|
 |
| | | Author: | Sibera_lee  | | Posted: | Jan 20, 2024 04:27 | | Subject: | Buyer had to pay VAT twice | | Viewed: | 155 times | | Topic: | Taxes | |
|
| Good evening everyone,
I’m a seller in Australia and had a buyer in Sweden make an order back in Nov/Dec.
Everything was fine until it turned up in the country (end of December before
Christmas) and the buyer stated that “VAT hadn’t been paid”. I provided the VAT
receipt that Bricklink provides as well as the IOSS number. The post office claimed
that it wasn’t sent that way so he had to pay again.
Since then we’ve both messaged Bricklink for a solution, they did reply to the
buyer but weren’t very helpful.
Buyer had also originally wanted to do some work around by me processing a full
refund and him paying back what he owed minus the VAT but the had been sent.
I said I would wait for a reply from Bricklink as I don’t have anything to do
with the VAT. Know the buyer wants me to split the VAT he paid to make it even.
It took me four messages to finally get a response and after providing them necessary
info, still waiting for a response from Bricklink a week later.
Does anyone know of a solution to this problem so that the issue can just be
over? Any help would be greatly appreciated.
Thanks for your time and assistance,
Leigh
|
|
|
| | | | | |
| | | | | Author: | SylvainLS | | Posted: | Jan 20, 2024 05:31 | | Subject: | Re: Buyer had to pay VAT twice | | Viewed: | 68 times | | Topic: | Taxes | |
|
| In Taxes, Sibera_lee writes:
Hi,
| | I’m a seller in Australia and had a buyer in Sweden make an order back in Nov/Dec.
Everything was fine until it turned up in the country (end of December before
Christmas) and the buyer stated that “VAT hadn’t been paid”. I provided the VAT
receipt that Bricklink provides as well as the IOSS number. The post office claimed
that it wasn’t sent that way so he had to pay again.
|
(Not trying to blame you, just trying to acertain the situation and prevent further
problems
Was the IOSS transmitted electronically?
That is, if you prepared the shipping online, was there a field for it and did
you use it?
Doing it online is often the only way to do it correctly because the clerks at
the post office can’t or won’t do it.
| | Since then we’ve both messaged Bricklink for a solution, they did reply to the
buyer but weren’t very helpful.
Buyer had also originally wanted to do some work around by me processing a full
refund and him paying back what he owed minus the VAT but the had been sent.
I said I would wait for a reply from Bricklink as I don’t have anything to do
with the VAT. Know the buyer wants me to split the VAT he paid to make it even.
It took me four messages to finally get a response and after providing them necessary
info, still waiting for a response from Bricklink a week later.
Does anyone know of a solution to this problem so that the issue can just be
over? Any help would be greatly appreciated.
|
Unfortunately, BL doesn’t want to apply the solution adopted by the EU: the marketplace
should refund the VAT to the buyer.
The marketplace can then mark the order as “VAT not collected” if it hasn’t been
remitted yet or simply deduct the amount from the next remittance.
Maybe BL doesn’t trust its buyers enough….
|
|
|
| | | | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | Author: | Sibera_lee | | Posted: | Jan 20, 2024 07:03 | | Subject: | Re: Buyer had to pay VAT twice | | Viewed: | 62 times | | Topic: | Taxes | |
|
| As far as I recall when I prepared the Customs Declaration form online I included
the IOSS number. I also believe the VAT receipt went into the pocket with the
customers form.
The strange thing is the buyers BrickLink response was pretty close to what I
did when it happened by providing the IOSS number and VAT receipt to them. But
the buyer claimed that PostNord said it had been sent as ‘VAT not IOSS’ but we
have evidence that says otherwise.
I also had contacted PostNord and the response to me was slightly even more convoluted.
I guess I may just have to play the waiting game or I could send BrickLink an
invoice for the issue.
|
|
| | | | | | | | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | | | Author: | SylvainLS | | Posted: | Jan 20, 2024 07:59 | | Subject: | Re: Buyer had to pay VAT twice | | Viewed: | 52 times | | Topic: | Taxes | |
|
| In Taxes, Sibera_lee writes:
| | As far as I recall when I prepared the Customs Declaration form online I included
the IOSS number. I also believe the VAT receipt went into the pocket with the
customers form.
|
Papers are mandatory… but no one reads them anymore. Worse, they don’t want
to 🙄
| | The strange thing is the buyers BrickLink response was pretty close to what I
did when it happened by providing the IOSS number and VAT receipt to them. But
the buyer claimed that PostNord said it had been sent as ‘VAT not IOSS’ but we
have evidence that says otherwise.
|
I forgot to say in my first answer that you may also have done everything right
on your side but something went wrong between the two posts.
| | I also had contacted PostNord and the response to me was slightly even more convoluted.
I guess I may just have to play the waiting game or I could send BrickLink an
invoice for the issue.
|
Really, BL should apply the solution or make a clear statement they won’t 😮💨
|
|
|
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | | | | | Author: | Sibera_lee | | Posted: | Jan 20, 2024 08:29 | | Subject: | Re: Buyer had to pay VAT twice | | Viewed: | 64 times | | Topic: | Taxes | |
|
| I’ve actually just checked with my buyer and he still had the original declaration
form which included the IOSS number which match the one from my invoice page
so at least I know I typed it correctly😅.
I’ve also messaged PostNord again asking how it’s possible for the evidence to
prove that VAT wasn’t paid. Since PostNord were the one that charged my buyer
the extra VAT.
|
|
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | | | | | | | Author: | Nubs_Select | | Posted: | Jan 20, 2024 11:34 | | Subject: | Re: Buyer had to pay VAT twice | | Viewed: | 37 times | | Topic: | Taxes | |
|
| In Taxes, Sibera_lee writes:
| | I’ve actually just checked with my buyer and he still had the original declaration
form which included the IOSS number which match the one from my invoice page
so at least I know I typed it correctly😅.
|
That dosnt sound right as bricklink says “You MUST NOT use BrickLink’s IOSS number
for any other purpose and NEVER write this number on your packages.” And I’ve
never once seen the iOSs number on the package and you arnt allowed it on the
package so how did the buyer find it on the 1 invoice page? The vat number often
is visible but never the iOSS number. Unless I’m missing something?
|
|
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | | | | | Author: | Stellar | | Posted: | Jan 20, 2024 12:19 | | Subject: | Re: Buyer had to pay VAT twice | | Viewed: | 36 times | | Topic: | Taxes | |
|
| In Taxes, SylvainLS writes:
| | In Taxes, Sibera_lee writes:
| | As far as I recall when I prepared the Customs Declaration form online I included
the IOSS number. I also believe the VAT receipt went into the pocket with the
customers form.
|
Papers are mandatory… but no one reads them anymore. Worse, they don’t want
to 🙄
| | The strange thing is the buyers BrickLink response was pretty close to what I
did when it happened by providing the IOSS number and VAT receipt to them. But
the buyer claimed that PostNord said it had been sent as ‘VAT not IOSS’ but we
have evidence that says otherwise.
|
I forgot to say in my first answer that you may also have done everything right
on your side but something went wrong between the two posts.
| | I also had contacted PostNord and the response to me was slightly even more convoluted.
I guess I may just have to play the waiting game or I could send BrickLink an
invoice for the issue.
|
Really, BL should apply the solution or make a clear statement they won’t 😮💨
|
Has the buyer contacted Bricklink with the VAT receipt?
https://www.bricklink.com/help.asp?helpID=2517#refunds
"BrickLink will provide refunds of VAT when applicable. It is recommended
to work with the seller of the product(s) instead of off-site methods to receive
full refunds."
They state this on the help pages.
https://www.bricklink.com/v3/help/contact.page
|
|
|
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | | | | | | | Author: | SylvainLS | | Posted: | Jan 20, 2024 12:28 | | Subject: | Re: Buyer had to pay VAT twice | | Viewed: | 31 times | | Topic: | Taxes | |
|
| In Taxes, Stellar writes:
| | […]
Has the buyer contacted Bricklink with the VAT receipt?
https://www.bricklink.com/help.asp?helpID=2517#refunds
"BrickLink will provide refunds of VAT when applicable. It is recommended
to work with the seller of the product(s) instead of off-site methods to receive
full refunds."
They state this on the help pages.
|
I think that’s about refunds triggered by the seller refunding an order (or part
of it). This has to be done onsite so that BL knows and automatically refunds
the corresponding VAT (which will be the same percentage as the refunded amount).
That means BL won’t refund VAT if the seller doesn’t refund the whole order.
That’s stupid.
|
|
|
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | Author: | Stellar | | Posted: | Jan 20, 2024 12:43 | | Subject: | Re: Buyer had to pay VAT twice | | Viewed: | 33 times | | Topic: | Taxes | |
|
| In Taxes, SylvainLS writes:
| | In Taxes, Stellar writes:
| | […]
Has the buyer contacted Bricklink with the VAT receipt?
https://www.bricklink.com/help.asp?helpID=2517#refunds
"BrickLink will provide refunds of VAT when applicable. It is recommended
to work with the seller of the product(s) instead of off-site methods to receive
full refunds."
They state this on the help pages.
|
I think that’s about refunds triggered by the seller refunding an order (or part
of it). This has to be done onsite so that BL knows and automatically refunds
the corresponding VAT (which will be the same percentage as the refunded amount).
That means BL won’t refund VAT if the seller doesn’t refund the whole order.
That’s stupid.
|
That should be it then yes, seems a bit weird written. For a moment checking
the help pages today I thought they updated it to be like other online marketplaces.
Will open a ticket just to see if they can write it more clear...
|
|
|
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | Author: | SylvainLS | | Posted: | Jan 20, 2024 13:01 | | Subject: | Re: Buyer had to pay VAT twice | | Viewed: | 30 times | | Topic: | Taxes | |
|
| In Taxes, Stellar writes:
| | […]
That should be it then yes, seems a bit weird written. For a moment checking
the help pages today I thought they updated it to be like other online marketplaces.
|
Last update was August 2022.
| | Will open a ticket just to see if they can write it more clear...
|
👍
Maybe something to also talk about (again?) in the Marketplace Panel? 
|
|
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | Author: | 1001bricks | | Posted: | Jan 20, 2024 13:19 | | Subject: | Re: Buyer had to pay VAT twice | | Viewed: | 38 times | | Topic: | Taxes | |
|
| | | Maybe something to also talk about (again?) in the Marketplace Panel?
|
Problem could be with BrickLink refunding tax paid twice:
* Seller may habe made a mistake.
So BrickLink will have to watch the "number of mistakes", and then act
accordingly like sending a warning or even closing the Shop if there are too
much mistakes?
* but then... what proves this Seller made a mistake?
* Buyer can abuse the system, asserting "Refund tax as I paid twice".
Pretty convenient, and 25% can represent an huge amount.
So BrickLink will have to watch the "number of refunds", and then act
accordingly like sending a warning or even unregistering the buyer if there are
too much refunds?
* but then... what proves this Buyer did pay twice?
This means it must be watched, transmitted documents controlled (what about Photoshop
forged ones???), and some punishments/system has to be set up.
As of right now, and for months, years (?) BrickLink Administration / Team is
overwhelmed, I can't see how they simply could manage this extra.
|
|
|
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | Author: | SylvainLS | | Posted: | Jan 20, 2024 13:23 | | Subject: | Re: Buyer had to pay VAT twice | | Viewed: | 36 times | | Topic: | Taxes | |
|
| In Taxes, 1001bricks writes:
| | […]
Problem could be with BrickLink refunding tax paid twice: […]
|
These are not problems, they are excuses.
|
|
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | Author: | peregrinator | | Posted: | Jan 20, 2024 13:33 | | Subject: | Re: Buyer had to pay VAT twice | | Viewed: | 40 times | | Topic: | Taxes | |
|
| In Taxes, 1001bricks writes:
| | | | Maybe something to also talk about (again?) in the Marketplace Panel?
|
Problem could be with BrickLink refunding tax paid twice:
* Seller may habe made a mistake.
So BrickLink will have to watch the "number of mistakes", and then act
accordingly like sending a warning or even closing the Shop if there are too
much mistakes?
|
I would advocate not closing down the shop but simply banning the shop from selling
to places for which BL collects VAT (EU, NO, OZ, NZ)
|
|
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | Author: | yorbrick | | Posted: | Jan 20, 2024 16:50 | | Subject: | Re: Buyer had to pay VAT twice | | Viewed: | 43 times | | Topic: | Taxes | |
|
| | | I would advocate not closing down the shop but simply banning the shop from selling
to places for which BL collects VAT (EU, NO, OZ, NZ)
|
And UK.
|
|
| | | | | |
| | | | | Author: | ghyde | | Posted: | Jan 20, 2024 16:03 | | Subject: | Re: Buyer had to pay VAT twice | | Viewed: | 41 times | | Topic: | Taxes | |
|
| In Taxes, Sibera_lee writes:
| | Good evening everyone,
I’m a seller in Australia and had a buyer in Sweden make an order back in Nov/Dec.
Everything was fine until it turned up in the country (end of December before
Christmas) and the buyer stated that “VAT hadn’t been paid”. I provided the VAT
receipt that Bricklink provides as well as the IOSS number. The post office claimed
that it wasn’t sent that way so he had to pay again.
Since then we’ve both messaged Bricklink for a solution, they did reply to the
buyer but weren’t very helpful.
Buyer had also originally wanted to do some work around by me processing a full
refund and him paying back what he owed minus the VAT but the had been sent.
I said I would wait for a reply from Bricklink as I don’t have anything to do
with the VAT. Know the buyer wants me to split the VAT he paid to make it even.
It took me four messages to finally get a response and after providing them necessary
info, still waiting for a response from Bricklink a week later.
Does anyone know of a solution to this problem so that the issue can just be
over? Any help would be greatly appreciated.
Thanks for your time and assistance,
Leigh
|
This might sound expensive but I suggest having a lawyer examine the order details,
and who paid VAT and when and where.
If all parties involved did what they were supposed to, there shouldn't be
double charged VAT. Since this appears to be the case, however, the lawyer can
identify the documents and validate them from a legal standpoint, and then determine
where the VAT failed to get paid when it should have been paid, and which party
bears the responsibility for this failure to properly account for the VAT when
applicable.
If VAT is not being paid correctly then that needs to be flagged to the regulating
authorities that are in charge of VAT and IOSS and management of it. They need
to change some laws because obviously the currently implemented laws that they
wrote aren't sufficient to prevent double payment of VAT.
Just my opinions.
Cheers ...
ghyde
|
|
|
| | | | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | Author: | SylvainLS | | Posted: | Jan 20, 2024 16:21 | | Subject: | Re: Buyer had to pay VAT twice | | Viewed: | 43 times | | Topic: | Taxes | |
|
| In Taxes, ghyde writes:
| | […]
This might sound expensive but I suggest having a lawyer examine the order details,
and who paid VAT and when and where.
If all parties involved did what they were supposed to, there shouldn't be
double charged VAT. Since this appears to be the case, however, the lawyer can
identify the documents and validate them from a legal standpoint, and then determine
where the VAT failed to get paid when it should have been paid, and which party
bears the responsibility for this failure to properly account for the VAT when
applicable.
|
1. Lawyers aren’t judges
2. Who’s at fault is easy:
a. BL: did collect the VAT as it’s supposed to. Not BL’s fault.
b. Buyer: did pay the VAT to BL. Not Buyer’s fault.
c. Seller: transmitted the info (IOSS) correctly. Not Seller’s fault.
d. Australian post (or whoever the seller used): should have transmitted the
IOSS. Maybe at fault.
e. NordPost: should have received the IOSS. Maybe at fault.
| | If VAT is not being paid correctly then that needs to be flagged to the regulating
authorities that are in charge of VAT and IOSS and management of it. They need
to change some laws because obviously the currently implemented laws that they
wrote aren't sufficient to prevent double payment of VAT.
|
The authorities (the EU Commission) have been made aware of this as soon as this
new scheme was applied, in July 2021.
The VAT group did come up with a solution, in 2022, of which I’ve talked at length:
BL refunds the VAT it collected, the buyer loses a bit in the bargain (VAT on
VAT + brokering fee).
The EU Commission did accept that solution, in 2022.
BL hasn’t implemented it, hasn’t talked about it, crickets.
|
|
|
| | | | | | | | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | | | Author: | yorbrick | | Posted: | Jan 20, 2024 16:55 | | Subject: | Re: Buyer had to pay VAT twice | | Viewed: | 35 times | | Topic: | Taxes | |
|
| In Taxes, SylvainLS writes:
| | In Taxes, ghyde writes:
| | […]
This might sound expensive but I suggest having a lawyer examine the order details,
and who paid VAT and when and where.
If all parties involved did what they were supposed to, there shouldn't be
double charged VAT. Since this appears to be the case, however, the lawyer can
identify the documents and validate them from a legal standpoint, and then determine
where the VAT failed to get paid when it should have been paid, and which party
bears the responsibility for this failure to properly account for the VAT when
applicable.
|
1. Lawyers aren’t judges
|
They will also cost a lot, probably significantly more than the VAT. Even worse
if the other party pays a lawyer and they support their client being not responsible.
|
|
|
| | | | | | | | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | | | Author: | ghyde | | Posted: | Jan 20, 2024 18:22 | | Subject: | Re: Buyer had to pay VAT twice | | Viewed: | 43 times | | Topic: | Taxes | |
|
| In Taxes, SylvainLS writes:
| | In Taxes, ghyde writes:
| | […]
This might sound expensive but I suggest having a lawyer examine the order details,
and who paid VAT and when and where.
If all parties involved did what they were supposed to, there shouldn't be
double charged VAT. Since this appears to be the case, however, the lawyer can
identify the documents and validate them from a legal standpoint, and then determine
where the VAT failed to get paid when it should have been paid, and which party
bears the responsibility for this failure to properly account for the VAT when
applicable.
|
1. Lawyers aren’t judges
2. Who’s at fault is easy:
a. BL: did collect the VAT as it’s supposed to. Not BL’s fault.
b. Buyer: did pay the VAT to BL. Not Buyer’s fault.
c. Seller: transmitted the info (IOSS) correctly. Not Seller’s fault.
d. Australian post (or whoever the seller used): should have transmitted the
IOSS. Maybe at fault.
e. NordPost: should have received the IOSS. Maybe at fault.
| | If VAT is not being paid correctly then that needs to be flagged to the regulating
authorities that are in charge of VAT and IOSS and management of it. They need
to change some laws because obviously the currently implemented laws that they
wrote aren't sufficient to prevent double payment of VAT.
|
The authorities (the EU Commission) have been made aware of this as soon as this
new scheme was applied, in July 2021.
The VAT group did come up with a solution, in 2022, of which I’ve talked at length:
BL refunds the VAT it collected, the buyer loses a bit in the bargain (VAT on
VAT + brokering fee).
The EU Commission did accept that solution, in 2022.
BL hasn’t implemented it, hasn’t talked about it, crickets.
|
Did this properly get extended across the entire scope of the IOSS implementation?
If it's only a partial solution and does not include cases where electronic
IOSS implementation is presented but is not recognized, then that certainly will
need to be fixed.
The implementation of the electronic side of the VAT tracking is at fault, because
of the double VAT charges others are receiving. I see no reason at present to
open my store. I haven't even bothered to start adding stock yet, I may as
well use it all for MOC creation building or personal creativity.
If double charging VAT cannot be eliminated, then it would appear that there
would be no real reason for me to sell to or buy from overseas stores where this
is a possibility. I've stated it before, and I will state it again: I will
not knowingly double charge VAT to buyers.
Just my opinions.
Cheers ...
ghyde
|
|
|
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | | | | | Author: | SylvainLS | | Posted: | Jan 20, 2024 18:51 | | Subject: | Re: Buyer had to pay VAT twice | | Viewed: | 49 times | | Topic: | Taxes | |
|
| In Taxes, ghyde writes:
| | […]
Did this properly get extended across the entire scope of the IOSS implementation?
If it's only a partial solution and does not include cases where electronic
IOSS implementation is presented but is not recognized, then that certainly will
need to be fixed.
|
This is what the VAT group and the Commission said:
Situation: EU buyers should be charged import VAT by marketplaces, at point of
sale, not by the transporter or customs, at point of delivery, but sometimes,
errors happens.
Solution: When a buyer is charged twice, the marketplace should refund.
That’s all. No hair splitting about the why or how it happened, just “buyer
got charged twice.”
| | […]
If double charging VAT cannot be eliminated,
|
It can, but BL won’t.
| | then it would appear that there
would be no real reason for me to sell to or buy from overseas stores where this
is a possibility.
|
*Sigh* The only way for you, an Australian, to be charged EU import VAT when
“buying from overseas” is if you travell or move in into the EU and buy from
here.
(And then, you’ll need to choose carefully the “overseas”: not all EU territories
are in Europe, though I don’t think there’s many BL stores there.)
Opinions are fine. Informed opinions are better.
|
|
|
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | | | | | | | Author: | ghyde | | Posted: | Jan 21, 2024 15:59 | | Subject: | Re: Buyer had to pay VAT twice | | Viewed: | 40 times | | Topic: | Taxes | |
|
| In Taxes, SylvainLS writes:
| | In Taxes, ghyde writes:
| | […]
Did this properly get extended across the entire scope of the IOSS implementation?
If it's only a partial solution and does not include cases where electronic
IOSS implementation is presented but is not recognized, then that certainly will
need to be fixed.
|
This is what the VAT group and the Commission said:
Situation: EU buyers should be charged import VAT by marketplaces, at point of
sale, not by the transporter or customs, at point of delivery, but sometimes,
errors happens.
Solution: When a buyer is charged twice, the marketplace should refund.
That’s all. No hair splitting about the why or how it happened, just “buyer
got charged twice.”
| | […]
If double charging VAT cannot be eliminated,
|
It can, but BL won’t.
| | then it would appear that there
would be no real reason for me to sell to or buy from overseas stores where this
is a possibility.
|
*Sigh* The only way for you, an Australian, to be charged EU import VAT when
“buying from overseas” is if you travell or move in into the EU and buy from
here.
(And then, you’ll need to choose carefully the “overseas”: not all EU territories
are in Europe, though I don’t think there’s many BL stores there.)
Opinions are fine. Informed opinions are better.
|
And what of any buyer who would buy from an Australian seller and gets charged
VAT twice? Is that possible from the buyer's end? What error would have to
happen to cause that to be a possibility? There's a thread in the forums
from an Australian seller whose buyer claims they got charged VAT twice. So it
is a very real possibility. It's in this thread, in fact.
Which brings me full circle. How was it possible for a buyer buying from an Australian
seller to get double charged VAT?
If, as you state, BrickLink should refund the double charge, and they have not,
then I categorically refuse to sell to anyone who would get charged VAT twice
by any error, irrespective of how it happened to be charged twice.
Maybe you know some things. Or maybe you are a cat. I still don't know which,
but that purring is getting loud!
Cheers ...
ghyde
|
|
|
| | | | | |
| | | | | Author: | kittybrickz | | Posted: | Jan 20, 2024 17:10 | | Subject: | Re: Buyer had to pay VAT twice | | Viewed: | 35 times | | Topic: | Taxes | |
|
| | hey! how much was the VAT for? |
|
| | | | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | Author: | 1001bricks | | Posted: | Jan 20, 2024 17:18 | | Subject: | Re: Buyer had to pay VAT twice | | Viewed: | 40 times | | Topic: | Taxes | |
|
| In Taxes, kittybrickz writes:
| | hey! how much was the VAT for?
|
It's a good question.
If it was $10 then yes, I'd deal a generous Coupon or even refund the buyer
myself and move on (and get an happy buyer for life).
Of course, that depends the amount.
|
|
| | | | | |
| | | | | Author: | kittybrickz | | Posted: | Jan 20, 2024 17:20 | | Subject: | Re: Buyer had to pay VAT twice | | Viewed: | 42 times | | Topic: | Taxes | |
|
| In Canada, we have to notify the post office person that there is an IOSS number
with a package, and the post person has to send it electronically in advance
of the parcel. I made this mistake, and they paid twice, once on here and again
upon receiving the package.
I don't think it is the fault of the buyer because this system is supposed
to be streamlined and convenient as possible for the buyer. As sellers we should
be informed of these systems and how they work. However, if the information is
not available or has not been completed by the administrations, then it is impossible
for us to comply.
I personally ate the cost of the double VAT, but it was under 10 bucks CAD. I'm
pretty sure most sellers on here would do just about anything to avoid the dreaded
Negative review. I hope this gets resolved peacefully, best wishes!
|
|
|
| | | | | |
| | | | | Author: | Sibera_lee | | Posted: | Jan 20, 2024 23:51 | | Subject: | (Cancelled) | | Viewed: | 16 times | | Topic: | Taxes | |
|
| | (Cancelled) |
|
| | | | | |
| | | | | Author: | Sibera_lee | | Posted: | Jan 21, 2024 01:23 | | Subject: | Re: Buyer had to pay VAT twice | | Viewed: | 38 times | | Topic: | Taxes | |
|
| Good afternoon everyone,
First off I want to say a big thank you for all your responses. I really appreciate
it. Second I thought I would follow up on some of the questions and issues that
you guys raised.
1. In response to Nubs_select, you are correct that it’s not supposed to be written
on the parcel, however I feel this maybe an Australian Post issue and something
I will need to clarify with them. When filling out the customs declaration the
only place you can type the IOSS number is in a ‘Importers Reference Number’
field, which then prints out on the declaration there are no other fields where
this could go. See the images for the original declaration and AusPosts websites
own guide to filling it out (Step 4) (link provided https://auspost.com.au/business/parcel-send-help-and-support/shipments/send-an-international-shipment).
I had done the exact same thing previously with an order that went to France
and there was no issues regarding VAT. (Pictures 1-3)
2. To Kittybrickz and 1001bricks the original VAT that BrickLink took was approx.
$19AU on the $50AU item the buyer brought. When it arrived the buyer was charged
appprox. $23AU for the second lot of VAT. Both of us have been in contact with
BrickLink with only the buyer getting a response so far, which didn’t seem to
answer or provide a solution to the problem. (Picture 4). The buyer wants me
to pay half of the new VAT which I understand as it makes it a fair outcome for
them but in trying to solve the issue I have spent over $50AU in international
calls to PostNord to no avail. So I’m already out of pocket.
As SylvainLS stated so wonderfully:
“2. Who’s at fault is easy:
a. BL: did collect the VAT as it’s supposed to. Not BL’s fault.
b. Buyer: did pay the VAT to BL. Not Buyer’s fault.
c. Seller: transmitted the info (IOSS) correctly. Not Seller’s fault.
d. Australian post (or whoever the seller used): should have transmitted the
IOSS. Maybe at fault.
e. NordPost: should have received the IOSS. Maybe at fault.
This seems to be the case. I guess I’ll just have to wait and see if BrickLinks
response to me helps at all.
Thanks again everyone.
|
|
|
|
| | | | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | Author: | yorbrick | | Posted: | Jan 21, 2024 03:13 | | Subject: | Re: Buyer had to pay VAT twice | | Viewed: | 36 times | | Topic: | Taxes | |
|
| | | 2. To Kittybrickz and 1001bricks the original VAT that BrickLink took was approx.
$19AU on the $50AU item the buyer brought. When it arrived the buyer was charged
|
appprox. $23AU for the second lot of VAT. Both of us have been in contact
with
| | BrickLink with only the buyer getting a response so far, which didn’t seem to
answer or provide a solution to the problem. (Picture 4). The buyer wants me
to pay half of the new VAT which I understand as it makes it a fair outcome for
them but in trying to solve the issue I have spent over $50AU in international
calls to PostNord to no avail. So I’m already out of pocket.
|
You need to learn which problems are worth solving. Paying half the VAT would
have cost you $12. Currently you're $50 in and no closer to resolution.
|
|
|
| | | | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | Author: | Stellar | | Posted: | Jan 21, 2024 06:09 | | Subject: | Re: Buyer had to pay VAT twice | | Viewed: | 48 times | | Topic: | Taxes | |
|
| In Taxes, Sibera_lee writes:
| | Good afternoon everyone,
First off I want to say a big thank you for all your responses. I really appreciate
it. Second I thought I would follow up on some of the questions and issues that
you guys raised.
1. In response to Nubs_select, you are correct that it’s not supposed to be written
on the parcel, however I feel this maybe an Australian Post issue and something
I will need to clarify with them. When filling out the customs declaration the
only place you can type the IOSS number is in a ‘Importers Reference Number’
field, which then prints out on the declaration there are no other fields where
this could go. See the images for the original declaration and AusPosts websites
own guide to filling it out (Step 4) (link provided https://auspost.com.au/business/parcel-send-help-and-support/shipments/send-an-international-shipment).
I had done the exact same thing previously with an order that went to France
and there was no issues regarding VAT. (Pictures 1-3)
2. To Kittybrickz and 1001bricks the original VAT that BrickLink took was approx.
$19AU on the $50AU item the buyer brought. When it arrived the buyer was charged
appprox. $23AU for the second lot of VAT. Both of us have been in contact with
BrickLink with only the buyer getting a response so far, which didn’t seem to
answer or provide a solution to the problem. (Picture 4). The buyer wants me
to pay half of the new VAT which I understand as it makes it a fair outcome for
them but in trying to solve the issue I have spent over $50AU in international
calls to PostNord to no avail. So I’m already out of pocket.
As SylvainLS stated so wonderfully:
“2. Who’s at fault is easy:
a. BL: did collect the VAT as it’s supposed to. Not BL’s fault.
b. Buyer: did pay the VAT to BL. Not Buyer’s fault.
c. Seller: transmitted the info (IOSS) correctly. Not Seller’s fault.
d. Australian post (or whoever the seller used): should have transmitted the
IOSS. Maybe at fault.
e. NordPost: should have received the IOSS. Maybe at fault.
This seems to be the case. I guess I’ll just have to wait and see if BrickLinks
response to me helps at all.
Thanks again everyone.
|
Is that the only place you can put the IOSS?
It should be in a field referencing the shipper, here is the ones we have:
|
|
|
|
| | | | | | | | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | | | Author: | Sibera_lee | | Posted: | Jan 21, 2024 07:27 | | Subject: | Re: Buyer had to pay VAT twice | | Viewed: | 42 times | | Topic: | Taxes | |
|
| It seems to be the case, but I’m going to check with Australia Post soon and
see if either I’m missing something or it’s there end.
|
|
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | | | | | Author: | Nubs_Select | | Posted: | Jan 22, 2024 00:17 | | Subject: | Re: Buyer had to pay VAT twice | | Viewed: | 46 times | | Topic: | Taxes | |
|
| In Taxes, Sibera_lee writes:
| | It seems to be the case, but I’m going to check with Australia Post soon and
see if either I’m missing something or it’s there end.
|
Some companies (like the PayPal shipping option in the USA) don’t have the field
for it for the free version so is it possible that the site your shipped it they
just dosnt support ioss?
|
|
|
|
|
Australia, Queensland
France, Nouvelle-Aquitaine
Canada, Ontario
Spain, Comunidad Valenciana
USA, New Jersey
United Kingdom, England
)
)
)
)
