I'm selling some small souvenirs, primarily in person but also by
mailorder. The cost of postage to EU is 3x that of UK,
they take three weeks to arrive,
and the customers are charged an extra 50% as import duty.
What palaver!
Farage, Boris, Gove et al... are you really pleased that your wafer-thin triumph at the ballot box is so desperately discouraging to exporters?
I'm selling some small souvenirs, primarily in person but also by
mailorder. The cost of postage to EU is 3x that of UK,
they take three
weeks to arrive, and the customers are charged an extra 50% as import
duty. What palaver!
Farage, Boris, Gove et al... are you really pleased that your wafer-thin triumph at the ballot box is so desperately discouraging to exporters?
I'm selling some small souvenirs, primarily in person but also by
mailorder. The cost of postage to EU is 3x that of UK,
they take three
weeks to arrive, and the customers are charged an extra 50% as import
duty. What palaver!
Farage, Boris, Gove et al... are you really pleased that your wafer-thin triumph at the ballot box is so desperately discouraging to exporters?
On Thu, 28 Nov 2024 16:46:02 +0000, Roland Perry wrote:
I'm selling some small souvenirs, primarily in person but also by
mailorder. The cost of postage to EU is 3x that of UK,
Is that a consequence of Brexit or of the cost of moving things? ISTR that sending something to France was always more expensive than sending it to Tunbridge Wells.
they take three
weeks to arrive, and the customers are charged an extra 50% as import
duty. What palaver!
Farage, Boris, Gove et al... are you really pleased that your wafer-thin
triumph at the ballot box is so desperately discouraging to exporters?
Who is it who imposes the import duty?
On 28/11/2024 04:46 pm, Roland Perry wrote:
I'm selling some small souvenirs, primarily in person but also by
mailorder. The cost of postage to EU is 3x that of UK,
I don't know the figures for inland or overseas Royal Mail postage of
parcels or packages, but would remind you that other carriers are available.
It's a competitive market these days.
they take three
weeks to arrive, and the customers are charged an extra 50% as import
duty. What palaver!
Hmmm... If I were to order something from www.thomann.de and had opted
for the UK page, the charge would be 20% VAT (paid by Thomann to HMRC)
and either a flat 8 Euros delivery fee or a flat 0 Euros fee if the
value of the order (inc. VAT) was 149 Euros or more.
And apparently, they use UK Mail (a service offered by DHL, though the
"final mile" is with Royal Mail) for UK deliveries.
Farage, Boris, Gove et al... are you really pleased that your wafer-thin
triumph at the ballot box is so desperately discouraging to exporters?
How do Thomann do it, I wonder?
I don't know the figures for inland or overseas Royal Mail postage of
parcels or packages, but would remind you that other carriers are
available.
It's a competitive market these days.
On Thu, 28 Nov 2024 16:46:02 +0000, Roland Perry wrote:
I'm selling some small souvenirs, primarily in person but also by
mailorder. The cost of postage to EU is 3x that of UK,
Is that a consequence of Brexit or of the cost of moving things? ISTR that >sending something to France was always more expensive than sending it to >Tunbridge Wells.
they take three weeks to arrive, and the customers are charged an
extra 50% as import duty. What palaver!
Farage, Boris, Gove et al... are you really pleased that your wafer-thin
triumph at the ballot box is so desperately discouraging to exporters?
Who is it who imposes the import duty?
On 28/11/2024 16:46, Roland Perry wrote:
I'm selling some small souvenirs, primarily in person but also by >>mailorder. The cost of postage to EU is 3x that of UK,
Is that a consequence of 'post-Brexit laws'? If so, I don't see it
myself. Perhaps you would clarify which laws you mean?
they take three weeks to arrive,
That too.
and the customers are charged an extra 50% as import duty.
I doubt if that was mandated by Brexit, but is rather the fault of the
EU being totally unreasonable in an EU sort of way. It's maybe the
sort of bureaucracy we voted to leave behind.
What palaver!
Farage, Boris, Gove et al... are you really pleased that your
wafer-thin triumph at the ballot box is so desperately discouraging
to exporters?
I doubt if you're the sort of exporter they were overly bothered about. >Nevertheless, UK exports of goods and services to the EU were £356
billion in 2023, so some are clearly managing.
I'm selling some small souvenirs, primarily in person but also by >>>mailorder. The cost of postage to EU is 3x that of UK,
I don't know the figures for inland or overseas Royal Mail postage of >>parcels or packages, but would remind you that other carriers are >>available.
It's a competitive market these days.
I don't know of any courier who can match the Royal Mail postage for
small ad-hoc items. Possibly for the 3x version, but I'd have to check.
On 28/11/2024 04:46 pm, Roland Perry wrote:
I'm selling some small souvenirs, primarily in person but also by >>mailorder. The cost of postage to EU is 3x that of UK,
I don't know the figures for inland or overseas Royal Mail postage of
parcels or packages, but would remind you that other carriers are
available.
It's a competitive market these days.
they take three weeks to arrive, and the customers are charged an
extra 50% as import duty. What palaver!
Hmmm... If I were to order something from www.thomann.de and had opted
for the UK page, the charge would be 20% VAT (paid by Thomann to HMRC)
and either a flat 8 Euros delivery fee
or a flat 0 Euros fee if the value of the order (inc. VAT) was 149
Euros or more.
And apparently, they use UK Mail (a service offered by DHL, though the
"final mile" is with Royal Mail) for UK deliveries.
Farage, Boris, Gove et al... are you really pleased that your
wafer-thin triumph at the ballot box is so desperately discouraging
to exporters?
How do Thomann do it, I wonder?
On 28/11/2024 17:17, Handsome Jack wrote:
On Thu, 28 Nov 2024 16:46:02 +0000, Roland Perry wrote:Customs in the receiving country
I'm selling some small souvenirs, primarily in person but also by
mailorder. The cost of postage to EU is 3x that of UK,
Is that a consequence of Brexit or of the cost of moving things? ISTR
that sending something to France was always more expensive than sending
it to Tunbridge Wells.
they take three weeks to arrive, and the customers are charged an
extra 50% as import duty. What palaver!
Farage, Boris, Gove et al... are you really pleased that your
wafer-thin triumph at the ballot box is so desperately discouraging to
exporters?
Who is it who imposes the import duty?
- as a direct and self-evident
consequence of the UK leaving the EU.
On 28/11/2024 04:46 pm, Roland Perry wrote:
I'm selling some small souvenirs, primarily in person but also by
mailorder. The cost of postage to EU is 3x that of UK,
I don't know the figures for inland or overseas Royal Mail postage of
parcels or packages, but would remind you that other carriers are
available.
It's a competitive market these days.
they take three weeks to arrive, and the customers are charged an
extra 50% as import duty. What palaver!
Hmmm... If I were to order something from www.thomann.de and had opted
for the UK page, the charge would be 20% VAT (paid by Thomann to HMRC)
and either a flat 8 Euros delivery fee or a flat 0 Euros fee if the
value of the order (inc. VAT) was 149 Euros or more.
And apparently, they use UK Mail (a service offered by DHL, though the
"final mile" is with Royal Mail) for UK deliveries.
JNugent wrote:
I don't know the figures for inland or overseas Royal Mail postage of
parcels or packages, but would remind you that other carriers are
available.
It's a competitive market these days.
Apparently it's cheaper to get a low-cost flight to Serbia and post 100 letters back to the UK than it is to post those letters from within the
UK ...
On 28 Nov 2024 at 17:29:44 GMT, "JNugent" <JNugent73@mail.com> wrote:
On 28/11/2024 04:46 pm, Roland Perry wrote:
I'm selling some small souvenirs, primarily in person but also by
mailorder. The cost of postage to EU is 3x that of UK,
I don't know the figures for inland or overseas Royal Mail postage of
parcels or packages, but would remind you that other carriers are available. >>
It's a competitive market these days.
they take three
weeks to arrive, and the customers are charged an extra 50% as import
duty. What palaver!
Hmmm... If I were to order something from www.thomann.de and had opted
for the UK page, the charge would be 20% VAT (paid by Thomann to HMRC)
and either a flat 8 Euros delivery fee or a flat 0 Euros fee if the
value of the order (inc. VAT) was 149 Euros or more.
And apparently, they use UK Mail (a service offered by DHL, though the
"final mile" is with Royal Mail) for UK deliveries.
Farage, Boris, Gove et al... are you really pleased that your wafer-thin >>> triumph at the ballot box is so desperately discouraging to exporters?
How do Thomann do it, I wonder?
Presumably by accepting a lower profit in order to keep market share?
On Thu, 28 Nov 2024 18:49:53 +0000, Sam Plusnet wrote:
On 28/11/2024 17:17, Handsome Jack wrote:
On Thu, 28 Nov 2024 16:46:02 +0000, Roland Perry wrote:Customs in the receiving country
I'm selling some small souvenirs, primarily in person but also by
mailorder. The cost of postage to EU is 3x that of UK,
Is that a consequence of Brexit or of the cost of moving things? ISTR
that sending something to France was always more expensive than sending
it to Tunbridge Wells.
they take three weeks to arrive, and the customers are charged an
extra 50% as import duty. What palaver!
Farage, Boris, Gove et al... are you really pleased that your
wafer-thin triumph at the ballot box is so desperately discouraging to >>>> exporters?
Who is it who imposes the import duty?
So we know whose fault it is, then.
- as a direct and self-evident
consequence of the UK leaving the EU.
But not a "post-Brexit law"; not a British one anyway.
On 28/11/2024 16:46, Roland Perry wrote:
I'm selling some small souvenirs, primarily in person but also by >>mailorder. The cost of postage to EU is 3x that of UK, they take three >>weeks to arrive, and the customers are charged an extra 50% as import
duty. What palaver!
Farage, Boris, Gove et al... are you really pleased that your
wafer-thin triumph at the ballot box is so desperately discouraging
to exporters?
If you get any orders from the Republic of Ireland I would not bother
sending then.
An Post seem to roll a die for every parcel received from the UK. If
they roll a five or a six, they deliver it. If they roll a three or a
four, they instigate their Return To Sender (RTS) protocols. For a one
or two, they roll the die again, and this second roll determines for
how many weeks they will sit it on it before instigating RTS protocols.
RTS involves affixing a pink CN15(b) sticker giving no information
whatsoever other than that it didn't clear Customs and has been
rejected.
I say this from the experience of a good friend that has all but given
up sending goods to the RoI as having sent multiple virtually identical >parcels at the same time with the same paperwork it is pure guesswork
as to what gets delivered and what gets rejected and it is easier to
say, "We do not send items to Ireland" than to have the goods returned >several months after they were despatched with no explanation
whatsoever as to what went wrong.
(And this is all done using a business account within Royal Mail's
on-line portal where all the customs paperwork is automatically
generated and printed using the Royal Mail supplied label printer that
comes with the software and automatically prints the labels that need >attaching to the parcels.)
Regards
S.P.
JNugent <JNugent73@mail.com> remarked:
Roland Perry wrote:
I'm selling some small souvenirs, primarily in person but also by
mailorder. The cost of postage to EU is 3x that of UK,
I don't know the figures for inland or overseas Royal Mail postage of
parcels or packages, but would remind you that other carriers are
available.
It's a competitive market these days.
I don't know of any courier who can match the Royal Mail postage for
small ad-hoc items. Possibly for the 3x version, but I'd have to check.
they take three weeks to arrive, and the customers are charged an
extra 50% as import duty. What palaver!
Hmmm... If I were to order something from www.thomann.de and had opted
for the UK page, the charge would be 20% VAT (paid by Thomann to HMRC)
And not recovered from you?
and either a flat 8 Euros delivery fee
Could be subsidised.
or a flat 0 Euros fee if the value of the order (inc. VAT) was 149
Euros or more.
Definitely subsidised.
And apparently, they use UK Mail (a service offered by DHL, though the
"final mile" is with Royal Mail) for UK deliveries.
Farage, Boris, Gove et al... are you really pleased that your
wafer-thin triumph at the ballot box is so desperately discouraging
to exporters?
How do Thomann do it, I wonder?
Under protest, I expect.
On 28/11/2024 07:20 pm, Roland Perry wrote:
JNugent <JNugent73@mail.com> remarked:
Roland Perry wrote:
I'm selling some small souvenirs, primarily in person but also by >>>>mailorder. The cost of postage to EU is 3x that of UK,
I don't know the figures for inland or overseas Royal Mail postageI don't know of any courier who can match the Royal Mail postage for >>small ad-hoc items. Possibly for the 3x version, but I'd have to
of parcels or packages, but would remind you that other carriers are >>>available.
It's a competitive market these days.
check.
they take three weeks to arrive, and the customers are charged an >>>>extra 50% as import duty. What palaver!
Hmmm... If I were to order something from www.thomann.de and had
opted for the UK page, the charge would be 20% VAT (paid by Thomann
to HMRC)
And not recovered from you?
Included in the competitive quoted price.
The prices are not usually as expensive as they are in the UK (with a
view things floating above and below that line).
and either a flat 8 Euros delivery feeCould be subsidised.
It's a business, not a chariry.
or a flat 0 Euros fee if the value of the order (inc. VAT) was 149Definitely subsidised.
Euros or more.
You mean "subsumed within the purchase price".
And apparently, they use UK Mail (a service offered by DHL, thoughUnder protest, I expect.
the "final mile" is with Royal Mail) for UK deliveries.
Farage, Boris, Gove et al... are you really pleased that your >>>>wafer-thin triumph at the ballot box is so desperately discouraging
to exporters?
How do Thomann do it, I wonder?
Take a look at their website.
That's the most optimistic and bullish "protest" you have ever seen.
<https://www.thomann.co.uk/helpdesk_shipping.html>
On 17:29 28 Nov 2024, JNugent said:
On 28/11/2024 04:46 pm, Roland Perry wrote:
I'm selling some small souvenirs, primarily in person but also by
mailorder. The cost of postage to EU is 3x that of UK,
I don't know the figures for inland or overseas Royal Mail postage of
parcels or packages, but would remind you that other carriers are
available.
It's a competitive market these days.
they take three weeks to arrive, and the customers are charged an
extra 50% as import duty. What palaver!
Hmmm... If I were to order something from www.thomann.de and had opted
for the UK page, the charge would be 20% VAT (paid by Thomann to HMRC)
and either a flat 8 Euros delivery fee or a flat 0 Euros fee if the
value of the order (inc. VAT) was 149 Euros or more.
And apparently, they use UK Mail (a service offered by DHL, though the
"final mile" is with Royal Mail) for UK deliveries.
A friend recently ordered this diary from the Netherlands. It costs £15.
https://www.daphnesdiary.com/product/daphnes-diary-journal-2025
For shipping the vendor designates the UK as "rest of the world", for
which they use DHL Express Wordwide at a cost of £20.57. Thanks,
Brexit.
On 17:29 28 Nov 2024, JNugent said:
On 28/11/2024 04:46 pm, Roland Perry wrote:
I'm selling some small souvenirs, primarily in person but also by
mailorder. The cost of postage to EU is 3x that of UK,
I don't know the figures for inland or overseas Royal Mail postage of
parcels or packages, but would remind you that other carriers are
available.
It's a competitive market these days.
they take three weeks to arrive, and the customers are charged an
extra 50% as import duty. What palaver!
Hmmm... If I were to order something from www.thomann.de and had opted
for the UK page, the charge would be 20% VAT (paid by Thomann to HMRC)
and either a flat 8 Euros delivery fee or a flat 0 Euros fee if the
value of the order (inc. VAT) was 149 Euros or more.
And apparently, they use UK Mail (a service offered by DHL, though the
"final mile" is with Royal Mail) for UK deliveries.
A friend recently ordered this diary from the Netherlands. It costs Å15.
https://www.daphnesdiary.com/product/daphnes-diary-journal-2025
For shipping the vendor designates the UK as "rest of the world", for
which they use DHL Express Wordwide at a cost of Å20.57. Thanks,
Brexit.
In message <vic085$10vr0$1@dont-email.me>, at 09:07:17 on Fri, 29 Nov
2024, Handsome Jack <jack@handsome.com> remarked:
On Thu, 28 Nov 2024 18:49:53 +0000, Sam Plusnet wrote:
On 28/11/2024 17:17, Handsome Jack wrote:
On Thu, 28 Nov 2024 16:46:02 +0000, Roland Perry wrote:Customs in the receiving country
I'm selling some small souvenirs, primarily in person but also by
mailorder. The cost of postage to EU is 3x that of UK,
Is that a consequence of Brexit or of the cost of moving things? ISTR
that sending something to France was always more expensive than sending >>>> it to Tunbridge Wells.
they take three weeks to arrive, and the customers are charged an
extra 50% as import duty. What palaver!
Farage, Boris, Gove et al... are you really pleased that your
wafer-thin triumph at the ballot box is so desperately discouraging to >>>>> exporters?
Who is it who imposes the import duty?
So we know whose fault it is, then.
- as a direct and self-evident
consequence of the UK leaving the EU.
But not a "post-Brexit law"; not a British one anyway.
Why does that matter? It was entirely predictable that these sorts of difficulties would arise, just like they used to when shipping things
outside the EU. Except the liars who promoted Brexit to gullible
xenophobes claimed there'd not be these knock-on effects.
JNugent <JNugent73@mail.com> remarked:
On 28/11/2024 07:20 pm, Roland Perry wrote:
JNugent <JNugent73@mail.com> remarked:
Roland Perry wrote:
I'm selling some small souvenirs, primarily in person but also by
mailorder. The cost of postage to EU is 3x that of UK,
I don't know the figures for inland or overseas Royal Mail postage
of parcels or packages, but would remind you that other carriers
are available.
It's a competitive market these days.
 I don't know of any courier who can match the Royal Mail postage for
small ad-hoc items. Possibly for the 3x version, but I'd have to check.
they take three weeks to arrive, and the customers are charged an
extra 50% as import duty. What palaver!
Hmmm... If I were to order something from www.thomann.de and had
opted for the UK page, the charge would be 20% VAT (paid by Thomann
to HMRC)
 And not recovered from you?
Included in the competitive quoted price.
Because there's a law about quoting "VAT inclusive" prices, and they'll
pay whatever the VAT is, arising in different territories?
The prices are not usually as expensive as they are in the UK (with a
view things floating above and below that line).
and either a flat 8 Euros delivery fee Could be subsidised.
It's a business, not a chariry.
It's good business to subsidise P&P if that means you sell more.
or a flat 0 Euros fee if the value of the order (inc. VAT) was 149
Euros or more.
 Definitely subsidised.
You mean "subsumed within the purchase price".
No, because if you bought three items at 149 Euros you'd pay nothing,
but buying the items separately you'd pay 8 Euros.
And apparently, they use UK Mail (a service offered by DHL, though
the "final mile" is with Royal Mail) for UK deliveries.
Farage, Boris, Gove et al... are you really pleased that your
wafer-thin triumph at the ballot box is so desperately
discouraging to exporters?
How do Thomann do it, I wonder? Under protest, I expect.
Take a look at their website.
That's the most optimistic and bullish "protest" you have ever seen.
<https://www.thomann.co.uk/helpdesk_shipping.html>
What they are prepared to do, to get orders, has nothing whatsoever to
do with the post-Brexit costs to me as an exporter.
On 29/11/2024 09:55 am, Roland Perry wrote:
In message <vic085$10vr0$1@dont-email.me>, at 09:07:17 on Fri, 29 Nov >>2024, Handsome Jack <jack@handsome.com> remarked:
On Thu, 28 Nov 2024 18:49:53 +0000, Sam Plusnet wrote:
On 28/11/2024 17:17, Handsome Jack wrote:
On Thu, 28 Nov 2024 16:46:02 +0000, Roland Perry wrote:Customs in the receiving country
I'm selling some small souvenirs, primarily in person but also by
mailorder. The cost of postage to EU is 3x that of UK,
Is that a consequence of Brexit or of the cost of moving things? ISTR >>>>> that sending something to France was always more expensive than sending >>>>> it to Tunbridge Wells.
they take three weeks to arrive, and the customers are charged an
extra 50% as import duty. What palaver!
Farage, Boris, Gove et al... are you really pleased that your
wafer-thin triumph at the ballot box is so desperately discouraging to >>>>>> exporters?
Who is it who imposes the import duty?
So we know whose fault it is, then.
- as a direct and self-evident
consequence of the UK leaving the EU.
But not a "post-Brexit law"; not a British one anyway.
Why does that matter? It was entirely predictable that these sorts
of difficulties would arise, just like they used to when shipping
things outside the EU. Except the liars who promoted Brexit to
gullible xenophobes claimed there'd not be these knock-on effects.
is it possible to provide a cite for any significant discussion on
postage rates during the referendum campaign?
It'd be interesting...
It seems that you have a complaint against certain mainland European
customs departments.
On 29/11/2024 11:39 am, Roland Perry wrote:
JNugent <JNugent73@mail.com> remarked:
On 28/11/2024 07:20 pm, Roland Perry wrote:
JNugent <JNugent73@mail.com> remarked:
Roland Perry wrote:
I'm selling some small souvenirs, primarily in person but also by
mailorder. The cost of postage to EU is 3x that of UK,
I don't know the figures for inland or overseas Royal Mail postage
of parcels or packages, but would remind you that other carriers
are available.
It's a competitive market these days.
I don't know of any courier who can match the Royal Mail postage for
small ad-hoc items. Possibly for the 3x version, but I'd have to check.
they take three weeks to arrive, and the customers are charged an >>>>>> extra 50% as import duty. What palaver!
Hmmm... If I were to order something from www.thomann.de and had
opted for the UK page, the charge would be 20% VAT (paid by Thomann >>>>> to HMRC)
And not recovered from you?
Included in the competitive quoted price.
Because there's a law about quoting "VAT inclusive" prices, and they'll
pay whatever the VAT is, arising in different territories?
A. It is what they do.
B. They didn't do it at first, not until they'd been able to make the
more recent arrangements.
C. The very existence of (B) indicates that it is not a legal rule. It
is a service provided by Thomann for their UK customers becase it makes cross-border trading easier and less hassle.
The prices are not usually as expensive as they are in the UK (with a
view things floating above and below that line).
and either a flat 8 Euros delivery feeCould be subsidised.
It's a business, not a chariry.
It's good business to subsidise P&P if that means you sell more.
"Subsidy" there only means "offer a competitive all-in price inc.
postage" (for orders over 149 Euros (it might be more than that now, as
might the 8 Euros charge).
or a flat 0 Euros fee if the value of the order (inc. VAT) was 149
Euros or more.
Definitely subsidised.
You mean "subsumed within the purchase price".
No, because if you bought three items at 149 Euros you'd pay nothing,
but buying the items separately you'd pay 8 Euros.
Thrice!
And apparently, they use UK Mail (a service offered by DHL, though
the "final mile" is with Royal Mail) for UK deliveries.
Farage, Boris, Gove et al... are you really pleased that your
wafer-thin triumph at the ballot box is so desperately
discouraging to exporters?
How do Thomann do it, I wonder?Under protest, I expect.
Take a look at their website.
That's the most optimistic and bullish "protest" you have ever seen.
<https://www.thomann.co.uk/helpdesk_shipping.html>
What they are prepared to do, to get orders, has nothing whatsoever to
do with the post-Brexit costs to me as an exporter.
It seems that you have a complaint against certain mainland European
customs departments.
In message <lqtepcF2ptfU1@mid.individual.net>, at 09:11:08 on Fri, 29
Nov 2024, Simon Parker <simonparkerulm@gmail.com> remarked:
On 28/11/2024 16:46, Roland Perry wrote:
I'm selling some small souvenirs, primarily in person but also by >>mailorder. The cost of postage to EU is 3x that of UK, they take three >>weeks to arrive, and the customers are charged an extra 50% as import >>duty. What palaver!
Farage, Boris, Gove et al... are you really pleased that your >>wafer-thin triumph at the ballot box is so desperately discouraging
to exporters?
If you get any orders from the Republic of Ireland I would not bother >sending then.
I've decided not to export any more (to anywhere). The extra cost and paperwork, and emails from customers asking why the thing has been
delayed, just isn't worth it.
In message <lqtoutFa96vU1@mid.individual.net>, at 12:04:45 on Fri, 29
Nov 2024, JNugent <JNugent73@mail.com> remarked:
It seems that you have a complaint against certain mainland European >>customs departments.
The electorate was assured things would be better after Brexit, not far worse.
On 29 Nov 2024 at 12:04:45 GMT, "JNugent" <JNugent73@mail.com> wrote:
On 29/11/2024 11:39 am, Roland Perry wrote:
JNugent <JNugent73@mail.com> remarked:
On 28/11/2024 07:20 pm, Roland Perry wrote:
JNugent <JNugent73@mail.com> remarked:
Roland Perry wrote:
I'm selling some small souvenirs, primarily in person but also by >>>>>>> mailorder. The cost of postage to EU is 3x that of UK,
I don't know the figures for inland or overseas Royal Mail postage >>>>>> of parcels or packages, but would remind you that other carriers
are available.
It's a competitive market these days.
I don't know of any courier who can match the Royal Mail postage for >>>>> small ad-hoc items. Possibly for the 3x version, but I'd have to check.
they take three weeks to arrive, and the customers are charged an >>>>>>> extra 50% as import duty. What palaver!
Hmmm... If I were to order something from www.thomann.de and had
opted for the UK page, the charge would be 20% VAT (paid by Thomann >>>>>> to HMRC)
And not recovered from you?
Included in the competitive quoted price.
Because there's a law about quoting "VAT inclusive" prices, and they'll
pay whatever the VAT is, arising in different territories?
A. It is what they do.
B. They didn't do it at first, not until they'd been able to make the
more recent arrangements.
C. The very existence of (B) indicates that it is not a legal rule. It
is a service provided by Thomann for their UK customers becase it makes
cross-border trading easier and less hassle.
No it is a legal rule, now being followed by even the Chinese and American online retailers.
The fact that they took some time to observe the rule
properly is not evidence against the existence of the rule.
The prices are not usually as expensive as they are in the UK (with a
view things floating above and below that line).
and either a flat 8 Euros delivery fee
Could be subsidised.
It's a business, not a chariry.
It's good business to subsidise P&P if that means you sell more.
"Subsidy" there only means "offer a competitive all-in price inc.
postage" (for orders over 149 Euros (it might be more than that now, as
might the 8 Euros charge).
The subsidy, if any, would arise from the rate for postage to the UK not being
higher than to elsewhere in Europe. Is it?
or a flat 0 Euros fee if the value of the order (inc. VAT) was 149 >>>>>> Euros or more.
Definitely subsidised.
You mean "subsumed within the purchase price".
No, because if you bought three items at 149 Euros you'd pay nothing,
but buying the items separately you'd pay 8 Euros.
Thrice!
And apparently, they use UK Mail (a service offered by DHL, though >>>>>> the "final mile" is with Royal Mail) for UK deliveries.
Farage, Boris, Gove et al... are you really pleased that your
wafer-thin triumph at the ballot box is so desperately
discouraging to exporters?
How do Thomann do it, I wonder?Under protest, I expect.
Take a look at their website.
That's the most optimistic and bullish "protest" you have ever seen.
<https://www.thomann.co.uk/helpdesk_shipping.html>
What they are prepared to do, to get orders, has nothing whatsoever to
do with the post-Brexit costs to me as an exporter.
It seems that you have a complaint against certain mainland European
customs departments.
They're just being customs officers, and doing what customs do. The complaint is that we are now subject to their ministrations.
In message <lqtojfFa6ifU2@mid.individual.net>, at 11:58:39 on Fri, 29
Nov 2024, JNugent <JNugent73@mail.com> remarked:
On 29/11/2024 09:55 am, Roland Perry wrote:
In message <vic085$10vr0$1@dont-email.me>, at 09:07:17 on Fri, 29 Nov
2024, Handsome Jack <jack@handsome.com> remarked:
On Thu, 28 Nov 2024 18:49:53 +0000, Sam Plusnet wrote:
On 28/11/2024 17:17, Handsome Jack wrote:
On Thu, 28 Nov 2024 16:46:02 +0000, Roland Perry wrote:Customs in the receiving country
I'm selling some small souvenirs, primarily in person but also by >>>>>>> mailorder. The cost of postage to EU is 3x that of UK,
Is that a consequence of Brexit or of the cost of moving things? ISTR >>>>>> that sending something to France was always more expensive than
sending
it to Tunbridge Wells.
they take three weeks to arrive, and the customers are charged an >>>>>>> extra 50% as import duty. What palaver!
Farage, Boris, Gove et al... are you really pleased that your
wafer-thin triumph at the ballot box is so desperately
discouraging to
exporters?
Who is it who imposes the import duty?
So we know whose fault it is, then.
- as a direct and self-evident
consequence of the UK leaving the EU.
But not a "post-Brexit law"; not a British one anyway.
 Why does that matter? It was entirely predictable that these sorts
of difficulties would arise, just like they used to when shipping
things outside the EU. Except the liars who promoted Brexit to
gullible xenophobes claimed there'd not be these knock-on effects.
is it possible to provide a cite for any significant discussion on
postage rates during the referendum campaign?
It'd be interesting...
Innumerable claims that either nothing would change to adversely affect
our trade as a result of Brexit, or if anything get better.
JNugent <JNugent73@mail.com> remarked:
It seems that you have a complaint against certain mainland European
customs departments.
The electorate was assured things would be better after Brexit, not far worse.
Roland Perry <roland@perry.uk> wrote:
In message <lqtepcF2ptfU1@mid.individual.net>, at 09:11:08 on Fri, 29
Nov 2024, Simon Parker <simonparkerulm@gmail.com> remarked:
On 28/11/2024 16:46, Roland Perry wrote:
I'm selling some small souvenirs, primarily in person but also by
mailorder. The cost of postage to EU is 3x that of UK, they take three
weeks to arrive, and the customers are charged an extra 50% as import
duty. What palaver!
Farage, Boris, Gove et al... are you really pleased that your
wafer-thin triumph at the ballot box is so desperately discouraging
to exporters?
If you get any orders from the Republic of Ireland I would not bother
sending then.
I've decided not to export any more (to anywhere). The extra cost and
paperwork, and emails from customers asking why the thing has been
delayed, just isn't worth it.
FWIW if you sell on ebay they have a 'global seller program' which means you >ship it to their UK warehouse, they handle the customs/VAT/duty stuff and >then deliver it on to the destination country.
I've used the same to buy things from the US where the seller won't
ship internationally - the rates are often much better than USPS which
is what the sellers who do ship internationally tend to use.
One of the consequence of Brexit and co-incident EU rule changes
is that giant platforms like ebay and Aliexpress, and major retailers
like Thomann, have built out their logistics to make sure VAT is paid
at the point of sale and the items can just drop into the domestic
shipping channels. But small time exporters don't have access to such >streamlined logistics and their parcels get stuck at customs.
Selling items on ebay is now free for private sellers, so it may be a cheap >way to have them handle it if you're selling a few items as an individual. >(even if you normally sell things direct, you can point international buyers >at your ebay listing as the preferred route for them to buy). If you are >selling things in the course of a business, you could just mark them up to >cover the ebay fees and allow UK buyers to order direct at a lower price.
On 29/11/2024 02:04 pm, Roger Hayter wrote:
On 29 Nov 2024 at 12:04:45 GMT, "JNugent" <JNugent73@mail.com> wrote:
On 29/11/2024 11:39 am, Roland Perry wrote:
JNugent <JNugent73@mail.com> remarked:
On 28/11/2024 07:20 pm, Roland Perry wrote:
JNugent <JNugent73@mail.com> remarked:
Roland Perry wrote:
I'm selling some small souvenirs, primarily in person but also by >>>>>>>> mailorder. The cost of postage to EU is 3x that of UK,
I don't know the figures for inland or overseas Royal Mail postage >>>>>>> of parcels or packages, but would remind you that other carriers >>>>>>> are available.
It's a competitive market these days.
I don't know of any courier who can match the Royal Mail postage for >>>>>> small ad-hoc items. Possibly for the 3x version, but I'd have to check. >>
they take three weeks to arrive, and the customers are charged an >>>>>>>> extra 50% as import duty. What palaver!
Hmmm... If I were to order something from www.thomann.de and had >>>>>>> opted for the UK page, the charge would be 20% VAT (paid by Thomann >>>>>>> to HMRC)
And not recovered from you?
Included in the competitive quoted price.
Because there's a law about quoting "VAT inclusive" prices, and they'll >>>> pay whatever the VAT is, arising in different territories?
A. It is what they do.
B. They didn't do it at first, not until they'd been able to make the
more recent arrangements.
C. The very existence of (B) indicates that it is not a legal rule. It
is a service provided by Thomann for their UK customers becase it makes
cross-border trading easier and less hassle.
No it is a legal rule, now being followed by even the Chinese and American >> online retailers.
How does the UK government enact legislation which binds the USA and PRC governments? How is it enforced?
The fact that they took some time to observe the rule
properly is not evidence against the existence of the rule.
So why isn't every EU-based company doing it?
The prices are not usually as expensive as they are in the UK (with a >>>>> view things floating above and below that line).
and either a flat 8 Euros delivery fee
Could be subsidised.
It's a business, not a chariry.
It's good business to subsidise P&P if that means you sell more.
"Subsidy" there only means "offer a competitive all-in price inc.
postage" (for orders over 149 Euros (it might be more than that now, as
might the 8 Euros charge).
The subsidy, if any, would arise from the rate for postage to the UK not being
higher than to elsewhere in Europe. Is it?
That doesn't sound like a definition of "subsidy". It sounds more like differential pricing. Even the local ladies' hairdressers here do a bit
of that. They don't lose on any transaction.
or a flat 0 Euros fee if the value of the order (inc. VAT) was 149 >>>>>>> Euros or more.
Definitely subsidised.
You mean "subsumed within the purchase price".
No, because if you bought three items at 149 Euros you'd pay nothing,
but buying the items separately you'd pay 8 Euros.
Thrice!
And apparently, they use UK Mail (a service offered by DHL, though >>>>>>> the "final mile" is with Royal Mail) for UK deliveries.
Farage, Boris, Gove et al... are you really pleased that your
wafer-thin triumph at the ballot box is so desperately
discouraging to exporters?
How do Thomann do it, I wonder?Under protest, I expect.
Take a look at their website.
That's the most optimistic and bullish "protest" you have ever seen. >>>>>
<https://www.thomann.co.uk/helpdesk_shipping.html>
What they are prepared to do, to get orders, has nothing whatsoever to >>>> do with the post-Brexit costs to me as an exporter.
It seems that you have a complaint against certain mainland European
customs departments.
They're just being customs officers, and doing what customs do. The complaint
is that we are now subject to their ministrations.
Their governments' decision.
On 29/11/2024 02:09 pm, Roland Perry wrote:
JNugent <JNugent73@mail.com> remarked:
It seems that you have a complaint against certain mainland European customs
departments.
The electorate was assured things would be better after Brexit, not far worse.
You'll have no difficulty, then, in providing a link to a contemporary discussion of
that.
On Fri, 29 Nov 2024 14:09:19 +0000, Roland Perry wrote:
In message <lqtoutFa96vU1@mid.individual.net>, at 12:04:45 on Fri, 29
Nov 2024, JNugent <JNugent73@mail.com> remarked:
It seems that you have a complaint against certain mainland European
customs departments.
The electorate was assured things would be better after Brexit, not far
worse.
The assertions "Everything is far worse for the entire country after
Brexit" and "Roland is having some slight difficulty sending items to
Europe" are not equivalent. I understand why you might think they are, but not everyone agrees.
Your assertion elsewhere that there were "innumerable claims that either nothing would change to adversely affect our trade as a result of Brexit,
or if anything get better" is a bit shaky too. IIRC it was always accepted that Brexit would have upsides and downsides, winners and losers. Some
people may have glossed over the details, but they were on both sides of
the argument.
On 28/11/2024 16:46, Roland Perry wrote:
I'm selling some small souvenirs, primarily in person but also by mailorder. The cost of postage to EU is 3x that of UK,
Is that a consequence of 'post-Brexit laws'? If so, I don't see it
myself. Perhaps you would clarify which laws you mean?
they take three weeks to arrive,
That too.
and the customers are charged an extra 50% as import duty.
I doubt if that was mandated by Brexit, but is rather the fault of the
EU being totally unreasonable in an EU sort of way.
It's maybe the sort
of bureaucracy we voted to leave behind.
Hmmm... If I were to order something from www.thomann.de and had opted
for the UK page, the charge would be 20% VAT (paid by Thomann to HMRC)
and either a flat 8 Euros delivery fee or a flat 0 Euros fee if the
value of the order (inc. VAT) was 149 Euros or more.
What palaver!
Farage, Boris, Gove et al... are you really pleased that your wafer-thin
triumph at the ballot box is so desperately discouraging to exporters?
I doubt if you're the sort of exporter they were overly bothered about. Nevertheless, UK exports of goods and services to the EU were £356
billion in 2023, so some are clearly managing.
Handsome Jack <jack@handsome.com> wrote:
On Fri, 29 Nov 2024 14:09:19 +0000, Roland Perry wrote:Okay, but it’s just that some of us are wondering what the upsides are?
In message <lqtoutFa96vU1@mid.individual.net>, at 12:04:45 on Fri, 29
Nov 2024, JNugent <JNugent73@mail.com> remarked:
It seems that you have a complaint against certain mainland European
customs departments.
The electorate was assured things would be better after Brexit, not
far worse.
The assertions "Everything is far worse for the entire country after
Brexit" and "Roland is having some slight difficulty sending items to
Europe" are not equivalent. I understand why you might think they are,
but not everyone agrees.
Your assertion elsewhere that there were "innumerable claims that
either nothing would change to adversely affect our trade as a result
of Brexit, or if anything get better" is a bit shaky too. IIRC it was
always accepted that Brexit would have upsides and downsides, winners
and losers. Some people may have glossed over the details, but they
were on both sides of the argument.
On Thu, 28 Nov 2024 17:13:41 +0000, Norman Wells wrote...
On 28/11/2024 16:46, Roland Perry wrote:
I'm selling some small souvenirs, primarily in person but also by
mailorder. The cost of postage to EU is 3x that of UK,
Is that a consequence of 'post-Brexit laws'? If so, I don't see it
myself. Perhaps you would clarify which laws you mean?
they take three weeks to arrive,
That too.
and the customers are charged an extra 50% as import duty.
I doubt if that was mandated by Brexit, but is rather the fault of the
EU being totally unreasonable in an EU sort of way.
Yes, you'd think they would find some way to pretend we were still an EU member, so as to avoid the WTO "most favoured nation" rules which say
they can't treat us more favourably than any other non-EU country.
It's maybe the sort
of bureaucracy we voted to leave behind.
It's maybe the sort of bureaucracy that we previously avoided by being members of the EU.
On Thu, 28 Nov 2024 17:29:44 +0000, JNugent wrote...
Hmmm... If I were to order something from www.thomann.de and had opted
for the UK page, the charge would be 20% VAT (paid by Thomann to HMRC)
and either a flat 8 Euros delivery fee or a flat 0 Euros fee if the
value of the order (inc. VAT) was 149 Euros or more.
Large EU exporters to the UK register direct with HMRC so that they can collect the UK VAT from you when you order.
An unregistered exporter or private individual has to declare the value
for customs purposes, and the UK tax is then collected by the carrier
when they deliver it to you. They add a further charge of their own to
cover their admin costs.
This is a result of us leaving the EU. It corresponds to the added cost
(in the reverse direction) that Roland noted in his OP.
In message <oco*xrN0z@news.chiark.greenend.org.uk>, at 14:36:14 on Fri,
29 Nov 2024, Theo <theom+news@chiark.greenend.org.uk> remarked:
One of the consequence of Brexit and co-incident EU rule changes
There aren't any EU rule changes, all that's happened is the UK is now a "Third Country", rather than a member. So we have to jump through the
same hoops as any other Third Country, having been accustomed to the
absence of hoops on account of being a member.
Selling items on ebay is now free for private sellers, so it may be a cheap >way to have them handle it if you're selling a few items as an individual. >(even if you normally sell things direct, you can point international buyers >at your ebay listing as the preferred route for them to buy). If you are >selling things in the course of a business, you could just mark them up to >cover the ebay fees and allow UK buyers to order direct at a lower price.
I was, perhaps foolishly, trying to have one price for everyone.
On 28 Nov 2024 at 17:13:41 GMT, Norman Wells wrote:
What palaver!
Farage, Boris, Gove et al... are you really pleased that your wafer-thin >>> triumph at the ballot box is so desperately discouraging to exporters?
I doubt if you're the sort of exporter they were overly bothered about.
Nevertheless, UK exports of goods and services to the EU were £356
billion in 2023, so some are clearly managing.
Managing, yes, in spite of Brexit:
https://www.cer.eu/insights/brexit-four-years-answers-two-trade-paradoxes
On 30/11/2024 01:54, Tim Jackson wrote:
On Thu, 28 Nov 2024 17:13:41 +0000, Norman Wells wrote...
On 28/11/2024 16:46, Roland Perry wrote:
I'm selling some small souvenirs, primarily in person but also by
mailorder. The cost of postage to EU is 3x that of UK,
Is that a consequence of 'post-Brexit laws'? If so, I don't see it
myself. Perhaps you would clarify which laws you mean?
they take three weeks to arrive,
That too.
and the customers are charged an extra 50% as import duty.
I doubt if that was mandated by Brexit, but is rather the fault of the
EU being totally unreasonable in an EU sort of way.
Yes, you'd think they would find some way to pretend we were still an EU
member, so as to avoid the WTO "most favoured nation" rules which say
they can't treat us more favourably than any other non-EU country.
I think you mean 'less favourably'. Otherwise no bilateral trade deals
would be possible.
It's maybe the sort
of bureaucracy we voted to leave behind.
It's maybe the sort of bureaucracy that we previously avoided by being
members of the EU.
Do you approve of such EU protectionism? Or only when we were a member,
and party to it?
On 30/11/2024 01:54, Tim Jackson wrote:
On Thu, 28 Nov 2024 17:13:41 +0000, Norman Wells wrote...
On 28/11/2024 16:46, Roland Perry wrote:
I'm selling some small souvenirs, primarily in person but also by
mailorder. The cost of postage to EU is 3x that of UK,
Is that a consequence of 'post-Brexit laws'? If so, I don't see it
myself. Perhaps you would clarify which laws you mean?
they take three weeks to arrive,
That too.
and the customers are charged an extra 50% as import duty.
I doubt if that was mandated by Brexit, but is rather the fault of the
EU being totally unreasonable in an EU sort of way.
Yes, you'd think they would find some way to pretend we were still an EU
member, so as to avoid the WTO "most favoured nation" rules which say
they can't treat us more favourably than any other non-EU country.
I think you mean 'less favourably'. Otherwise no bilateral trade deals
would be possible.
It's maybe the sort
of bureaucracy we voted to leave behind.
It's maybe the sort of bureaucracy that we previously avoided by being
members of the EU.
Do you approve of such EU protectionism? Or only when we were a member,
and party to it?
Norman Wells <hex@unseen.ac.am> wrote:
[quoted text muted]
I looked up the WTO rules on the official WTO web site a while ago and
there are fundamental errors in your understanding of them.
On 29/11/2024 02:09 pm, Roland Perry wrote:
JNugent <JNugent73@mail.com> remarked:
It seems that you have a complaint against certain mainland European >>>customs departments.The electorate was assured things would be better after Brexit, not
far worse.
You'll have no difficulty, then, in providing a link to a contemporary >discussion of that.
I was already familiar with the principles involved (having ordered
goods from the USA on various occasions and having to pay Royal Mail
charges, plus amounts representing import duty and VAT). Yet I have no >recollection of that being a topic of controversy at all. Nevertheless,
when you provide a link to any one of those many "assurances" you
mention, we'll be able to get to the bottom of it.
On Fri, 29 Nov 2024 22:21:17 +0000, Sir Tim wrote:
Handsome Jack <jack@handsome.com> wrote:
On Fri, 29 Nov 2024 14:09:19 +0000, Roland Perry wrote:Okay, but it’s just that some of us are wondering what the upsides are?
In message <lqtoutFa96vU1@mid.individual.net>, at 12:04:45 on Fri, 29
Nov 2024, JNugent <JNugent73@mail.com> remarked:
It seems that you have a complaint against certain mainland European >>>>> customs departments.
The electorate was assured things would be better after Brexit, not
far worse.
The assertions "Everything is far worse for the entire country after
Brexit" and "Roland is having some slight difficulty sending items to
Europe" are not equivalent. I understand why you might think they are,
but not everyone agrees.
Your assertion elsewhere that there were "innumerable claims that
either nothing would change to adversely affect our trade as a result
of Brexit, or if anything get better" is a bit shaky too. IIRC it was
always accepted that Brexit would have upsides and downsides, winners
and losers. Some people may have glossed over the details, but they
were on both sides of the argument.
Sovereignty.
Taking back control.
Blue passports.
Immigration down to zero.
£350 million a week extra to the NHS.
Better deal for farmers.
Better deal for fishermen.
the list is endless.
In message <vieoqe$3e12f$17@dont-email.me>, at 10:18:54 on Sat, 30 Nov
2024, Jethro_uk <jethro_uk@hotmailbin.com> remarked:
On Fri, 29 Nov 2024 22:21:17 +0000, Sir Tim wrote:
Handsome Jack <jack@handsome.com> wrote:Sovereignty.
On Fri, 29 Nov 2024 14:09:19 +0000, Roland Perry wrote:Okay, but it’s just that some of us are wondering what the upsides are? >>
In message <lqtoutFa96vU1@mid.individual.net>, at 12:04:45 on Fri, 29 >>>>> Nov 2024, JNugent <JNugent73@mail.com> remarked:
It seems that you have a complaint against certain mainland European >>>>>> customs departments.
The electorate was assured things would be better after Brexit, not
far worse.
The assertions "Everything is far worse for the entire country after
Brexit" and "Roland is having some slight difficulty sending items to
Europe" are not equivalent. I understand why you might think they are, >>>> but not everyone agrees.
Your assertion elsewhere that there were "innumerable claims that
either nothing would change to adversely affect our trade as a result
of Brexit, or if anything get better" is a bit shaky too. IIRC it was
always accepted that Brexit would have upsides and downsides, winners
and losers. Some people may have glossed over the details, but they
were on both sides of the argument.
Taking back control.
Blue passports.
Immigration down to zero.
I think you mis-typed "up to 900k".
£350 million a week extra to the NHS.
Always a lie.
Better deal for farmers.
Better deal for fishermen.
Both would now disagree strongly.
the list is endless.
Better deal for farmers.
Better deal for fishermen.
Both would now disagree strongly.
On 30 Nov 2024 at 15:58:57 GMT, "Roland Perry" <roland@perry.uk> wrote:
In message <vieoqe$3e12f$17@dont-email.me>, at 10:18:54 on Sat, 30 NovBit of a Whoosh! moment there, I'd say.
2024, Jethro_uk <jethro_uk@hotmailbin.com> remarked:
On Fri, 29 Nov 2024 22:21:17 +0000, Sir Tim wrote:
Handsome Jack <jack@handsome.com> wrote:
On Fri, 29 Nov 2024 14:09:19 +0000, Roland Perry wrote:Okay, but it’s just that some of us are wondering what the upsides
In message <lqtoutFa96vU1@mid.individual.net>, at 12:04:45 on Fri, >>>>>> 29 Nov 2024, JNugent <JNugent73@mail.com> remarked:
It seems that you have a complaint against certain mainland
European customs departments.
The electorate was assured things would be better after Brexit, not >>>>>> far worse.
The assertions "Everything is far worse for the entire country after >>>>> Brexit" and "Roland is having some slight difficulty sending items
to Europe" are not equivalent. I understand why you might think they >>>>> are,
but not everyone agrees.
Your assertion elsewhere that there were "innumerable claims that
either nothing would change to adversely affect our trade as a
result of Brexit, or if anything get better" is a bit shaky too.
IIRC it was always accepted that Brexit would have upsides and
downsides, winners and losers. Some people may have glossed over the >>>>> details, but they were on both sides of the argument.
are?
Sovereignty.
Taking back control.
Blue passports.
Immigration down to zero.
I think you mis-typed "up to 900k".
£350 million a week extra to the NHS.
Always a lie.
Better deal for farmers.
Better deal for fishermen.
Both would now disagree strongly.
the list is endless.
Norman Wells <hex@unseen.ac.am> wrote:
Do you approve of such EU protectionism? Or only when we were a member,
and party to it?
Protectionism by nation states and trading groups is widespread and recent events suggest that it is popular with voters where they have the
opportunity to vote for candidates with a declared protectionist agenda.
We knew that the EU favours members over non-members before brexit and the British people voted for brexit despite that. The voters decided that
rather than stay in the EU and attempt to reduce its protectionist stance
the UK should leave and therefore have no further say in the matter.
The voters chose brexit, now live the consequences.
My personal opinion on protectionism is as irrelevant as yours no matter
how much you follow Gove in believing that a strongly held opinion trumps expertise.
On 30 Nov 2024 at 08:19:04 GMT, "Norman Wells" <hex@unseen.ac.am> wrote:
On 30/11/2024 01:54, Tim Jackson wrote:
On Thu, 28 Nov 2024 17:13:41 +0000, Norman Wells wrote...
On 28/11/2024 16:46, Roland Perry wrote:
I'm selling some small souvenirs, primarily in person but also by
mailorder. The cost of postage to EU is 3x that of UK,
Is that a consequence of 'post-Brexit laws'? If so, I don't see it
myself. Perhaps you would clarify which laws you mean?
they take three weeks to arrive,
That too.
and the customers are charged an extra 50% as import duty.
I doubt if that was mandated by Brexit, but is rather the fault of the >>>> EU being totally unreasonable in an EU sort of way.
Yes, you'd think they would find some way to pretend we were still an EU >>> member, so as to avoid the WTO "most favoured nation" rules which say
they can't treat us more favourably than any other non-EU country.
I think you mean 'less favourably'. Otherwise no bilateral trade deals
would be possible.
No he means more favourably. I don't profess to understand WTO rules, but they
don't preclude formal free trade treaties.
It's maybe the sort
of bureaucracy we voted to leave behind.
It's maybe the sort of bureaucracy that we previously avoided by being
members of the EU.
Do you approve of such EU protectionism? Or only when we were a member,
and party to it?
Just having customs examination of goods entering a country is normal! It isn't protectionism. Unreasonably high tariffs for certain goods or countries is protectionism.
Roland Perry <roland@perry.uk> wrote:
In message <oco*xrN0z@news.chiark.greenend.org.uk>, at 14:36:14 on Fri,
29 Nov 2024, Theo <theom+news@chiark.greenend.org.uk> remarked:
One of the consequence of Brexit and co-incident EU rule changes
There aren't any EU rule changes, all that's happened is the UK is now a
"Third Country", rather than a member. So we have to jump through the
same hoops as any other Third Country, having been accustomed to the
absence of hoops on account of being a member.
There are, EU VAT rules changed from 1 July 2021: >https://vat-one-stop-shop.ec.europa.eu/index_en >https://www.grantthornton.co.uk/insights/ioss-big-changes-to-eu-vat-from >-july-2021/
It so happened that the outcome of Brexit and the EU IOSS VAT rules had >similar effects coming in at a similar time. Which is handy because the >implementations often work similarly for EU and UK.
Selling items on ebay is now free for private sellers, so it may be a cheap >> >way to have them handle it if you're selling a few items as an individual. >> >(even if you normally sell things direct, you can point international buyersI was, perhaps foolishly, trying to have one price for everyone.
at your ebay listing as the preferred route for them to buy). If you are >> >selling things in the course of a business, you could just mark them up to >> >cover the ebay fees and allow UK buyers to order direct at a lower price. >>
As you're a private seller, you can list them on ebay with no fees. Hence >you can keep the same price for everyone, and get ebay to handle collecting >VAT.
(I think the item would be liable for import VAT even if sold by somebody
who isn't VAT registered. I don't think you can stop VAT being added on >cross-border sales)
In message <lqu90kFcph7U1@mid.individual.net>, at 16:38:44 on Fri, 29
Nov 2024, JNugent <JNugent73@mail.com> remarked:
On 29/11/2024 02:09 pm, Roland Perry wrote:
JNugent <JNugent73@mail.com> remarked:
It seems that you have a complaint against certain mainland European The electorate was assured things would be better after Brexit, not
customs departments.
far worse.
You'll have no difficulty, then, in providing a link to a contemporary
discussion of that.
I was already familiar with the principles involved (having ordered
goods from the USA on various occasions and having to pay Royal Mail
charges, plus amounts representing import duty and VAT). Yet I have no
recollection of that being a topic of controversy at all.
Nevertheless, when you provide a link to any one of those many
"assurances" you mention, we'll be able to get to the bottom of it.
There were so many, I can't easily find one which summarises them all.
On 30/11/2024 13:16, Owen Rees wrote:
Norman Wells <hex@unseen.ac.am> wrote:
Do you approve of such EU protectionism? Or only when we were a member, >>> and party to it?
Protectionism by nation states and trading groups is widespread and recent >> events suggest that it is popular with voters where they have the
opportunity to vote for candidates with a declared protectionist agenda.
We knew that the EU favours members over non-members before brexit and the >> British people voted for brexit despite that. The voters decided that
rather than stay in the EU and attempt to reduce its protectionist stance
the UK should leave and therefore have no further say in the matter.
A very principled stance if I may say so. What you're advocating is remaining in a protectionist organisation, rather like a London gang,
which you know deep down is employing rather underhand tactics to be protectionist, in the forlorn hope of reforming it from within when all
your previous attempts to do that for nearly 50 years had no effect whatsoever.
The voters chose brexit, now live the consequences.
My personal opinion on protectionism is as irrelevant as yours no matter
how much you follow Gove in believing that a strongly held opinion trumps
expertise.
Nevertheless, if you think protectionism is fundamentally a bad thing
and that free trade is inherently better, you should as a matter of
principle be welcoming any steps away from the former and towards the
latter.
"JNugent" <JNugent73@mail.com> wrote:
Roger Hayter wrote:
"JNugent" <JNugent73@mail.com> wrote:
Roland Perry wrote:
JNugent <JNugent73@mail.com> remarked:
On 28/11/2024 07:20 pm, Roland Perry wrote:
JNugent <JNugent73@mail.com> remarked:
Roland Perry wrote:
I'm selling some small souvenirs, primarily in person but also by >>>>>>>>> mailorder. The cost of postage to EU is 3x that of UK,
I don't know the figures for inland or overseas Royal Mail postage >>>>>>>> of parcels or packages, but would remind you that other carriers >>>>>>>> are available.
It's a competitive market these days.
I don't know of any courier who can match the Royal Mail postage for >>>>>>> small ad-hoc items. Possibly for the 3x version, but I'd have to check.
they take three weeks to arrive, and the customers are charged an >>>>>>>>> extra 50% as import duty. What palaver!
Hmmm... If I were to order something from www.thomann.de and had >>>>>>>> opted for the UK page, the charge would be 20% VAT (paid by Thomann >>>>>>>> to HMRC)
And not recovered from you?
Included in the competitive quoted price.
Because there's a law about quoting "VAT inclusive" prices, and they'll >>>>> pay whatever the VAT is, arising in different territories?
A. It is what they do.
B. They didn't do it at first, not until they'd been able to make the
more recent arrangements.
C. The very existence of (B) indicates that it is not a legal rule. It >>>> is a service provided by Thomann for their UK customers becase it makes >>>> cross-border trading easier and less hassle.
No it is a legal rule, now being followed by even the Chinese and American >>> online retailers.
How does the UK government enact legislation which binds the USA and PRC
governments? How is it enforced?
Presumably if necessary the government could take steps to stop such entities selling goods to British residents. Which is easy if they have a corporate presence here. Perhaps if they don't we would have to use the customs facilities referred to below. There may be other legal avenues I don't know about, but I agree very small sellers would be difficult to chase.
The fact that they took some time to observe the rule
properly is not evidence against the existence of the rule.
So why isn't every EU-based company doing it?
Can you tell me of any that *don't* charge UK vat?
They're just being customs officers, and doing what customs do. The complaint
is that we are now subject to their ministrations.
Their governments' decision.
So you think any competent and normal EU government really has the option of dispensing with customs?? Or indeed any rational reason to. We certainly intend to apply customs rules to EU imports in a consistent way as with the rest of the world once we get our act together.
On 29/11/2024 06:29 pm, Roger Hayter wrote:
"JNugent" <JNugent73@mail.com> wrote:
Roger Hayter wrote:
"JNugent" <JNugent73@mail.com> wrote:
Roland Perry wrote:
JNugent <JNugent73@mail.com> remarked:
On 28/11/2024 07:20 pm, Roland Perry wrote:
JNugent <JNugent73@mail.com> remarked:
Roland Perry wrote:
I'm selling some small souvenirs, primarily in person but also by >>>>>>>>>> mailorder. The cost of postage to EU is 3x that of UK,
I don't know the figures for inland or overseas Royal Mail postage >>>>>>>>> of parcels or packages, but would remind you that other carriers >>>>>>>>> are available.
It's a competitive market these days.
I don't know of any courier who can match the Royal Mail postage for
small ad-hoc items. Possibly for the 3x version, but I'd have to check.
they take three weeks to arrive, and the customers are charged an >>>>>>>>>> extra 50% as import duty. What palaver!
Hmmm... If I were to order something from www.thomann.de and had >>>>>>>>> opted for the UK page, the charge would be 20% VAT (paid by Thomann >>>>>>>>> to HMRC)
And not recovered from you?
Included in the competitive quoted price.
Because there's a law about quoting "VAT inclusive" prices, and they'll >>>>>> pay whatever the VAT is, arising in different territories?
A. It is what they do.
B. They didn't do it at first, not until they'd been able to make the >>>>> more recent arrangements.
C. The very existence of (B) indicates that it is not a legal rule. It >>>>> is a service provided by Thomann for their UK customers becase it makes >>>>> cross-border trading easier and less hassle.
No it is a legal rule, now being followed by even the Chinese and American >>>> online retailers.
How does the UK government enact legislation which binds the USA and PRC >>> governments? How is it enforced?
Presumably if necessary the government could take steps to stop such entities
selling goods to British residents. Which is easy if they have a corporate >> presence here. Perhaps if they don't we would have to use the customs
facilities referred to below. There may be other legal avenues I don't know >> about, but I agree very small sellers would be difficult to chase.
Prevention / prohibition of private (or even commercial) importing would surely be a breach of Yooman Rites.
The fact that they took some time to observe the rule
properly is not evidence against the existence of the rule.
So why isn't every EU-based company doing it?
Can you tell me of any that *don't* charge UK vat?
Of course not.
But as you already know, that isn't the issue. The issue is whether they charge the UK rate of VAT and pay the collected tax (if any) to the UK Treasury.
www.thomann.de does that.
[ ... ]
They're just being customs officers, and doing what customs do. The complaint
is that we are now subject to their ministrations.
Their governments' decision.
So you think any competent and normal EU government really has the option of >> dispensing with customs?? Or indeed any rational reason to. We certainly
intend to apply customs rules to EU imports in a consistent way as with the >> rest of the world once we get our act together.
Are you denying that it is the government of an EU coiuntry which
enforces the collection of import duty and VAT on goods imported and
received by post?
Or are you making some other, less obvious, point?
On 30/11/2024 11:21, Roger Hayter wrote:
On 30 Nov 2024 at 08:19:04 GMT, "Norman Wells" <hex@unseen.ac.am> wrote:
On 30/11/2024 01:54, Tim Jackson wrote:
On Thu, 28 Nov 2024 17:13:41 +0000, Norman Wells wrote...
On 28/11/2024 16:46, Roland Perry wrote:
I'm selling some small souvenirs, primarily in person but also by
mailorder. The cost of postage to EU is 3x that of UK,
Is that a consequence of 'post-Brexit laws'? If so, I don't see it
myself. Perhaps you would clarify which laws you mean?
they take three weeks to arrive,
That too.
and the customers are charged an extra 50% as import duty.
I doubt if that was mandated by Brexit, but is rather the fault of the >>>>> EU being totally unreasonable in an EU sort of way.
Yes, you'd think they would find some way to pretend we were still an EU >>>> member, so as to avoid the WTO "most favoured nation" rules which say
they can't treat us more favourably than any other non-EU country.
I think you mean 'less favourably'. Otherwise no bilateral trade deals
would be possible.
No he means more favourably. I don't profess to understand WTO rules, but they
don't preclude formal free trade treaties.
That is exactly my point. You can treat people more favourably if you
agree a deal with them, but you can't treat anyone who doesn't less favourably than anyone else who doesn't.
It's maybe the sort
of bureaucracy we voted to leave behind.
It's maybe the sort of bureaucracy that we previously avoided by being >>>> members of the EU.
Do you approve of such EU protectionism? Or only when we were a member, >>> and party to it?
Just having customs examination of goods entering a country is normal! It
isn't protectionism. Unreasonably high tariffs for certain goods or countries
is protectionism.
How about the '50%' quoted above?
I'd call it protectionism.
On 30 Nov 2024 at 15:46:40 GMT, "Norman Wells" <hex@unseen.ac.am> wrote:
On 30/11/2024 13:16, Owen Rees wrote:
Norman Wells <hex@unseen.ac.am> wrote:
Do you approve of such EU protectionism? Or only when we were a member, >>>> and party to it?
Protectionism by nation states and trading groups is widespread and recent >>> events suggest that it is popular with voters where they have the
opportunity to vote for candidates with a declared protectionist agenda. >>>
We knew that the EU favours members over non-members before brexit and the >>> British people voted for brexit despite that. The voters decided that
rather than stay in the EU and attempt to reduce its protectionist stance >>> the UK should leave and therefore have no further say in the matter.
A very principled stance if I may say so. What you're advocating is
remaining in a protectionist organisation, rather like a London gang,
which you know deep down is employing rather underhand tactics to be
protectionist, in the forlorn hope of reforming it from within when all
your previous attempts to do that for nearly 50 years had no effect
whatsoever.
The voters chose brexit, now live the consequences.
My personal opinion on protectionism is as irrelevant as yours no matter >>> how much you follow Gove in believing that a strongly held opinion trumps >>> expertise.
Nevertheless, if you think protectionism is fundamentally a bad thing
and that free trade is inherently better, you should as a matter of
principle be welcoming any steps away from the former and towards the
latter.
I don't think it is an established law of nature that protectionism is a bad this, still less a moral fault! Much has been made of free trade as being virtuous by *some* economists but, as nearly all American politicians have demonstrated over more than a century, tariffs as a form of economic warfare against your competitors have their value. And they still do it even while preaching the virtues of free trade.
On 30 Nov 2024 at 15:34:43 GMT, "Norman Wells" <hex@unseen.ac.am> wrote:
On 30/11/2024 11:21, Roger Hayter wrote:
On 30 Nov 2024 at 08:19:04 GMT, "Norman Wells" <hex@unseen.ac.am> wrote: >>>> On 30/11/2024 01:54, Tim Jackson wrote:
On Thu, 28 Nov 2024 17:13:41 +0000, Norman Wells wrote...
On 28/11/2024 16:46, Roland Perry wrote:
I'm selling some small souvenirs, primarily in person but also by >>>>>>> mailorder. The cost of postage to EU is 3x that of UK,
Is that a consequence of 'post-Brexit laws'? If so, I don't see it >>>>>> myself. Perhaps you would clarify which laws you mean?
they take three weeks to arrive,
That too.
and the customers are charged an extra 50% as import duty.
I doubt if that was mandated by Brexit, but is rather the fault of the >>>>>> EU being totally unreasonable in an EU sort of way.
Yes, you'd think they would find some way to pretend we were still an EU >>>>> member, so as to avoid the WTO "most favoured nation" rules which say >>>>> they can't treat us more favourably than any other non-EU country.
I think you mean 'less favourably'. Otherwise no bilateral trade deals >>>> would be possible.
No he means more favourably. I don't profess to understand WTO rules, but they
don't preclude formal free trade treaties.
That is exactly my point. You can treat people more favourably if you
agree a deal with them, but you can't treat anyone who doesn't less
favourably than anyone else who doesn't.
It's maybe the sort
of bureaucracy we voted to leave behind.
It's maybe the sort of bureaucracy that we previously avoided by being >>>>> members of the EU.
Do you approve of such EU protectionism? Or only when we were a member, >>>> and party to it?
Just having customs examination of goods entering a country is normal! It >>> isn't protectionism. Unreasonably high tariffs for certain goods or countries
is protectionism.
How about the '50%' quoted above?
I'd call it protectionism.
The 50% is not usually a tariff, but a consequence of an administrative charge
usually by couriers for *administering* customs clearance.
On 30 Nov 2024 at 17:08:51 GMT, "JNugent" <JNugent73@mail.com> wrote:
On 29/11/2024 06:29 pm, Roger Hayter wrote:
"JNugent" <JNugent73@mail.com> wrote:
Roger Hayter wrote:
"JNugent" <JNugent73@mail.com> wrote:
Roland Perry wrote:
JNugent <JNugent73@mail.com> remarked:
On 28/11/2024 07:20 pm, Roland Perry wrote:
JNugent <JNugent73@mail.com> remarked:
Roland Perry wrote:
I'm selling some small souvenirs, primarily in person but also by >>>>>>>>>>> mailorder. The cost of postage to EU is 3x that of UK,
I don't know the figures for inland or overseas Royal Mail postage >>>>>>>>>> of parcels or packages, but would remind you that other carriers >>>>>>>>>> are available.
It's a competitive market these days.
I don't know of any courier who can match the Royal Mail postage for
small ad-hoc items. Possibly for the 3x version, but I'd have to check.
they take three weeks to arrive, and the customers are charged an >>>>>>>>>>> extra 50% as import duty. What palaver!
Hmmm... If I were to order something from www.thomann.de and had >>>>>>>>>> opted for the UK page, the charge would be 20% VAT (paid by Thomann >>>>>>>>>> to HMRC)
And not recovered from you?
Included in the competitive quoted price.
Because there's a law about quoting "VAT inclusive" prices, and they'll >>>>>>> pay whatever the VAT is, arising in different territories?
A. It is what they do.
B. They didn't do it at first, not until they'd been able to make the >>>>>> more recent arrangements.
C. The very existence of (B) indicates that it is not a legal rule. It >>>>>> is a service provided by Thomann for their UK customers becase it makes >>>>>> cross-border trading easier and less hassle.
No it is a legal rule, now being followed by even the Chinese and American
online retailers.
How does the UK government enact legislation which binds the USA and PRC >>>> governments? How is it enforced?
Presumably if necessary the government could take steps to stop such entities
selling goods to British residents. Which is easy if they have a corporate >>> presence here. Perhaps if they don't we would have to use the customs
facilities referred to below. There may be other legal avenues I don't know >>> about, but I agree very small sellers would be difficult to chase.
Prevention / prohibition of private (or even commercial) importing would
surely be a breach of Yooman Rites.
Do you have any basis for saying that? I think it is totally untrue. There may
be some niche applications where certain goods needed for religious or cultural purposes are otherwise unavailable, but I can't think of any general human right that is infringed by import controls.
The fact that they took some time to observe the rule
properly is not evidence against the existence of the rule.
So why isn't every EU-based company doing it?
Can you tell me of any that *don't* charge UK vat?
Of course not.
But as you already know, that isn't the issue. The issue is whether they
charge the UK rate of VAT and pay the collected tax (if any) to the UK
Treasury.
www.thomann.de does that.
[ ... ]
They're just being customs officers, and doing what customs do. The complaint
is that we are now subject to their ministrations.
Their governments' decision.
So you think any competent and normal EU government really has the option of
dispensing with customs?? Or indeed any rational reason to. We certainly >>> intend to apply customs rules to EU imports in a consistent way as with the >>> rest of the world once we get our act together.
Are you denying that it is the government of an EU coiuntry which
enforces the collection of import duty and VAT on goods imported and
received by post?
Of course not. The issue of the British government insisting that VAT is paid by distance sellers to us is a totally separate issue from the EU setting conditions and customs bureaucracy on us exporting to them.
Or are you making some other, less obvious, point?
On 30 Nov 2024 at 15:46:40 GMT, "Norman Wells" <hex@unseen.ac.am> wrote:
On 30/11/2024 13:16, Owen Rees wrote:
Norman Wells <hex@unseen.ac.am> wrote:
Do you approve of such EU protectionism? Or only when we were a member, >>>> and party to it?
Protectionism by nation states and trading groups is widespread and recent >>> events suggest that it is popular with voters where they have the
opportunity to vote for candidates with a declared protectionist agenda. >>>
We knew that the EU favours members over non-members before brexit and the >>> British people voted for brexit despite that. The voters decided that
rather than stay in the EU and attempt to reduce its protectionist stance >>> the UK should leave and therefore have no further say in the matter.
A very principled stance if I may say so. What you're advocating is
remaining in a protectionist organisation, rather like a London gang,
which you know deep down is employing rather underhand tactics to be
protectionist, in the forlorn hope of reforming it from within when all
your previous attempts to do that for nearly 50 years had no effect
whatsoever.
The voters chose brexit, now live the consequences.
My personal opinion on protectionism is as irrelevant as yours no matter >>> how much you follow Gove in believing that a strongly held opinion trumps >>> expertise.
Nevertheless, if you think protectionism is fundamentally a bad thing
and that free trade is inherently better, you should as a matter of
principle be welcoming any steps away from the former and towards the
latter.
I don't think it is an established law of nature that protectionism is a bad this, still less a moral fault! Much has been made of free trade as being virtuous by *some* economists
but, as nearly all American politicians have
demonstrated over more than a century, tariffs as a form of economic warfare against your competitors have their value. And they still do it even while preaching the virtues of free trade.
On 30/11/2024 06:57 pm, Roger Hayter wrote:
Of course not. The issue of the British government insisting that VAT is paid
by distance sellers to us is a totally separate issue from the EU setting conditions and customs bureaucracy on us exporting to them.
Does the UK government have power to require overseas sellers to charge
and pay over UK VAT to the UK government?
In message <oco*aDR0z@news.chiark.greenend.org.uk>, at 09:38:10 on Sat,
30 Nov 2024, Theo <theom+news@chiark.greenend.org.uk> remarked:
As you're a private seller, you can list them on ebay with no fees. Hence >you can keep the same price for everyone, and get ebay to handle collecting >VAT.
I can get the same price, but NOT the same shipping cost.
(I think the item would be liable for import VAT even if sold by somebody >who isn't VAT registered. I don't think you can stop VAT being added on >cross-border sales)
My customers in France/Netherlands are reporting having to pay 11 Euros
on an item I sold for £20, which by the time the extra carriage and paperwork is taken into account is 'at cost'.
In message <via8jj$kj1q$1@dont-email.me>, at 17:17:39 on Thu, 28 Nov
2024, Handsome Jack <jack@handsome.com> remarked:
On Thu, 28 Nov 2024 16:46:02 +0000, Roland Perry wrote:
I'm selling some small souvenirs, primarily in person but also by
mailorder. The cost of postage to EU is 3x that of UK,
Is that a consequence of Brexit or of the cost of moving things? ISTR that >>sending something to France was always more expensive than sending it to >>Tunbridge Wells.
It's quite likely more expensive because the Post Office Counters
people have several minutes of paperwork to fill in, which they didn't >previously.
they take three weeks to arrive, and the customers are charged an
extra 50% as import duty. What palaver!
Farage, Boris, Gove et al... are you really pleased that your wafer-thin >>> triumph at the ballot box is so desperately discouraging to exporters?
Who is it who imposes the import duty?
The people whose free trade zone we voted to leave.
In message <vieoqe$3e12f$17@dont-email.me>, at 10:18:54 on Sat, 30 NovWe are now much more simply rule takers
2024, Jethro_uk <jethro_uk@hotmailbin.com> remarked:
On Fri, 29 Nov 2024 22:21:17 +0000, Sir Tim wrote:
Handsome Jack <jack@handsome.com> wrote:Sovereignty.
On Fri, 29 Nov 2024 14:09:19 +0000, Roland Perry wrote:Okay, but it’s just that some of us are wondering what the upsides are? >>
In message <lqtoutFa96vU1@mid.individual.net>, at 12:04:45 on Fri, 29 >>>>> Nov 2024, JNugent <JNugent73@mail.com> remarked:
It seems that you have a complaint against certain mainland European >>>>>> customs departments.
The electorate was assured things would be better after Brexit, not
far worse.
The assertions "Everything is far worse for the entire country after
Brexit" and "Roland is having some slight difficulty sending items to
Europe" are not equivalent. I understand why you might think they are, >>>> but not everyone agrees.
Your assertion elsewhere that there were "innumerable claims that
either nothing would change to adversely affect our trade as a result
of Brexit, or if anything get better" is a bit shaky too. IIRC it was
always accepted that Brexit would have upsides and downsides, winners
and losers. Some people may have glossed over the details, but they
were on both sides of the argument.
As above.Taking back control.
We could always have had them.Blue passports.
Many were convinced that Brexit could stop illegal immigration.Immigration down to zero.I think you mis-typed "up to 900k".
Even if it had been £350, at what eventual cost?£350 million a week extra to the NHS.Always a lie.
Especially the shellfish fishermen.Better deal for farmers.Both would now disagree strongly.
Better deal for fishermen.
At least add bent bananas!the list is endless.
On 30/11/2024 18:52, Roger Hayter wrote:
On 30 Nov 2024 at 15:46:40 GMT, "Norman Wells" <hex@unseen.ac.am> wrote:
On 30/11/2024 13:16, Owen Rees wrote:
Norman Wells <hex@unseen.ac.am> wrote:
Do you approve of such EU protectionism? Or only when we were a member, >>>>> and party to it?
Protectionism by nation states and trading groups is widespread and recent >>>> events suggest that it is popular with voters where they have the
opportunity to vote for candidates with a declared protectionist agenda. >>>>
We knew that the EU favours members over non-members before brexit and the >>>> British people voted for brexit despite that. The voters decided that
rather than stay in the EU and attempt to reduce its protectionist stance >>>> the UK should leave and therefore have no further say in the matter.
A very principled stance if I may say so. What you're advocating is
remaining in a protectionist organisation, rather like a London gang,
which you know deep down is employing rather underhand tactics to be
protectionist, in the forlorn hope of reforming it from within when all
your previous attempts to do that for nearly 50 years had no effect
whatsoever.
The voters chose brexit, now live the consequences.
My personal opinion on protectionism is as irrelevant as yours no matter >>>> how much you follow Gove in believing that a strongly held opinion trumps >>>> expertise.
Nevertheless, if you think protectionism is fundamentally a bad thing
and that free trade is inherently better, you should as a matter of
principle be welcoming any steps away from the former and towards the
latter.
I don't think it is an established law of nature that protectionism is a bad >> this, still less a moral fault! Much has been made of free trade as being >> virtuous by *some* economists
I think by 'most' or 'nearly all' actually.
but, as nearly all American politicians have
demonstrated over more than a century, tariffs as a form of economic warfare >> against your competitors have their value. And they still do it even while >> preaching the virtues of free trade.
Only if you prefer war to peace. It's short term advantage only, and it
only works for as long as your trading partners don't retaliate.
On 30/11/2024 19:10, Roger Hayter wrote:
On 30 Nov 2024 at 15:34:43 GMT, "Norman Wells" <hex@unseen.ac.am> wrote:
On 30/11/2024 11:21, Roger Hayter wrote:
On 30 Nov 2024 at 08:19:04 GMT, "Norman Wells" <hex@unseen.ac.am> wrote: >>>>> On 30/11/2024 01:54, Tim Jackson wrote:
On Thu, 28 Nov 2024 17:13:41 +0000, Norman Wells wrote...
On 28/11/2024 16:46, Roland Perry wrote:
I'm selling some small souvenirs, primarily in person but also by >>>>>>>> mailorder. The cost of postage to EU is 3x that of UK,
Is that a consequence of 'post-Brexit laws'? If so, I don't see it >>>>>>> myself. Perhaps you would clarify which laws you mean?
they take three weeks to arrive,
That too.
and the customers are charged an extra 50% as import duty.
I doubt if that was mandated by Brexit, but is rather the fault of the >>>>>>> EU being totally unreasonable in an EU sort of way.
Yes, you'd think they would find some way to pretend we were still an EU >>>>>> member, so as to avoid the WTO "most favoured nation" rules which say >>>>>> they can't treat us more favourably than any other non-EU country.
I think you mean 'less favourably'. Otherwise no bilateral trade deals >>>>> would be possible.
No he means more favourably. I don't profess to understand WTO rules, but they
don't preclude formal free trade treaties.
That is exactly my point. You can treat people more favourably if you
agree a deal with them, but you can't treat anyone who doesn't less
favourably than anyone else who doesn't.
It's maybe the sort
of bureaucracy we voted to leave behind.
It's maybe the sort of bureaucracy that we previously avoided by being >>>>>> members of the EU.
Do you approve of such EU protectionism? Or only when we were a member, >>>>> and party to it?
Just having customs examination of goods entering a country is normal! It >>>> isn't protectionism. Unreasonably high tariffs for certain goods or countries
is protectionism.
How about the '50%' quoted above?
I'd call it protectionism.
The 50% is not usually a tariff, but a consequence of an administrative charge
usually by couriers for *administering* customs clearance.
Well, a putative exporter called it that above, and I go with the
information I'm given. However, whatever you call the 50%, and however
it's made up, it's a restriction on trade created and perpetuated by the
EU, which I think it's fair to call protectionism.
Does the UK government have power to require overseas sellers to charge
and pay over UK VAT to the UK government?
On 30/11/2024 01:25, Tim Jackson wrote:
On Thu, 28 Nov 2024 17:29:44 +0000, JNugent wrote...
Hmmm... If I were to order something from www.thomann.de and had opted
for the UK page, the charge would be 20% VAT (paid by Thomann to HMRC)
and either a flat 8 Euros delivery fee or a flat 0 Euros fee if the
value of the order (inc. VAT) was 149 Euros or more.
Large EU exporters to the UK register direct with HMRC so that they can collect the UK VAT from you when you order.
An unregistered exporter or private individual has to declare the value
for customs purposes, and the UK tax is then collected by the carrier
when they deliver it to you. They add a further charge of their own to cover their admin costs.
This is a result of us leaving the EU. It corresponds to the added cost (in the reverse direction) that Roland noted in his OP.
So it may be, but the subject header mentions 'post-Brexit laws' that
have caused this consequence. Which laws please?
On Sat, 30 Nov 2024 08:21:40 +0000, Norman Wells wrote...
On 30/11/2024 01:25, Tim Jackson wrote:
On Thu, 28 Nov 2024 17:29:44 +0000, JNugent wrote...
Hmmm... If I were to order something from www.thomann.de and had opted >>>> for the UK page, the charge would be 20% VAT (paid by Thomann to HMRC) >>>> and either a flat 8 Euros delivery fee or a flat 0 Euros fee if the
value of the order (inc. VAT) was 149 Euros or more.
Large EU exporters to the UK register direct with HMRC so that they can
collect the UK VAT from you when you order.
An unregistered exporter or private individual has to declare the value
for customs purposes, and the UK tax is then collected by the carrier
when they deliver it to you. They add a further charge of their own to
cover their admin costs.
This is a result of us leaving the EU. It corresponds to the added cost >>> (in the reverse direction) that Roland noted in his OP.
So it may be, but the subject header mentions 'post-Brexit laws' that
have caused this consequence. Which laws please?
See my post elsewhere about WTO rules. These predate Brexit, but have
only applied to UK-EU trade post-Brexit.
On 30 Nov 2024 at 20:39:20 GMT, "Norman Wells" <hex@unseen.ac.am> wrote:
On 30/11/2024 19:10, Roger Hayter wrote:
On 30 Nov 2024 at 15:34:43 GMT, "Norman Wells" <hex@unseen.ac.am> wrote: >>>> On 30/11/2024 11:21, Roger Hayter wrote:
On 30 Nov 2024 at 08:19:04 GMT, "Norman Wells" <hex@unseen.ac.am> wrote:
Do you approve of such EU protectionism? Or only when we were a member, >>>>>> and party to it?
Just having customs examination of goods entering a country is normal! It >>>>> isn't protectionism. Unreasonably high tariffs for certain goods or countries
is protectionism.
How about the '50%' quoted above?
I'd call it protectionism.
The 50% is not usually a tariff, but a consequence of an administrative charge
usually by couriers for *administering* customs clearance.
Well, a putative exporter called it that above, and I go with the
information I'm given. However, whatever you call the 50%, and however
it's made up, it's a restriction on trade created and perpetuated by the
EU, which I think it's fair to call protectionism.
That is absurd. It is a situation "created" by any cross-border trading anywhere in the world, unless both sides of the border are in the same free trade area. The EU didn't "create amd perpetuate" it, Brexit did. Both parties
have exactly the same restrictions regarding trade with the rest of the world,
they just didn't with each other when we were in the EU.
On 30 Nov 2024 at 20:34:38 GMT, "Norman Wells" <hex@unseen.ac.am> wrote:
On 30/11/2024 18:52, Roger Hayter wrote:
On 30 Nov 2024 at 15:46:40 GMT, "Norman Wells" <hex@unseen.ac.am> wrote: >>>
On 30/11/2024 13:16, Owen Rees wrote:
Norman Wells <hex@unseen.ac.am> wrote:
Do you approve of such EU protectionism? Or only when we were a member, >>>>>> and party to it?
Protectionism by nation states and trading groups is widespread and recent
events suggest that it is popular with voters where they have the
opportunity to vote for candidates with a declared protectionist agenda. >>>>>
We knew that the EU favours members over non-members before brexit and the
British people voted for brexit despite that. The voters decided that >>>>> rather than stay in the EU and attempt to reduce its protectionist stance >>>>> the UK should leave and therefore have no further say in the matter.
A very principled stance if I may say so. What you're advocating is
remaining in a protectionist organisation, rather like a London gang,
which you know deep down is employing rather underhand tactics to be
protectionist, in the forlorn hope of reforming it from within when all >>>> your previous attempts to do that for nearly 50 years had no effect
whatsoever.
The voters chose brexit, now live the consequences.
My personal opinion on protectionism is as irrelevant as yours no matter >>>>> how much you follow Gove in believing that a strongly held opinion trumps >>>>> expertise.
Nevertheless, if you think protectionism is fundamentally a bad thing
and that free trade is inherently better, you should as a matter of
principle be welcoming any steps away from the former and towards the
latter.
I don't think it is an established law of nature that protectionism is a bad
this, still less a moral fault! Much has been made of free trade as being >>> virtuous by *some* economists
I think by 'most' or 'nearly all' actually.
but, as nearly all American politicians have
demonstrated over more than a century, tariffs as a form of economic warfare
against your competitors have their value. And they still do it even while >>> preaching the virtues of free trade.
Only if you prefer war to peace. It's short term advantage only, and it
only works for as long as your trading partners don't retaliate.
Or, in the case of the US, if your economy is bigger and stronger than anyone else's, your military is bigger, you produce at a reasonable price nearly all kinds of goods internally and your currency is the de facto world currency. Protectionism works well for the Americans at the moment, and has done for at least the last century, and that is perhaps why they are so determined to weaken China.
On 30/11/2024 23:30, Roger Hayter wrote:
On 30 Nov 2024 at 20:39:20 GMT, "Norman Wells" <hex@unseen.ac.am> wrote:
On 30/11/2024 19:10, Roger Hayter wrote:
On 30 Nov 2024 at 15:34:43 GMT, "Norman Wells" <hex@unseen.ac.am> wrote: >>>> On 30/11/2024 11:21, Roger Hayter wrote:
On 30 Nov 2024 at 08:19:04 GMT, "Norman Wells" <hex@unseen.ac.am> wrote:
Do you approve of such EU protectionism? Or only when we were a member,
and party to it?
Just having customs examination of goods entering a country is normal! It
isn't protectionism. Unreasonably high tariffs for certain goods or countries
is protectionism.
How about the '50%' quoted above?
I'd call it protectionism.
The 50% is not usually a tariff, but a consequence of an administrative charge
usually by couriers for *administering* customs clearance.
Well, a putative exporter called it that above, and I go with the
information I'm given. However, whatever you call the 50%, and however
it's made up, it's a restriction on trade created and perpetuated by the >> EU, which I think it's fair to call protectionism.
That is absurd. It is a situation "created" by any cross-border trading anywhere in the world, unless both sides of the border are in the same free trade area. The EU didn't "create amd perpetuate" it, Brexit did. Both parties
have exactly the same restrictions regarding trade with the rest of the world,
they just didn't with each other when we were in the EU.
All tariffs are anti-competitive restrictions on trade.
I don't think the UK applies any import tariffs to EU goods. Do you
think we should retaliate in kind and apply such tariffs as they apply against us?
That would only be fair surely?
On 30/11/2024 23:34, Roger Hayter wrote:
On 30 Nov 2024 at 20:34:38 GMT, "Norman Wells" <hex@unseen.ac.am>
wrote:
On 30/11/2024 18:52, Roger Hayter wrote:
On 30 Nov 2024 at 15:46:40 GMT, "Norman Wells" <hex@unseen.ac.am>
wrote:
On 30/11/2024 13:16, Owen Rees wrote:
Norman Wells <hex@unseen.ac.am> wrote:
Do you approve of such EU protectionism? Or only when we were a >>>>>>> member,
and party to it?
Protectionism by nation states and trading groups is widespread and >>>>>> recent events suggest that it is popular with voters where they
have the opportunity to vote for candidates with a declared
protectionist agenda.
We knew that the EU favours members over non-members before brexit >>>>>> and the British people voted for brexit despite that. The voters
decided that rather than stay in the EU and attempt to reduce its
protectionist stance the UK should leave and therefore have no
further say in the matter.
A very principled stance if I may say so. What you're advocating is >>>>> remaining in a protectionist organisation, rather like a London
gang, which you know deep down is employing rather underhand tactics >>>>> to be protectionist, in the forlorn hope of reforming it from within >>>>> when all your previous attempts to do that for nearly 50 years had
no effect whatsoever.
The voters chose brexit, now live the consequences.
My personal opinion on protectionism is as irrelevant as yours no
matter how much you follow Gove in believing that a strongly held
opinion trumps expertise.
Nevertheless, if you think protectionism is fundamentally a bad
thing and that free trade is inherently better, you should as a
matter of principle be welcoming any steps away from the former and
towards the latter.
I don't think it is an established law of nature that protectionism
is a bad this, still less a moral fault! Much has been made of free
trade as being virtuous by *some* economists
I think by 'most' or 'nearly all' actually.
but, as nearly all American politicians have demonstrated over more
than a century, tariffs as a form of economic warfare against your
competitors have their value. And they still do it even while
preaching the virtues of free trade.
Only if you prefer war to peace. It's short term advantage only, and
it only works for as long as your trading partners don't retaliate.
Or, in the case of the US, if your economy is bigger and stronger than
anyone else's, your military is bigger, you produce at a reasonable
price nearly all kinds of goods internally and your currency is the de
facto world currency. Protectionism works well for the Americans at the
moment, and has done for at least the last century, and that is perhaps
why they are so determined to weaken China.
Why some in the USA want to 'weaken' China is that actually they produce
the goods US consumers want at a cheaper price. Applying trade tariffs
will make it more expensive for the average American.
Incidentally, China's army is twice the size of the USA's, so the
military argument doesn't work either.
On 30/11/2024 23:30, Roger Hayter wrote:
On 30 Nov 2024 at 20:39:20 GMT, "Norman Wells" <hex@unseen.ac.am> wrote:
On 30/11/2024 19:10, Roger Hayter wrote:
On 30 Nov 2024 at 15:34:43 GMT, "Norman Wells" <hex@unseen.ac.am> wrote: >>>>> On 30/11/2024 11:21, Roger Hayter wrote:
On 30 Nov 2024 at 08:19:04 GMT, "Norman Wells" <hex@unseen.ac.am> wrote:
Do you approve of such EU protectionism? Or only when we were a member,
and party to it?
Just having customs examination of goods entering a country is normal! It
isn't protectionism. Unreasonably high tariffs for certain goods or countries
is protectionism.
How about the '50%' quoted above?
I'd call it protectionism.
The 50% is not usually a tariff, but a consequence of an administrative charge
usually by couriers for *administering* customs clearance.
Well, a putative exporter called it that above, and I go with the
information I'm given. However, whatever you call the 50%, and however
it's made up, it's a restriction on trade created and perpetuated by the >>> EU, which I think it's fair to call protectionism.
That is absurd. It is a situation "created" by any cross-border trading
anywhere in the world, unless both sides of the border are in the same free >> trade area. The EU didn't "create amd perpetuate" it, Brexit did. Both parties
have exactly the same restrictions regarding trade with the rest of the world,
they just didn't with each other when we were in the EU.
All tariffs are anti-competitive restrictions on trade.
I don't think the UK applies any import tariffs to EU goods. Do you
think we should retaliate in kind and apply such tariffs as they apply against us?
That would only be fair surely?
I don't think the UK applies any import tariffs to EU goods. Do you
think we should retaliate in kind and apply such tariffs as they apply against us?
That would only be fair surely?
This very day I was with a friend who was posting a small package to Portugal. [Not sure what it was, but I suspect it was a bunch of
photos.] It took him quite some time to emerge from the post office,
because the accompanying customs declaration form he had already
completed (something he is now used to doing) was obsolete, and he had
to fill in a new one (which he said asked exactly the same questions). I
took the opportunity (as I usually do) of reminding him that he (and his wife) had both voted for Brexit.
On 30 Nov 2024 at 20:09:04 GMT, "JNugent" <JNugent73@mail.com> wrote:
Does the UK government have power to require overseas sellers to charge
and pay over UK VAT to the UK government?
You just asked that, but apparently didn't like the answer.
The answer is yes,
and they have successfully done so, at least for all significantly large overseas traders. Maybe some smaller ones will get a nasty shock if they don't
comply soon.
Perhaps some traders will try to cheat their way out of actually paying the VAT they have charged, but then criminals exist in this country too.
On 30/11/2024 11:40 pm, Roger Hayter wrote:
On 30 Nov 2024 at 20:09:04 GMT, "JNugent" <JNugent73@mail.com> wrote:
Does the UK government have power to require overseas sellers to charge
and pay over UK VAT to the UK government?
You just asked that, but apparently didn't like the answer.
What answer?
The answer is yes,
and they have successfully done so, at least for all significantly large
overseas traders. Maybe some smaller ones will get a nasty shock if they don't
comply soon.
What is the mechanism?
Perhaps some traders will try to cheat their way out of actually paying the >> VAT they have charged, but then criminals exist in this country too.
Are you arguing that it is impossible for a EU-based seller to send
purchased goods (let alone services) to the UYK without calculating the
UK's VAT, adding that to the price, collecting it and eventually
remitting it to HMRC?
On Sun, 1 Dec 2024 08:50:39 +0000, Norman Wells wrote...
I don't think the UK applies any import tariffs to EU goods. Do you
think we should retaliate in kind and apply such tariffs as they apply
against us?
That would only be fair surely?
Not only would it be fair, it's what we are supposed to do. (Except
where we've negotiated a separate bilateral agreement.)
WTO "most favoured nation" rules mean that we have to apply the same
tariffs as we do to other WTO countries outside the EU. Which is what
the EU is doing to us.
For a number of years since Brexit, the Conservative Government kept
kicking that can down the road, since it would increase prices of EU
goods to UK consumers.
I believe the Government had an intention to finally bite that bullet
earlier this year, but I don't know what happened. But we can't just
keep on putting it off, since eventually there will be a formal
complaint from other WTO countries, whose goods are not being treated as favourably as EU goods.
On Sun, 1 Dec 2024 08:10:08 +0000, Norman Wells wrote...
On 01/12/2024 02:41, Tim Jackson wrote:
On Sat, 30 Nov 2024 08:21:40 +0000, Norman Wells wrote...
On 30/11/2024 01:25, Tim Jackson wrote:
On Thu, 28 Nov 2024 17:29:44 +0000, JNugent wrote...
Hmmm... If I were to order something from www.thomann.de and had opted >>>>>> for the UK page, the charge would be 20% VAT (paid by Thomann to HMRC) >>>>>> and either a flat 8 Euros delivery fee or a flat 0 Euros fee if the >>>>>> value of the order (inc. VAT) was 149 Euros or more.
Large EU exporters to the UK register direct with HMRC so that they can >>>>> collect the UK VAT from you when you order.
An unregistered exporter or private individual has to declare the value >>>>> for customs purposes, and the UK tax is then collected by the carrier >>>>> when they deliver it to you. They add a further charge of their own to >>>>> cover their admin costs.
This is a result of us leaving the EU. It corresponds to the added cost >>>>> (in the reverse direction) that Roland noted in his OP.
So it may be, but the subject header mentions 'post-Brexit laws' that
have caused this consequence. Which laws please?
See my post elsewhere about WTO rules. These predate Brexit, but have
only applied to UK-EU trade post-Brexit.
So, not laws then, and not post-Brexit.
Other than that, the subject header applies.
I'm glad you find comfort in the semantic distinction between Roland's "post-Brexit law" and an older international treaty rule which applies post-Brexit.
At least add bent bananas!the list is endless.
An unregistered exporter or private individual has to declare the value >>>>>> for customs purposes, and the UK tax is then collected by the carrier >>>>>> when they deliver it to you. They add a further charge of their own to >>>>>> cover their admin costs.
This is a result of us leaving the EU. It corresponds to the added cost >>>>>> (in the reverse direction) that Roland noted in his OP.
So it may be, but the subject header mentions 'post-Brexit laws' that >>>>> have caused this consequence. Which laws please?
See my post elsewhere about WTO rules. These predate Brexit, but have >>>> only applied to UK-EU trade post-Brexit.
So, not laws then, and not post-Brexit.
Other than that, the subject header applies.
I'm glad you find comfort in the semantic distinction between
Roland's "post-Brexit law" and an older international treaty rule
which applies post-Brexit.
But Roland's 50% is not a tariff or a duty apparently according to
other posts here. Which means any extra he has to pay isn't anything
to do with WTO rules (call them laws if you like) either.
On 01/12/2024 15:24, Tim Jackson wrote:
On Sun, 1 Dec 2024 08:50:39 +0000, Norman Wells wrote...
I don't think the UK applies any import tariffs to EU goods. Do you
think we should retaliate in kind and apply such tariffs as they apply
against us?
That would only be fair surely?
Not only would it be fair, it's what we are supposed to do. (Except
where we've negotiated a separate bilateral agreement.)
No it isn't. We *can* if we choose to but we don't have to and we're
not 'supposed to'.
In message <JQC$SGK5x5SnFwGD@brattleho.plus.com>, at 23:15:05 on Sat,
30 Nov 2024, Ian Jackson <ianREMOVETHISjackson@g3ohx.co.uk> remarked:
At least add bent bananas!the list is endless.
That's another Boris invention [aka lie]. The Directive in question
didn't ban any particular shape of banana, but was mainly about
ensuring banana imports were neither infested with pests, nor soaked
in pesticide.
On Sun, 1 Dec 2024 16:41:51 +0000, Norman Wells wrote...
On 01/12/2024 15:24, Tim Jackson wrote:
On Sun, 1 Dec 2024 08:10:08 +0000, Norman Wells wrote...
On 01/12/2024 02:41, Tim Jackson wrote:
On Sat, 30 Nov 2024 08:21:40 +0000, Norman Wells wrote...
On 30/11/2024 01:25, Tim Jackson wrote:
On Thu, 28 Nov 2024 17:29:44 +0000, JNugent wrote...
Hmmm... If I were to order something from www.thomann.de and had opted >>>>>>>> for the UK page, the charge would be 20% VAT (paid by Thomann to HMRC) >>>>>>>> and either a flat 8 Euros delivery fee or a flat 0 Euros fee if the >>>>>>>> value of the order (inc. VAT) was 149 Euros or more.
Large EU exporters to the UK register direct with HMRC so that they can >>>>>>> collect the UK VAT from you when you order.
An unregistered exporter or private individual has to declare the value >>>>>>> for customs purposes, and the UK tax is then collected by the carrier >>>>>>> when they deliver it to you. They add a further charge of their own to >>>>>>> cover their admin costs.
This is a result of us leaving the EU. It corresponds to the added cost
(in the reverse direction) that Roland noted in his OP.
So it may be, but the subject header mentions 'post-Brexit laws' that >>>>>> have caused this consequence. Which laws please?
See my post elsewhere about WTO rules. These predate Brexit, but have >>>>> only applied to UK-EU trade post-Brexit.
So, not laws then, and not post-Brexit.
Other than that, the subject header applies.
I'm glad you find comfort in the semantic distinction between Roland's
"post-Brexit law" and an older international treaty rule which applies
post-Brexit.
But Roland's 50% is not a tariff or a duty apparently according to other
posts here. Which means any extra he has to pay isn't anything to do
with WTO rules (call them laws if you like) either.
Yawn. It's a combination of the WTO-mandated tariff/duty with the
carrier's service charge for collecting it. Please try to keep up.
On Sun, 1 Dec 2024 16:46:55 +0000, Norman Wells wrote...
On 01/12/2024 15:24, Tim Jackson wrote:
On Sun, 1 Dec 2024 08:50:39 +0000, Norman Wells wrote...
I don't think the UK applies any import tariffs to EU goods. Do you
think we should retaliate in kind and apply such tariffs as they apply >>>> against us?
That would only be fair surely?
Not only would it be fair, it's what we are supposed to do. (Except
where we've negotiated a separate bilateral agreement.)
No it isn't. We *can* if we choose to but we don't have to and we're
not 'supposed to'.
Norman, you are simply wrong. I've made two detailed posts explaining
how WTO rules mean we have to treat all WTO countries the same, in the absence of a separate bilateral agreement. But you've either not read
them or not understood. I'm not going to repeat them here.
Unless of course you mean that we could remove import tariffs on goods
from *all* WTO countries? Well, yes, we could.
But that would rather
destroy our bargaining position if we want to negotiate free trade
agreements with other countries such as the USA. Why should they give
us anything if they've already got what they want?
On 01/12/2024 18:20, Tim Jackson wrote:
Yawn. It's a combination of the WTO-mandated tariff/duty with the carrier's service charge for collecting it. Please try to keep up.
He called it a tariff. Others said it wasn't. You say it's a
combination of all sorts of things. There's no consensus between you
with which to keep up.
However, even on your analysis, the EU is deliberately hindering trade
for its own ends, when the vast majority of economists say that is a Bad Thing. Maybe we don't want to be party to that sort of thing, nor to
trade wars generally. Maybe it was very principled of us to get out of it.
On 01/12/2024 18:20, Tim Jackson wrote:
On Sun, 1 Dec 2024 16:46:55 +0000, Norman Wells wrote...
On 01/12/2024 15:24, Tim Jackson wrote:
On Sun, 1 Dec 2024 08:50:39 +0000, Norman Wells wrote...
I don't think the UK applies any import tariffs to EU goods. Do you >>>> think we should retaliate in kind and apply such tariffs as they apply >>>> against us?
That would only be fair surely?
Not only would it be fair, it's what we are supposed to do. (Except
where we've negotiated a separate bilateral agreement.)
No it isn't. We *can* if we choose to but we don't have to and we're
not 'supposed to'.
Norman, you are simply wrong. I've made two detailed posts explaining
how WTO rules mean we have to treat all WTO countries the same, in the absence of a separate bilateral agreement. But you've either not read
them or not understood. I'm not going to repeat them here.
Not so. We do not have to impose tariffs on any goods from anywhere.
We can if we choose impose no tariffs on any goods from anywhere, and
that would be fully in accordance with WTO rules.
Unless of course you mean that we could remove import tariffs on goods
from *all* WTO countries? Well, yes, we could.
Thank you.
But that would rather
destroy our bargaining position if we want to negotiate free trade agreements with other countries such as the USA. Why should they give
us anything if they've already got what they want?
Free trade deals sound great in theory, but their benefits are very
limited in practice, as those trumpeting them post-Brexit have found out.
Ian Jackson <ianREMOVETHISjackson@g3ohx.co.uk> wrote:
This very day I was with a friend who was posting a small package to
Portugal. [Not sure what it was, but I suspect it was a bunch of
photos.] It took him quite some time to emerge from the post office,
because the accompanying customs declaration form he had already
completed (something he is now used to doing) was obsolete, and he had
to fill in a new one (which he said asked exactly the same questions). I
took the opportunity (as I usually do) of reminding him that he (and his
wife) had both voted for Brexit.
Well, Ian, we were in the shape-shifting EEC/EC/EU for 47 years. We know
the bureaucracy of the EU is glacially slow. Let’s see what life is like after a similar span of freedom, say around 2067, as they might have
learned some sense by then.
On 01/12/2024 11:40, Spike wrote:
Ian Jackson <ianREMOVETHISjackson@g3ohx.co.uk> wrote:
This very day I was with a friend who was posting a small package to
Portugal. [Not sure what it was, but I suspect it was a bunch of
photos.] It took him quite some time to emerge from the post office,
because the accompanying customs declaration form he had already
completed (something he is now used to doing) was obsolete, and he had
to fill in a new one (which he said asked exactly the same questions). I >>> took the opportunity (as I usually do) of reminding him that he (and his >>> wife) had both voted for Brexit.
Well, Ian, we were in the shape-shifting EEC/EC/EU for 47 years. We know
the bureaucracy of the EU is glacially slow. Let’s see what life is like >> after a similar span of freedom, say around 2067, as they might have
learned some sense by then.
Plus ça change, plus c’est la même chose... ;-)
On 1 Dec 2024 at 15:11:04 GMT, "JNugent" <JNugent73@mail.com> wrote:
On 30/11/2024 11:40 pm, Roger Hayter wrote:
On 30 Nov 2024 at 20:09:04 GMT, "JNugent" <JNugent73@mail.com> wrote:
Does the UK government have power to require overseas sellers to charge >>>> and pay over UK VAT to the UK government?
You just asked that, but apparently didn't like the answer.
What answer?
The answer is yes,
and they have successfully done so, at least for all significantly large >>> overseas traders. Maybe some smaller ones will get a nasty shock if they don't
comply soon.
What is the mechanism?
Perhaps some traders will try to cheat their way out of actually paying the >>> VAT they have charged, but then criminals exist in this country too.
Are you arguing that it is impossible for a EU-based seller to send
purchased goods (let alone services) to the UYK without calculating the
UK's VAT, adding that to the price, collecting it and eventually
remitting it to HMRC?
It is impossible to do that for consumers without breaking UK law. Smuggling is a whole other issue.
On Sun, 1 Dec 2024 19:14:49 +0000, Norman Wells wrote...
On 01/12/2024 18:20, Tim Jackson wrote:
On Sun, 1 Dec 2024 16:46:55 +0000, Norman Wells wrote...
On 01/12/2024 15:24, Tim Jackson wrote:
On Sun, 1 Dec 2024 08:50:39 +0000, Norman Wells wrote...
I don't think the UK applies any import tariffs to EU goods. Do you >>>>>> think we should retaliate in kind and apply such tariffs as they apply >>>>>> against us?
That would only be fair surely?
Not only would it be fair, it's what we are supposed to do. (Except >>>>> where we've negotiated a separate bilateral agreement.)
No it isn't. We *can* if we choose to but we don't have to and we're
not 'supposed to'.
Norman, you are simply wrong. I've made two detailed posts explaining
how WTO rules mean we have to treat all WTO countries the same, in the
absence of a separate bilateral agreement. But you've either not read
them or not understood. I'm not going to repeat them here.
Not so. We do not have to impose tariffs on any goods from anywhere.
We can if we choose impose no tariffs on any goods from anywhere, and
that would be fully in accordance with WTO rules.
Unless of course you mean that we could remove import tariffs on goods
from *all* WTO countries? Well, yes, we could.
Thank you.
I see that you responded to my first paragraph before reading the
second. Then realised your response was what I'd already said. How embarrassing.
Roland Perry <roland@perry.uk> wrote:
In message <oco*aDR0z@news.chiark.greenend.org.uk>, at 09:38:10 on Sat,
30 Nov 2024, Theo <theom+news@chiark.greenend.org.uk> remarked:
As you're a private seller, you can list them on ebay with no fees. Hence >> >you can keep the same price for everyone, and get ebay to handle collecting >> >VAT.
I can get the same price, but NOT the same shipping cost.
Shipping to another country will always cost more.
This is about eliminating the courier's 'admin' fee and the item being
stuck in customs, by sending the item Delivery Duty Paid so that it's
just inserted into the domestic postal system. Think about it like US >Preclearance at airports, but for packages.
(search 'incoterms' for the gory details of the various shipping paperwork - >DDP is the relevant one here, even though it's mostly VAT not duty that's >relevant here)
(I think the item would be liable for import VAT even if sold by somebody >> >who isn't VAT registered. I don't think you can stop VAT being added on
cross-border sales)
My customers in France/Netherlands are reporting having to pay 11 Euros
on an item I sold for £20, which by the time the extra carriage and
paperwork is taken into account is 'at cost'.
You obviously aren't using a service like ebay's global shipping which does >the paperwork so all the VAT and duties are collected at point of sale.
| Sysop: | Keyop |
|---|---|
| Location: | Huddersfield, West Yorkshire, UK |
| Users: | 498 |
| Nodes: | 16 (0 / 16) |
| Uptime: | 75:35:47 |
| Calls: | 9,819 |
| Calls today: | 7 |
| Files: | 13,757 |
| Messages: | 6,190,027 |