Secret Farnell employee - stand up and declare yourself !

[Steve Firth]

Then die, die, die....

Because you should have written in the bit that hands out a receipt for the payment received.

[Tinkerer]

As explained elsewhere, the payment you give is simply reimbursing PF for money they have already spent on your behalf. Your gripe should be with HM Customs who collect the VAT and only issue the label you find affixed to the parcel (they attach it before PF receive the parcel). Perhaps you should approach HMC and see whether they have provision for issuing subsequent VAT receipts. They may well have. PF are indeed a non VAT company and cannot charge VAT or give VAT receipts - that's how the law is.

[Steve Firth]

Is there somewhere that you went to to learn how to be a tedious straight man?

I know how VAT works, I know for Parcel Farce work. I simply beleive that if Parcel Farce act as an agent they damn well give out receipts.

And possibly employ something other than monkeys.

[Tinkerer]

Like I said. The law does not permit them to and they are not acting as agents for Customs but for the sender, who will already have sent any receipts due for their part of the transaction. You asked, I have answered. I assumed that your question was serious, not facetious, hence the "straight" reply.

[Arfa Daily]

What you say about the law is very probably true, but I take Steve's point, that this does not make it right. If I hand over money to anyone who is themselves a business operator, or represents one, then I reasonably expect to be able to have a receipt for that money. If I ask for a VAT receipt in a garage, I don't expect the till operator to tell me that VAT has got nothing to do with them, and that I can only have a receipt for the actual fuel that I've bought. If an item has been ordered from abroad - ie from say China or the U.S. then VAT will not have been charged on it in the original transaction that has been carried out between the seller and buyer, so there will not have been any invoice which includes that additional charge. As to whether VAT - and import duty for that matter - *gets* charged, is down to whether customs pick up on the item, and decide to charge VAT or duty. I used to purchase some semiconductors from a U.S. company, and used to buy

300 quids-worth at a time. Import duty was always charged on these, but not VAT, because they were parts, and not finished goods. But the duty was collected by UPS when they delivered to my door, and they *were* acting on behalf of HMRC, and a UPS receipt for the money collected, was always issued by the driver, at the time of delivery.

I accept that any receipts due from the seller for "their part" of the transaction may have been duly issued, but that still leaves a receipt for HMRC's bit that you haven't got. I guess if you ask them, they would have to issue you one, but I can imagine the nightmare of trying to organise that. So, I'm actually with Steve on this one, and whether in law PF or any other courier are acting as an agent for HMRC or not, in reality, they are, and should be able - and obliged - to issue receipts for monies collected.

Just to take the point a bit further, as an employer, I have to collect money from employees for tax and NI etc. For this purpose, HMRC treat me as an (unpaid) "agent" ie I am collecting this money *on their behalf*. I am required to produce all the relevant paperwork for those employees, to show them where the money that I have collected from them, has gone. The trouble is that HMRC want it both ways, and that's not how the real world works.

So no, I don't think that Steve's question or point, was facetious at all.

Arfa

[Steve Firth]

That's untrue. They are acting as an agent for the sender for the delivery, but they are acting as an agent for HMRCC in collecting duty and VAT. The sender has no responsibility to pay excise duty and VAT, I do. Your beliefs about how it works are about as wrong as they can be.

In truth this is just farting about between HMRCC and Parcel Farce. Parcel Farce live on in a dream world in which they are still the Post Office hence don't need to be VAT registered. HMRCC are simply trying to block businesses from making imports of small quantities of items and claim back the VAT.

[Tinkerer]

Actually, the facetious comment was merely made in response to Steve's straight man remarks. I agree with you totally that the system leaves much to be desired but Parcel Force have to carry out the function as directed by HMC, and the fact remains that, as a non VAT concern, they cannot issue VAT receipts. The only change made, some 15 years ago now, was the way in which the money was collected. The pre PF method, which continued after PF came into existence, was for sorting office staff to "spot" charged parcels coming through and put them to one side to be dealt with. Too often they would get missed and put out for delivery. As a result PF were paying mountains of dosh to HMC and getting much less back. So the new (then) system was introduced by which the parcels were passed from HMC directly to a section that recorded and stored them. The addressees were sent a letter detailing the charges and asking for it to be sent to the central accounts office who, on receipt, would release the parcel for delivery. As to HMC wanting it both ways, you are quite right, that has always been how "The Revenue" have worked and, I suppose, always will be.

[Tinkerer]

The reason that PF are (or at least in my day some 10 years ago were) not registered for VAT is that their services are exempt from VAT and that is why they cannot issue VAT receipts, no non VAT business can. Like I said, that was 10 years ago and I can only assume that it is still the case today. HMC regard the label attached to the parcel, which details the breakdown of charges, as the receipt. PF regard the parcel as a Cash On Delivery parcel and the total amount is just that - a single charge to be collected. And of course PF are still the Post Office in the old sense of the word because Post Office Ltd, Royal Mail and Parcel Force are all part of the same group. Although how long that situation will last now is anybody's guess with privatisation proposals back in the offing. My guess is that PF will be the first part to go. As to why they have not introduced a general receipt (without detailing the HMC breakdown) I have no idea. It used to be said that the parcel was the receipt in itself. As to the last bit of your reply, any conversation about VAT drawback has to be with the Customs authorities. The charge label on the parcel will detail the separate charges so I would have thought that there was room for dialogue there.

[Arfa Daily]

Explanation all accepted, but wouldn't it actually be so easy to address this issue. It's all a case of definitions, really. Whilst strictly speaking, PF can't issue a 'VAT Receipt', there is nothing whatsoever, as a business, to stop them issuing any other kind of receipt for monies taken. So actually, there would be nothing to stop them issuing a receipt "For payment collected on behalf of the VAT division of HMRC". I'm sure that would satisfy the vast majority of people, and at least give them something that they could put in their books, otherwise, there is no official record of the money having been paid. I'm sure it doesn't happen often, but imagine the pissing contest that would ensue, if HMRC claimed that the money in respect of some import, had not been received.

As to PF not being an "agent" of HMRC, again, this is just a matter of definitions really, and is being exploited by all sides to relinquish responsibility for that money whilst it's 'in the system'. No matter what either PF or HMRC claim to the contrary as being the 'legal' position, if PF collect that money, and then pass it on to HMRC, then they are acting as that organisation's agent, and ought to bear the responsibility of at least being able to issue a receipt when they take money from their customers.

It's interesting to see how the dictionary defines "agent". See the top entry in the full listing for the word a third the way down the page at

[Steve Firth]

No they don't, and there is no such label on most deliveries.

You seem to be making this up as you go along.

[Tinkerer]

No, as I said originally that is how it was before I retired. If the label is no longer present then that is something that has changed since my days. I agree the whole system was a mess but it had to be operated as laid down by the Customs. The labels I am referring to were printed in red with headings for all the possible customs charges and one at the bottom for PF's handling charge. The customs charges were filled in by hand by the customs staff and the handling charge was a fixed figure. The completed label was stuck to the outer wrapping of the parcel. At that time the customs staff operated a unit within the various PF offices of exchange and they were the only carrier granted that facility. Anyway, that is how it was and there may well have been changes since, but from what you are saying any that have been made were certainly not for the better.

[Tinkerer]

was before I retired. It could have changed since but it sounds unlikely. In those days, addressees sent their payments to the accountants office in Derbyshire and the parcels were susequently released from the appropriate office of exchange (there used to be a dozen or so around the country but I believe it is all concentrated in Rugby now). That in itself would have complicated issueing receipts but I am sure could have been got around. As to customs claiming that a VAT payment had not been received, that would not happen because PF don't just pay for each individual parcel, they pay a bulk figure consisting of the totals for all the parcels over a period. The parcel is just a number on a bulk list and it would be impossible to identify what had or had not been collected. In the event of a customer refusing a parcel or it being undeliverable, PF claim the payments back from the customs. So yes, it wasn't the best system, but it was how Customs wanted it (and most likely still do) and I refer you back to your earlier remarks.

I take your point about the word agent but I don't think they see it that way. They simply regard themselves as a carrier transporting a parcel, in this instance, from Customs to addressee as they would with any COD parcel. In fact I suppose they probably regard themselves more as an agent of the addressee. It is of course the addressee, not Customs, who pay PF for the service via the handling charge.

[Steve Firth]

The only labels are the ones filled in by the sender, including the green customs declaration which shows no value for duty, since the sender obviously has no knowledge what that is. The thing that gives the lie to the way that Parcel Farce operate is that every other courier issues a receipt which shows the monies collected on behalf of HMRC.

Parcel Force simply refuse to issue such a receipt and that, I can only assume, is because the office staff are useless monkeys.

[Tinkerer]

I have told you all I know and can only repeat that a) the labels were there in my day and that, as I suggested earlier, may have changed since 2002 b) They are not refusing to issue receipts, they are not allowed to c) no other carrier is VAT exempt and they can, therefore, issue VAT receipts as they are VAT registered. PF are VAT exempt because they are still technically part of the overall VAT exempt Royal Mail business which has long been a bone of contention with the competition. d) They have to provide the service as laid down by the agreement with HMRC

There is nothing else that I can tell you, for any further clarification you will have to contact either PF or HMC.

[Steve Firth]

[Tinkerer]

I meant VAT ones.

[Man at B&Q]

All of my imports have the label attached which gives a breakdown of the charges.

A similar breakdown of charges is issued by PF when they write to inform you that charges are due on a shipment that you must pay before they will deliver.

MBQ

[Man at B&Q]

That's how it still is, except the labels are printed.

MBQ

[Man at B&Q]

You are making this up.

*Every* parcel I get through the Milton Keynes depot is notified by post with a breakdown of the charges due (not a VAT receipt in the strict legal sense but the VAT is itemised). I don't see how it can be any different as you have to pay before delivery. I wouldn't pay unless I could see what I was paying.

When they parcels arrive they *all* have the printed label with the same charges itemised.

MBQ

[Tinkerer]

All of my imports have the label attached which gives a breakdown of the charges.

A similar breakdown of charges is issued by PF when they write to inform you that charges are due on a shipment that you must pay before they will deliver.

MBQ

Many thanks MBQ. That, and your other responses, are exactly what I have been saying all along. I thought my grey cells were atrophying.