Recieved another couple of bits..

[The3rd Earl Of Derby]

this morning,he marks on the box gift...so no duty to pay. ;-)

really are excellent bits.

[Weatherlawyer]

You do realise that reporting your petty thefts online can incur the wrath of agencies?

We all know you are stupid but some of us have been happy to overlook your ignorance. Now you are in the know about that little foible, consider yourself warned. Fool.

[The3rd Earl Of Derby]

Oh do piss off of you horrible excuse for a man.

Have you ever heard of *Data protection act* ? DICK.

What this means is I can sue the company that provides my details to any source and probably end up with more than the alledged offence.

[Steve Walker]

Whilst agreeing with your general sentiments, it's worth noting that DPA has huge exemptions written into it for the prevention & detection of crime.

[The3rd Earl Of Derby]

Agreed,but it will cost more in revenue and resources to chase up an offence that cost about 8GBP?

[Dave Plowman (News)]

I've bought quite a lot of 'bits' from the US, - mainly off Ebay - and the revenue don't seem to bother below a certain value - probably about $100.

[John White]

Sadly this does not seem to enter into the equation.

I know somebody who fell foul of the VAT by accidentally underpaying by 9 GBP. This was a simple error that was both quickly spotted and repaid

The VAT must have then spent thousands on both the threatening letters and the spot checks they conducted afterwards. She assumed that she was a nice "soft target" for them and that they enjoyed the run out to the countryside.

John

[Weatherlawyer]

Plus you had the bloody sense to keep your big gob shut about it until now.

[Steve Walker]

I read the other day that the Treasury is again reducing the staff dedicated to chasing millionaire tax avoiders, and increasing the staff dedicated to chasing small-time builders etc. They appear to have an emerging policy of leaving the big fish alone, even though recovery at the minnow level isn't likely to be cost effective.

[Owain]

It depends on how one evaluates cost-effectiveness.

Pursuing millionaire tax avoiders is very cost in-effective; it has an adverse impact on donations, err loans, to the Labour Party.

Owain

[Brian G]

Don't have to go to the supplier, just read your headers and drop a little request, via a court order if necessary, to your ISP Telewest/blueyonder to supply your name and address, and they'll come-a-knockin' at about 3am, armed with a search warrant - customs boys have unbelievable powers - and the blue-blood won't save you, they'll probably lock you up in the tower. :-)

[Weatherlawyer]

What on earth is cost effective?

Why have a vast conglomerate and only chase a few big fish that seem able to evade them anyway. The richest people never pay taxes. They use their business acumin to avoid them whilst making more money. That is why they are millionaires.

Where did you get your information? The Sun?

[Dave Plowman (News)]

Don't think it's reasonable to expect an individual to know if duty or VAT is payable - the goods are described on the package, so it's up to customs.

[Andy Hall]

That's actually an incorrect assumption. Marking something as a gift does not affect whether or VAT and possibly duty are payable. That is determined by the invoice value and is £18.

In practice, you may find that collection isn't made up to around £30-50, but it usually is above that point.

[Andy Hall]

He hasn't committed a crime.

The declaration that the item is a gift makes no difference to whether or not VAT and possibly duty is payable. That is determined by the value. HMRC may collect above that figure but are not required to do so.

Certainly if an item's value is declared below true value, there may well be a problem if there is an inspection. HMRC certainly take a dim view of underdeclaration