and have done it wrong. If they are doing this then any additional costs are the couriers "handling" fees which are extortionate but aren't actually a tax.
Even still there's still vat to pay on an item whose seller is not vat registered nor in the country.
The theft act clearly defines nothing,
"A person is guilty of theft if he dishonestly appropriates property belonging to another with the intention of permanently depriving the other of it; and “thief” and “steal” shall be construed accordingly"
Fraud was contained within the theft act, although now it's been taken out and placed into the fraud act I'd expect tax evasion would now lie there as you are gaining by false representation. Which then also begs the question whether this falls foul of the money laundering regulations.
So, still far worse than shoplifting, but true, shoplifting isn't as bad as it's only minor theft not fraud. Twas a silly example I admit.
Well of course, VAT is consumption. Duty is protectionist, and you don't pay that. I fail to see the issue unless you'd prefer higher income taxes and no VAT?
I'm quite frankly amazed that you believe deception is worse than physical criminal activities. Though I rather suspect you are being deliberately obtuse here.
Income tax is always preferable over VAT which is very easy to evade, regressive in it's current form and costly to implement.
Permabanned
- Joined
- 22 Feb 2010
- Posts
- 1,629
i have never been caught out with vat and duty... and i wonce shipped a 2k laptop from usa to uk up urs HM Person!
up urs HM Person!I've gotta say, I've made quite a few orders, mostly from Japan, and I've never been charged any VAT or Customs fees. I've simply paid the price the shop were selling at, and the delivery price they paid themselves. They do declare the items of a far lesser value on the declarations slip though.
Permabanned
- Joined
- 22 Feb 2010
- Posts
- 1,629
they do that so you will shop with them again :d
Couriers will only go by the information given on the commercial invoice, which must be produced by the customer. If the customer does not declare the correct commodity code for the reduced rate of duty and the correct CPC code then they will be assumed by the courier. Mistakes do happen though!