Amazon purchases and new GST Rules

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by BobL

I don't doubt there's gouging but you can't compare this way as you're assume the Aus Retailer is buying them at the same price as the US retailer and that is rarely the case.
So you have to look at the Aus retailers buy price.
I can only comment on one case and that is for Stihl chainsaws where Aus retailers pay more for them from Stihl than the RRP in the US.
The US buys about 20x more chainsaws from Stihl than Aus does so the US retailers have a huge advantage.
The average US retailer also sells many more chainsaws per unit time than Aus retailers so they make up for lower RRP by having a a higher turnover.

---

Stihl have taken the "home turf" thing to a whole new level in the States (maybe here as well). Over there dealers are only allowed to sell to those in their local dealership area. As I understand it - not just state to state, but city/region restrictions as well.

Whilst I agree with the premise of your argument, Stihl isn't the best one to use as an example. There are plenty of European based companies that try to exercise this turf thing, and also at least attempt to fix retail pricing. Festool was fined €8,000,000 (around AUD12,000,000) about 5 years ago for price fixing in Germany.

I would think, and certainly hope that a small company like Infinity would just have a single wholesale pricelist.

It might be an interesting example to try and pull apart. In AUD they are $40 in the USA, and $69 here. Assume 50% mark-up from wholesale to retail, which would give a w'sale price of $26.66.
Freight cost - not much, even by airfreight, in a decent sized box. Call it $2.
Import Duty, probably 5%, so $1.33
GST upon retailing at $69 would be $6.27
Cost of warehousing such a small item - nil
Total costs $36.26 unless I've missed something (maybe an allowance for Custom Clearance which would only apply to imports in bulk - otherwise airfreighting already looks after that)
Profit = $69.00 - 36.26 = $32.74.
That's ~90% profit where the US retailer gets 50% (by the earlier definition). I can't see that the Aussie retailer needs 40% more to cover the country differences. Perhaps 20%. A price of $59 to $63 would be fairer, and quite reasonable. A retail price here of about 150% of the overseas price (in AUD) is fine by me, depending on the freight costs etc.

It's certainly far from the worst example I've seen.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by FenceFurniture

Stihl have taken the "home turf" thing to a whole new level in the States (maybe here as well). Over there dealers are only allowed to sell to those in their local dealership area. As I understand it - not just state to state, but city/region restrictions as well.

Whilst I agree with the premise of your argument, Stihl isn't the best one to use as an example. There are plenty of European based companies that try to exercise this turf thing, and also at least attempt to fix retail pricing. Festool was fined €8,000,000 (around AUD12,000,000) about 5 years ago for price fixing in Germany.

I would think, and certainly hope that a small company like Infinity would just have a single wholesale pricelist. .

---

There will be an official wholesale price but if you buy 10000 units you will obtain a much lower price than if you offer to buy 100. Even Aus retailers offer this, eg Element14, Altronics etc.

Yeah, but I don't think anyone in the world is ever going to buy 10,000 of the same router bit. I understand what you are saying though.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Beardy

And my personal gripe...

• Domestic beer in the United States is 42.15% cheaper than in Australia

---

sounds about right.
it's generally accepted that US domestic beer is mostly flavoured water.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by ian

sounds about right.
it's generally accepted that US domestic beer is mostly flavoured water.

---

I think you mean coloured?

Actually my experience is the US microbrewery scene makes our micro brewery scene pale into insignificance. If you know where to look there is all manner of delicious brews available in most US major cities and towns. Every city I have been to in the US has surprised me with the high quality and variety of microbrewery Beers. US microbreweries are much more willing to try unusual ingredients and have come up with some incredible brews. One of my favourites is Dog Fish Head, there's nothing like their 18% stout and their IPAs here in Aus. They also made a beer using sultanas and champagne yeast which was amazing. Stone brewing in CA are also one of my other faves. I could go on - well maybe a bit more. Seattle has a vibrant microbrewery scene - I did a brewery crawl over a couple of days there back in 2005 - it was hard work as there were so many. Even though its the home of StarSluts some of the Coffee was also outstanding.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by BobL

I think you mean coloured?

Actually my experience is the US microbrewery scene makes our micro brewery scene pale into insignificance. If you know where to look there is all manner of delicious brews available in most US major cities and towns. Every city I have been to in the US has surprised me with the high quality and variety of microbrewery Beers. US microbreweries are much more willing to try unusual ingredients and have come up with some incredible brews. One of my favourites is Dog Fish Head, there's nothing like their 18% stout and their IPAs here in Aus. They also made a beer using sultanas and champagne yeast which was amazing. Stone brewing in CA are also one of my other faves. I could go on - well maybe a bit more. Seattle has a vibrant microbrewery scene - I did a brewery crawl over a couple of days there back in 2005 - it was hard work as there were so many. Even though its the home of StarSluts some of the Coffee was also outstanding.

---

Micro brewers don't count as the beer they brew is tailored to a particular palate and alcohol content.

the coloured water comment applies to mass market brews -- especially those in tins.

Interesting thread, don’t know if this helps or hinders but some info,

As of 30 June 2015, Harvey Norman Holdings' overseas operations (all conducted under the Harvey Norman brand) are in:

• Croatia (2 stores)
• Ireland (12 stores)
• Malaysia (14 stores)
• New Zealand (36 stores)
• Northern Ireland (2 stores)
• Singapore (17 stores)
• Slovenia (5 stores)

I would like to add a little to this thread. I started in retail (photography gear) back in 1990 and ended in 2010, in the beginning retail margins for any camera were around the 30% mark and tax on the camera was 33% . I don’t know if anyone remembers the pre GST days that we all paid tax on many items? Anyway as time went on and with the implementation of GST product prices come down and so did margins, the Harvey franchise began as did the JB hifi stores which meant more competition in the photo world, it was no longer a camera stores domain to sell photo products it became a free for all and the wholesalers welcomed it with open arms. Back at the start the store I worked for was part of a buying group which meant that as part of that group we had better buying power than an independent store. We could either chose to discount certain items to encourage customers to buy from us or just pocket the profits which may have added 10-15% to the margin on a given product. Once the new players come to town the wholesalers had retailers that were way bigger than what they had ever had in the past and the small retailers (even the buying groups) were hung out to dry. The retail margins dropped very quickly to around the 10% mark just to compete with the large box movers, the boss even said to sell cameras at cost if we had to to get the sale. This left us with trying to make up the difference in overall margin out of accessories (no easy task). The wholesalers/importers within Australia do not buy anywhere near the quantities that the US, Asia or the EU do, another factor was that at the time there was no Nikon Australia etc. like there was in the US and Europe, all goods were imported by independent importers. A part of the importation agreements were that for 100 cameras come with enough spare parts to cover warranties say 30%, if more cameras than the 30% come back for repair the importers had to wear the cost of repairs not to mention the labour costs for those repairs.
No doubt the wholesalers/importers were making good margins out of the retailers back in the day. Things have changed though and there are less independent importers than what there were, Nikon, Olympus and Sony are now importing and distributing their own product which means profits go back to the parent company OS and margins are withheld within the company, the big chain stores like Harvey, JB, Big W, Myer etc. get the big discounts from the wholesalers and the independent stores get the dregs. I don’t know what happens within the woodwork world but I would hazard a guess that the retailers in Australia are not making a motza out of us as some would suspect. The wholesalers may be doing ok but as a country we just don’t have the population to allow us the buying power of the rest of the world. As a country we are a very small fish in a really big pond.

On the Harvey thing, part of the reason for his wealth is that he provides his franchises with a loan to buy into the business, they then have to pay back the loan and franchise fee and pay rent for the floor space and advertising fees, warehousing etc. all of which goes back to the man at the top, they then have to pay wages and running costs and all the usual things that go along with owning a business, not an easy task with the low margins that they now have in consumer electronics.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Cal

I would like to add a little to this thread. I started in retail (photography gear) back in 1990 and ended in 2010, in the beginning retail margins for any camera were around the 30% mark and tax on the camera was 33% . I don’t know if anyone remembers the pre GST days that we all paid tax on many items? Anyway as time went on and with the implementation of GST product prices come down and so did margins, the Harvey franchise began as did the JB hifi stores which meant more competition in the photo world, it was no longer a camera stores domain to sell photo products it became a free for all and the wholesalers welcomed it with open arms. Back at the start the store I worked for was part of a buying group which meant that as part of that group we had better buying power than an independent store. We could either chose to discount certain items to encourage customers to buy from us or just pocket the profits which may have added 10-15% to the margin on a given product. Once the new players come to town the wholesalers had retailers that were way bigger than what they had ever had in the past and the small retailers (even the buying groups) were hung out to dry. The retail margins dropped very quickly to around the 10% mark just to compete with the large box movers, the boss even said to sell cameras at cost if we had to to get the sale. This left us with trying to make up the difference in overall margin out of accessories (no easy task). The wholesalers/importers within Australia do not buy anywhere near the quantities that the US, Asia or the EU do, another factor was that at the time there was no Nikon Australia etc. like there was in the US and Europe, all goods were imported by independent importers. A part of the importation agreements were that for 100 cameras come with enough spare parts to cover warranties say 30%, if more cameras than the 30% come back for repair the importers had to wear the cost of repairs not to mention the labour costs for those repairs.
No doubt the wholesalers/importers were making good margins out of the retailers back in the day. Things have changed though and there are less independent importers than what there were, Nikon, Olympus and Sony are now importing and distributing their own product which means profits go back to the parent company OS and margins are withheld within the company, the big chain stores like Harvey, JB, Big W, Myer etc. get the big discounts from the wholesalers and the independent stores get the dregs. I don’t know what happens within the woodwork world but I would hazard a guess that the retailers in Australia are not making a motza out of us as some would suspect. The wholesalers may be doing ok but as a country we just don’t have the population to allow us the buying power of the rest of the world. As a country we are a very small fish in a really big pond.

On the Harvey thing, part of the reason for his wealth is that he provides his franchises with a loan to buy into the business, they then have to pay back the loan and franchise fee and pay rent for the floor space and advertising fees, warehousing etc. all of which goes back to the man at the top, they then have to pay wages and running costs and all the usual things that go along with owning a business, not an easy task with the low margins that they now have in consumer electronics.

---

Cal I would say that your experience in retail would be indicative of most sectors of the retail trade today. As you have said Australia is insignificant on the world trade scene.
I went to the world trade fair in China a couple of years ago and the minimum quantity of widgets that they propose you buy is very high.....I doubt there would be that many interested purchasers in Australia for some if the items but they obviously have no problem selling in those volumes to other parts of the world.

I don’t really understand where the government is going with the GST thing either, if we sell an item from Australia to somewhere overseas we and the buyer are quite with our rights to not apply GST on the item no matter what the price is. The government misses out on its piece of the pie because we can then claim back a tax credit for that item we have paid GST on. If an individual purchases an item here and travel out of the country they can also claim back the GST. No different to what the old duty free days (but less tax involved) I get that GST is an income for the country and having it forms part of our revenue and quite rightly so. The government has forgotten about a small detail in all of this revenue, selling public assets to the private sector that can and in some cases have become part of the “globalisation” which includes foreign ownership of Australian assets. The horse has bolted and the government fail to admit that they have stuffed up and are trying to claw back the revenue anyway they can. The government and big business wanted and I guess needed to be part of the global economy but they don’t want the people to be a part of it. Tax havens for the rich are common place and part of an accept business practice for those at the top of town. I think the government needs to come down hard on the legal tax fraud that is taking place and not screw the end users, but that won’t happen because you have to look after your mates right?

I would be mightily interested to know how much Company Tax is paid by Harvey Norman. Not the Franchisees, or GH personally (although I'll bet that is way down), but the actual company. Do they pay their fair share willingly or do they do what so many other Corporations in Australia do and bury the income offshore through a gazillion companies all wrapped up in spaghetti?

There would be somebody who has the skills to find that out.

If GH has the country's best interests at heart before his own then I will be very very surprised. I'll be even more surprised if the whinging stops now.

Maybe it is not so much about the GST revenue aspect but more used as a tool to try and make purchasing from O/S less appealing? The more money that stays in the country the more times it goes through the GST collection point to continue raising revenue.
It is very hard to come down on the legal tax “ fraud” of the bigger end of town even if they wanted to as if the terms become unfavourable for them here they will just pack up shop and operate from another more lucrative country and our economy suffers from the result.
The way I see it, I am not that fussed about how much income tax they pay even if they don’t pay any at all. The reality is that these type of people pay much more tax than we will ever pay via other tax levies, just not via income tax.
Look at the luxury car tax, land tax, the tax on their luxury boats etc not to mention all the GST they are paying on their disposable income day to day. Take that to the next layer of the jobs they have created and the tax stream that comes from those people so bigger picture they pay plenty of tax.....just not the one the media likes to focus on

I wasn’t meaning the individuals involved ie CEO’s etc as their income is due to the stupidity of the board and the shareholders, I mean the companies/corporations should be held accountable for the tax that is payable for the income that has derived from purchases that occur within Australia. None of that income should be allowed to be sent to off shore bank accounts in tax free countries as pure cream. That is the legal fraud I am talking about.

Cal's observations of his experience in the photography field are very interesting. We're a small market and even collectives of retailers didn't have the buying power to purchase at the 'right' price and yet the manufacturers find it necessary to set up as local distributors to ensure as much of the profit as possible comes directly back to them. Equipment in the photography field has changed enormously in the last 30 years, digital and all that, and margins, at the retail level, would appear to be more slim than they have ever been, but are the manufacturers making bigger margins than ever? H'mm, there must be a dollar in it somewhere and maybe it's just that the dollar has moved further up the chain.

Even though we're a small market there are a lot more buyers of cameras than there is of the specialist woodworking tools that we're concerned about.

There probably is money in it otherwise the manufacturers would just give up, as an interesting aside or insight to the digital revolution Nikon almost went to the wall near the beginning for trying to develop there own ccd sensor. Nikon initially were in the development of sensors with Kodak and Sony and once Sony got a handle on it all started to develop there sensor using Nikon cameras as they did not have still camera experience of their own. The partnership lasted about 10 years and Nikon were developing their own sensor without Sony knowing, Nikon eventually released a camera with their own sensor after throwing every last cent at the technology. The reason behind it was for high speed action photography, the processor that Sony were using could not handle the data the sensor was throwing at it fast enough to be useful for the demands of sports photography, anyway the Nikon sensor/processor worked well but it sent Nikon close to the point of bankruptcy. Nikon learned a valuable lesson and shared their technology with Sony who were able to then streamline the sensor and production while Nikon dug itself out of a rather large hole. Sony went on to buy out Minolta and the rest is as it stands today. Canon and Sony are the big boys on the block and have other streams of income unlike Nikon (who still do a lot with their lens technology)
I think it is still far tougher now than what it has ever been in business, there have been a huge quantity of companies taking over other companies in the last 20-30 years compared to in the past, just look at the automotive industry. There are more expectations of companies needing to turn an increasingly large profit for shareholders and directors and it just keeps snowballing, no longer are companies happy to have the same turnover/profit as the last financial year, they have to better it by what ever means it takes. Humans are a silly animal really, need, want, have to have. Richest one to the grave wins, apparently [emoji57]

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Cal

I don’t really understand where the government is going with the GST thing either, if we sell an item from Australia to somewhere overseas we and the buyer are quite with our rights to not apply GST on the item no matter what the price is. T
snip
The government and big business wanted and I guess needed to be part of the global economy but they don’t want the people to be a part of it.

---

oh I don't think that is the case.
Business (little and big) are part of the global economy, but it's not a "level playing field" (if such a thing exists) if consumers can slip by some of big business's costs.

with small value imports (<$1000), the "people" (and micro businesses) have been avoiding paying GST that any operation larger than a micro business cannot avoid because the larger businesses import quantities well above the current (to June 30) low value cut off.

Here in Canada, the low value cut-off is $20.
While no reasonable person should object to paying GST on a low value import, the collection of this GST should not be allowed to become a profit line item for the shipper.
For example, for goods entering Canada, UPS charge a sliding fee to "custom clear" and pay the GST on your behalf. The fee varies from $7.00 for a $21 pair of ear buds, to $51.70 for a package valued at $200 to $350, to $77.35 for a package valued at $750 to $1000. It's very difficult to see how UPS's costs vary by the value of the package. And because each of their delivery trucks is effectively a bond store, the duty itself is not payable till after a package is delivered and the duty collected so no monies are advanced on a customer's behalf.
And the other quirk. The end customer is allowed to take the UPS paperwork to Canada Customs and self-clear the shipment, in which case no "document preparation" payment is due to UPS.

what's the saying about ducks ?

If equity is the real issue then the Canada model should be adopted. Australia post according to afr is claiming it will cost 900 million to collect the projected 300m. Scmo is not open about the cost and issues involved with a foreign entity collecting gst. How's Amazon compensated? Amazon perhaps doesn't want to set a precedent of collecting taxes for foreign countries and the Oz market is not significant enough. I think this half cocked idea will back fire if it hasn't already. eBay on the other hand is collecting thru their .com.au domain and many items will be claimed as used anyway. It's all about pleasing large political doners like Gerry.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by justonething

It's all about pleasing large political doners like Gerry.

---

That's the long and the short of it, and is just another reason why all political donations should be banned - individuals and corporations.

Ian, I take it by "micro-businesses" you mean those under $75k turnover? GST is completely irrelevant for businesses larger than that because they claim back what they paid after they charge for their own product or service. However, for a <$75k the GST is a totally added cost that is not redeemable.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by ian

Here in Canada, the low value cut-off is $20.

---

It was here as well.

Back in the very early 90's I mail ordered some software (mainly games) from a Singapore PC shop advertised in a PC magazine. The software came on about 40, 5/25" floppy disks and AP called me in to ascertain the value of goods addressed to me as there was no invoice or value declaration with the goods themselves. When they called me in they showed me into a small room and shoved a brown paper covered parcel across a desk at me and asked me if I had ordered these goods. I immediately became worried that something else might be in the package but all there was only the discs with hand written labels on them. None of the AP officers had any idea of the value of the games themselves. I had no receipt so a value could not be determined but it then dawned on me I had a credit card statement and the original advertisement in a PC magazine at home so I went and got them. I forget how much I paid but it was something silly like $1 per disk which was about the price of the disk itself. An AP officer took the credit card statement, magazine and disks away and asked me to wait. About an hour later a senior AP officer came back and asked me some more questions. Then the original officer came back and said that Duty had to be paid on the disks themselves but as the duty came to <$20 there was nothing payable. It cost me 3 hours of time all up and as I didn't want to go through all that again I never bought any more software this way.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by FenceFurniture

However, for a <$75k the GST is a totally added cost that is not redeemable.

---

While that is true and businesses not registered for GST have to make a margin on that unrecoverable cost they don't have to add the GST to any margin they charge on that initial cost of goods. So at the very least the final consumer isn't paying GST on the sellers net profit from the sale and there are possibly going to be some inputs that come into the sellers costs that do not have GST levied on them as well.

If the government was really serious about GST avoidance they'd be doing something about the black economy. The introduction of the GST was supposed to wipe out the black economy - what a joke! It actually made it a whole lot easier and more attractive space to work in. The only reason you don't hear Gerry Harvey bleating about it is because the people who do operate there aren't his direct competitors. So, like everything else, it all comes down to self interest.

I see something deeply sinister in all this.

Ians post #96 and BobLs #99 aren't too far off the mark.

Dark, dark, days are ahead with debt. The governments of the world will do absolutely anything and everything to keep their own ponzis alive. This is but one part of it. People have no conception how much debt is held now - it is utterly staggering.

Import GST and trade imposts are the beginning of an attempt to collapse imports to correct balance of trade and manage currency exchanges. People are incorrect to think this is simply the government levelling the playing field on taxes. It doesn't take too much imagination to see how "handling fees" or other punitive levies and go-slow tactics will be added to items from China (?) or other "unfair" trading countries....

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by FenceFurniture

Ian, I take it by "micro-businesses" you mean those under $75k turnover? GST is completely irrelevant for businesses larger than that because they claim back what they paid after they charge for their own product or service. However, for a <$75k the GST is a totally added cost that is not redeemable.

---

Yes, I'm thinking about those "businesses" that effectively operate from the kitchen table and have one employee (the owner).

around the time this thread started there was a side bar about one such business that the Amazon change would put "out of business" because the owner would no longer be able to source the goods sold by the business.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by aldav

If the government was really serious about GST avoidance they'd be doing something about the black economy. The introduction of the GST was supposed to wipe out the black economy - what a joke! It actually made it a whole lot easier and more attractive space to work in. The only reason you don't hear Gerry Harvey bleating about it is because the people who do operate there aren't his direct competitors. So, like everything else, it all comes down to self interest.

---

I hear that there's a proposal to withdraw the $50 and $100 notes from circulation to counter the black economy.
The thought being that paying more than a few hundred dollars with $20s is impractical.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by woodPixel

I see something deeply sinister in all this.

Import GST and trade imposts are the beginning of an attempt to collapse imports to correct balance of trade and manage currency exchanges. People are incorrect to think this is simply the government levelling the playing field on taxes. It doesn't take too much imagination to see how "handling fees" or other punitive levies and go-slow tactics will be added to items from China (?) or other "unfair" trading countries....

---

ah com'on.

It's only Trump that is using the War of 1812 to justify trade sanctions against Canadian Aluminium.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by ian

ah com'on.

It's only Trump that is using the War of 1812 to justify trade sanctions against Canadian Aluminium.

---

You Canadians burnt thier collective psyche deeply with that one.

They aren't letting it go :D:D:D:D

Sneaky Canadians! :wink:

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by aldav

If the government was really serious about GST avoidance they'd be doing something about the black economy. The introduction of the GST was supposed to wipe out the black economy - what a joke! It actually made it a whole lot easier and more attractive space to work in. The only reason you don't hear Gerry Harvey bleating about it is because the people who do operate there aren't his direct competitors. So, like everything else, it all comes down to self interest.

---

I thought the GST did address the black economy pretty well?
Sure there might be a discount for cash for a service of some description here and there but the vendor with the cash usually uses the money to purchase goods or services of some description so GST revenue gets generated again........so in the circle of the transactions the government misses out on a drink here and there but gets plenty of sips along the way whereas pre GST they got nothing

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by woodPixel

You Canadians burnt thier collective psyche deeply with that one.

They aren't letting it go :D:D:D:D

Sneaky Canadians! :wink:

---

'cept it were British Regiments.
Years ago I knew a bloke who had served in one of the British regiments involved. Apparently this regiment delights in inviting visiting US officers to the Mess and seating them on cushions and serving them using plates and cutlery looted from the White House in 1814.

Good news everybody: https://www.gizmodo.com.au/2018/06/a...hat-youll-get/

Makes it all a bit more palatable :)

(oh, the pun!!!)

That is good news but you have to use Aussie Amazon where the prices are ridiculous. Microjig's Grripper, for example, is $115 at Carbatec and an unbelievable $342 at AU Amazon and $98 delivered to Australia from US Amazon. This is really shattering for me. All my saw blades, table saw accessories, router bits etc etc etc have been bought from Amazon US at substantially cheaper prices than you can get here. The only minor negative is that you have to wait about 9 days to get it. No big deal.

On a side note the CBA sent me an email that all bank issued Amex cards would be cancelled by November. Why, I don't know but most of those Amazon purchases have been made using an Amex card which gets me triple points and is easier to use overseas in some situations. So I am p..... off with all of this

In terms of non compliance by overseas entities, it appears that the ATO might get very serious. (From a PWC explanatory note https://www.pwc.com.au/tax/taxtalk/a...ly-29mar18.pdf)

The ATO has already commenced compliance activities for the inbound intangibles measures introduced in July 2017, and has issued assessments in instances of non-compliance. We would expect the ATO will take a similar approach in relation to the low value goods measures.
The ATO has also clearly stated it will use all available powers to ensure compliance (in cases where their initial education / communication strategies fail) and this may include:
 Raising default assessments.
 Seeking judgment against taxpayers to get the matter into the public domain.
 Writing to other tax authorities or other regulators regarding non-compliance in Australia.
 Garnisheeing payments from Australia.
 Geo-blocking the website; and
 Seizing assets held in Australia.

could be fun and games down the track.

That all sounds great with their tough talk but that only works if they have a legal presence in Australia
Good luck chasing down an O/S company and garnishing their accounts

The phrase PWC used was garnisheeing payments from Australia.
The "fun and games" might include billing your credit card for GST owed by an overseas supplier.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by ian

The phrase PWC used was garnisheeing payments from Australia.
The "fun and games" might include billing your credit card for GST owed by an overseas supplier.

---

But if the O/S vendor has already charged you GST the ATO debt lies with them not the purchaser.

The point above that one, “writing a letter to other tax authorities” probably shows how little authority they have O/S

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Beardy

The point above that one, “writing a letter to other tax authorities” probably shows how little authority they have O/S

---

Perhaps the letter will be very sternly worded....

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Beardy

But if the O/S vendor has already charged you GST the ATO debt lies with them not the purchaser.

---

not necessarily.
I'm not sure who apart from the ATO knows the full extent of the powers they wield. Nor do we really know what data they get from our banks and credit card providers.
it's not inconceivable that GST owed by a foreign supplier in respect to an order you placed 12 months ago might be added to your current order with the same supplier. That could be construed as "garnisheeing payments from Australia" -- which is a very broad term

all sounds like it is going to be very expensive to administer, enforce and collect. Let's see if this lasts more than 2 years.

Sent from my MI 5s using Tapatalk

It's a 3 year trial apparently.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by FenceFurniture

It's a 3 year trial apparently.

---

like I said, let's see if lasts more than 2...

I suspect it will suffer massive cost blowouts, and other more important compliance issues will suffer. But I suppose that could be the entire point.

Sent from my MI 5s using Tapatalk

I believe most of the above is related to new goods and companies. How will the proposals be applied to private individuals and second hand goods, and in particular where there are multiple suppliers?

Regards
Paul

Yeah, I nearly added, "but let's see how long...."

I'm absolutely certain the various Govt players have no idea what they have bitten off to chew, and it wouldn't surprise me if it was clobbered in 6 months. Of course I'm assuming there that there is someone of rank who is half smart in one of those departments, who can also make themselves heard.