On Wed, 18 Feb 2015 11:15:20 +0000, The Natural Philosopher wrote:

http://www.breitbart.com/london/2015...hrive-outside-
the-european-union/

interesting article.

...written by one of the most profoundly anti-EU of MEPs, outside of
UKIP. So hardly an unbiased reflection.

That is what is so interesting. The most anti EU politician isn't in
UKIP...

Not any more, no, he isn't. Even he doesn't think UKIP act in the
country's best interests. Mind you, as the apparent lead author of the
2010 "drivel" manifesto, the feeling's clearly mutual.

Strange, isn't it, how those on either fringe always seem to fall out
with each other. Splitters!

I wonder how long before a replacement manifesto comes out, and how long
before that too gets disowned? Will dress-codes for taxi drivers and
theatre-goers, and re-circularising the Circle line, be carried forward?
How about retro colour schemes for trains and re-introducing Pullman
coaches? Scrapping maternity pay and bringing back the cane? Farage's
assessment of the 2010 manifesto (which he signed the introduction to as
"Chief Party Spokesman") is one of the few things I agree with him on.

The second interesting thing is that you haven't challenged his
arguments - merely attempted to discredit his competence to make an
argument at all.

No, I merely pointed out that his argument was not going to be exactly
balanced or unbiased, but would be very firmly coming from one side of
the debate.

I also pointed out that it was totally unrelated to the question it was
posted in reply to.

Seems to me that the current way of dealing with other EU countries
is by far and away the easier one. Unless, of course, you really
believe that the UK would get shot of any kind of
value-added/goods-and-services/purchase/sales tax if we left the
EU?

Can't see that happening, not least because it would leave a
roughly £100bn hole in the Gov'ts income each year that'd need to
be filled with something else.

Yes, sales tax.

Other than the name, care to explain the difference?

Adrian posted
On Wed, 18 Feb 2015 11:04:32 +0000, The Natural Philosopher wrote:

http://www.breitbart.com/london/2015...hrive-outside-
the-european-union/

interesting article.

...written by one of the most profoundly anti-EU of MEPs, outside of
UKIP. So hardly an unbiased reflection.

But all your posts are biased too, albeit the other way. So shall we not
bother reading any of them?

--
Les

On 18/02/15 11:29, Adrian wrote:
No, I merely pointed out that his argument was not going to be exactly
balanced or unbiased, but would be very firmly coming from one side of
the debate.

I suppose that Isaac Newton's many years trying to prove the existence
of God invalidate the theory of gravity too?

You must learn to separate the arguer from the argument or you will
never learn anything again.

Mind you, that perhaps to you would be considered an optimal strategy?

--
Everything you read in newspapers is absolutely true, except for the
rare story of which you happen to have first-hand knowledge. €“ Erwin Knoll

Adrian wrote:
On Wed, 18 Feb 2015 10:58:10 +0000, Capitol wrote:

Seems to me that the current way of dealing with other EU countries is
by far and away the easier one. Unless, of course, you really believe
that the UK would get shot of any kind of
value-added/goods-and-services/ purchase/sales tax if we left the EU?

Can't see that happening, not least because it would leave a roughly
£100bn hole in the Gov'ts income each year that'd need to be filled
with something else.

Yes, sales tax.

Other than the name, care to explain the difference?

Sales tax is non recoverable, much less paperwork.

On Wed, 18 Feb 2015 12:31:07 +0000, The Natural Philosopher wrote:

No, I merely pointed out that his argument was not going to be exactly
balanced or unbiased, but would be very firmly coming from one side of
the debate.

I suppose that Isaac Newton's many years trying to prove the existence
of God invalidate the theory of gravity too?

Perhaps a closer parallel would be to take his years of trying to prove
the existence of God into account when considering an article he wrote
entitled "Does God exist or not?"

On Wed, 18 Feb 2015 12:30:20 +0000, Big Les Wade wrote:

http://www.breitbart.com/london/2015...hrive-outside-
the-european-union/

interesting article.

...written by one of the most profoundly anti-EU of MEPs, outside of
UKIP. So hardly an unbiased reflection.

But all your posts are biased too, albeit the other way. So shall we not
bother reading any of them?

If somebody was planning on quoting one of my posts on the subject as
providing justification for an anti-UKIP viewpoint, then of course the
post couldn't be viewed as neutral.

On 18/02/2015 10:04, john james wrote:


"Dennis@home" wrote in message
web.com...
On 18/02/2015 00:06, john james wrote:


"Dennis@home" wrote in message
web.com...
On 17/02/2015 21:57, john james wrote:

I didn't commented on that, just pointed out that some
exports, particularly by small exporters, would be easier
if Britain was outside the EU because then the exporters
would not have to bother with the EU requirements on
charging the VAT due in the country it is exported to
with intangible stuff as opposed to tangible goods.

What VAT, its only the EU that charges VAT not the rest of the world.

That is not correct. Quite a bit of the rest of the world does charge
a VAT
tho they don't all call it that. Its a VAT in the sense that it
applies to both
goods and services and applies to the value added with each transaction.

VAT is what we are required to charge when selling to members of the EU.

Yes.

We are not required to do any of that stuff when exporting to elsewhere.

But if Britain chose to leave the EU, an exporter would not be
required to charge the VAT that applies in the buyer's country
and forward that VAT collected to the buyer's country.

You may be charged import duty by the other country if they are trying
to restrict their imports just like the EU does.

They dont do that to restrict anything, they just collect the VAT that
is due.

You still have to pay VAT, duty is an additional cost that is added.

http://www.dutycalculator.com/countr...nited-Kingdom/

The duty is there to restrict buying goods from overseas rather than
from the EU/UK.


In other words its collected on entry to the country, not by the seller.

And it isn't possible for the EU to do it like that, because goods
that move between EU countries dont go through the same
customs system as goods that come in from outside the EU.

The rules don't allow you to add duty to goods bought from inside the
EU. You have a "level playing field" (unless you are French).


And with the intangibles being discussed, the VAT that is due
can not be charged by customs, because intangible transactions
never go anywhere near customs, even with imports from outside
the EU. That is why the change was made at the start of the year
to force the exporter to collect the VAT and send it to the buyer's
country.

What's that got to do with anything about the UK exporting to other
countries outside the EU?


Exports to the EU would be rather harder if we were not in the EU as
they try to block imports for stuff already made in the EU.

That isn't correct either, Britain is currently free to import lots
of stuff from China and the US that is currently made in the EU.

So I am imagining the duty charged on imports fro outside the EU?

There is no duty on quite a bit of the imports.

There is on a lot of it, the government just doesn't think its worth
collecting on small personal imports, the same with the VAT. However if
you cross the threshold and they notice you will be charged duty + VAT +
admin fee.

In article ,
The Natural Philosopher wrote:
You must learn to separate the arguer from the argument or you will
never learn anything again.

Can't believe you of all people wrote this. ;-)

--
*Artificial Intelligence is no match for Natural Stupidity *

Dave Plowman London SW
To e-mail, change noise into sound.

In article ,
Adrian wrote:
On Wed, 18 Feb 2015 11:04:32 +0000, The Natural Philosopher wrote:

Seems to me that the current way of dealing with other EU countries
is by far and away the easier one. Unless, of course, you really
believe that the UK would get shot of any kind of
value-added/goods-and-services/ purchase/sales tax if we left the EU?

Can't see that happening, not least because it would leave a roughly
£100bn hole in the Gov'ts income each year that'd need to be filled
with something else.

Yes, sales tax.

Other than the name, care to explain the difference?

http://www.breitbart.com/london/2015...hrive-outside-
the-european-union/

interesting article.

...written by one of the most profoundly anti-EU of MEPs, outside of
UKIP. So hardly an unbiased reflection.

But about the difference between a sales tax and a value-added tax?

I'm guessing, but VAT applies to Goods & Services a Sales Tax would only
apply to goods? So, how does the exchequer balance the books without
pushing Sales Tax up to over 30%?

--
From KT24 in Surrey

Using a RISC OS computer running v5.18

charles wrote:
In ,
wrote:
On Wed, 18 Feb 2015 11:04:32 +0000, The Natural Philosopher wrote:

Seems to me that the current way of dealing with other EU countries
is by far and away the easier one. Unless, of course, you really
believe that the UK would get shot of any kind of
value-added/goods-and-services/ purchase/sales tax if we left the EU?

Can't see that happening, not least because it would leave a roughly
£100bn hole in the Gov'ts income each year that'd need to be filled
with something else.

Yes, sales tax.

Other than the name, care to explain the difference?

http://www.breitbart.com/london/2015...hrive-outside-
the-european-union/

interesting article.

...written by one of the most profoundly anti-EU of MEPs, outside of
UKIP. So hardly an unbiased reflection.

But about the difference between a sales tax and a value-added tax?

I'm guessing, but VAT applies to Goods& Services a Sales Tax would only
apply to goods? So, how does the exchequer balance the books without
pushing Sales Tax up to over 30%?

Sales taxes also apply to services.

On 18/02/2015 10:54, Capitol wrote:
Adrian wrote:
On Tue, 17 Feb 2015 22:54:09 +0000, Capitol wrote:

The sooner we replace VAT the better. An administrative nightmare.

You ever run a VAT-reg business? If your accounting software's even
quarter-way competent, it's a piece of ****.

Yes. VAT is an unneccessary administrative nightmare. Purchase tax
required a workforce of 30 people, ...

We had that many in one office of one importer to deal with it. It was
far more complicated than VAT.

--
Colin Bignell

Nightjar cpb@ wrote:
On 18/02/2015 10:54, Capitol wrote:
Adrian wrote:
On Tue, 17 Feb 2015 22:54:09 +0000, Capitol wrote:

The sooner we replace VAT the better. An administrative nightmare.

You ever run a VAT-reg business? If your accounting software's even
quarter-way competent, it's a piece of ****.

Yes. VAT is an unneccessary administrative nightmare. Purchase tax
required a workforce of 30 people, ...

We had that many in one office of one importer to deal with it. It was
far more complicated than VAT.


You did, but HMRC didn't. Importers/exporters always have a more
compliced life. I know, I've dealt with it.

"Adrian" wrote in message
...
On Wed, 18 Feb 2015 21:04:00 +1100, john james wrote:

But if Britain chose to leave the EU, an exporter would not be required
to charge the VAT that applies in the buyer's country and forward that
VAT collected to the buyer's country.

If somebody in the UK buys something from France, now, they pay French
TVA on it in the same way as a French resident would.

If somebody in France buys something from the UK, now, they pay UK VAT on
it in the same way as a UK resident would.

Not with intangibles like ebooks.

If somebody in the UK buys something from France, after we leave the EU,
they would pay UK VAT (and any duty that might be applicable) on it on
import, involving declarations of value and usually a handling charge from
the courier in the same way as if it came from outside the EU currently.

Again, not with intangibles currently.

If somebody in France buys something from the UK, after we leave the EU,
they would pay French TVA (and any duty that might be applicable) on it
on import, involving declarations of value and usually a handling charge
from the courier in the same way as if it came from outside the EU
currently.

Again, not with intangibles.

Seems to me that the current way of dealing with
other EU countries is by far and away the easier one.

Not with intangibles where small exporters have to
collect the VAT that is due in the buyer's country
and remit that to the buyer's country somehow.

Even the MOSS system involves a lot more work
for small exporters than the system that would
apply if Britain was outside the EU where the
customs system has to get the VAT that is due
form the buyer or do without with intangibles.

Unless, of course, you really believe that
the UK would get shot of any kind of value-added/goods-and-services/
purchase/sales tax if we left the EU?

No I do not. It's only places like Hong Kong that can do that sort of thing.

And I agree that the economic value of the small
exporters being able to export with less effort once
Britain left the EU would be trivial compared with the
loss of exports from foreign owned car manufactures
to the EU alone when they decide that they will no
longer make cars in Britain and export them to the
EU and move their operations to say Spain instead.

Can't see that happening, not least because it would leave a roughly
£100bn hole in the Gov'ts income each year that'd need to be filled with
something else.

Sure.

On Thu, 19 Feb 2015 05:27:25 +1100, john james wrote:

If somebody in France buys something from the UK, now, they pay UK VAT
on it in the same way as a UK resident would.

Not with intangibles like ebooks.

Yep, that is an oddity. Basically, digital downloads are viewed as giving
a nice easy "off-shoring" opportunity in low-VAT countries. So anybody
that sells sufficient digital products into a country to get above the
VAT threshold for that country is regarded as having a presence in that
country.

Problem is, some countries have zero VAT thresholds, versus the UK's £81k.

On 18/02/2015 15:55, Capitol wrote:
Nightjar cpb@ wrote:
On 18/02/2015 10:54, Capitol wrote:
Adrian wrote:
On Tue, 17 Feb 2015 22:54:09 +0000, Capitol wrote:

The sooner we replace VAT the better. An administrative nightmare.

You ever run a VAT-reg business? If your accounting software's even
quarter-way competent, it's a piece of ****.

Yes. VAT is an unneccessary administrative nightmare. Purchase tax
required a workforce of 30 people, ...

We had that many in one office of one importer to deal with it. It was
far more complicated than VAT.


You did, but HMRC didn't. Importers/exporters always have a more
compliced life. I know, I've dealt with it.

So, your proposal is that we should replace a very simple system with
one that is far more complex, in order to put a large number of people
out of work and that this is somehow a good thing.


--
Colin Bignell

"Dennis@home" wrote in message
eb.com...
On 18/02/2015 10:04, john james wrote:


"Dennis@home" wrote in message
web.com...
On 18/02/2015 00:06, john james wrote:


"Dennis@home" wrote in message
web.com...
On 17/02/2015 21:57, john james wrote:

I didn't commented on that, just pointed out that some
exports, particularly by small exporters, would be easier
if Britain was outside the EU because then the exporters
would not have to bother with the EU requirements on
charging the VAT due in the country it is exported to
with intangible stuff as opposed to tangible goods.

What VAT, its only the EU that charges VAT not the rest of the world.

That is not correct. Quite a bit of the rest of the world does charge
a VAT
tho they don't all call it that. Its a VAT in the sense that it
applies to both
goods and services and applies to the value added with each
transaction.

VAT is what we are required to charge when selling to members of the EU.

Yes.

We are not required to do any of that stuff when exporting to elsewhere.

But if Britain chose to leave the EU, an exporter would not be
required to charge the VAT that applies in the buyer's country
and forward that VAT collected to the buyer's country.

You may be charged import duty by the other country if they are trying
to restrict their imports just like the EU does.

They dont do that to restrict anything, they just collect the VAT that
is due.

You still have to pay VAT, duty is an additional cost that is added.

Yes, I just commented on your restrict claim.

http://www.dutycalculator.com/countr...nited-Kingdom/

The duty is there to restrict buying goods from overseas rather than from
the EU/UK.

But there is no duty on quite a lot of the imports that are made in the EU.

In other words its collected on entry to the country, not by the seller.

And it isn't possible for the EU to do it like that, because goods
that move between EU countries dont go through the same
customs system as goods that come in from outside the EU.

The rules don't allow you to add duty to goods bought from inside the EU.
You have a "level playing field" (unless you are French).

I wasnt talking about the rules, the problem is that when
there is no customs between EU states, there is no way to
impose anything at all.

And with the intangibles being discussed, the VAT that is due
can not be charged by customs, because intangible transactions
never go anywhere near customs, even with imports from outside
the EU. That is why the change was made at the start of the year
to force the exporter to collect the VAT and send it to the buyer's
country.

What's that got to do with anything about the UK exporting to other
countries outside the EU?

That was talking about something else entirely, the impossibility of
charging VAT or duty on something that no customs post ever sees.

That is why the new rules that applied from the start of the year
came about, to make the exporter collect the VAT that is due and
remit the VAT they collect from the buyer to the buyer's tax authorities.

Exports to the EU would be rather harder if we were not in the EU as
they try to block imports for stuff already made in the EU.

That isn't correct either, Britain is currently free to import lots
of stuff from China and the US that is currently made in the EU.

So I am imagining the duty charged on imports fro outside the EU?

There is no duty on quite a bit of the imports.

There is on a lot of it, the government just doesn't think its worth
collecting on small personal imports, the same with the VAT.

And it was those small exporters we were discussing that would
be better off if Britain was not in the EU because they would not
have to collect the VAT that is due on intangibles and remit that
to the buyer's country tax system.

However if you cross the threshold and they notice you will be charged
duty + VAT + admin fee.

And that isn't even possible with intangibles,
because they never see those.

On 18/02/2015 19:29, john james wrote:

8

The duty is there to restrict buying goods from overseas rather than
from the EU/UK.

But there is no duty on quite a lot of the imports that are made in the EU.

Such as?

8

Nightjar cpb@ wrote:
On 18/02/2015 15:55, Capitol wrote:
Nightjar cpb@ wrote:
On 18/02/2015 10:54, Capitol wrote:
Adrian wrote:
On Tue, 17 Feb 2015 22:54:09 +0000, Capitol wrote:

The sooner we replace VAT the better. An administrative nightmare.

You ever run a VAT-reg business? If your accounting software's even
quarter-way competent, it's a piece of ****.

Yes. VAT is an unneccessary administrative nightmare. Purchase tax
required a workforce of 30 people, ...

We had that many in one office of one importer to deal with it. It was
far more complicated than VAT.


You did, but HMRC didn't. Importers/exporters always have a more
compliced life. I know, I've dealt with it.

So, your proposal is that we should replace a very simple system with
one that is far more complex, in order to put a large number of people
out of work and that this is somehow a good thing.


No, my suggestion is that we should put a lot of pen pushers and civil
servants out of work by using a much simpler tax system.

In article ,
Capitol wrote:
Nightjar cpb@ wrote:
On 18/02/2015 15:55, Capitol wrote:
Nightjar cpb@ wrote:
On 18/02/2015 10:54, Capitol wrote:
Adrian wrote:
On Tue, 17 Feb 2015 22:54:09 +0000, Capitol wrote:

The sooner we replace VAT the better. An administrative nightmare.

You ever run a VAT-reg business? If your accounting software's even
quarter-way competent, it's a piece of ****.

Yes. VAT is an unneccessary administrative nightmare. Purchase tax
required a workforce of 30 people, ...

We had that many in one office of one importer to deal with it. It was
far more complicated than VAT.


You did, but HMRC didn't. Importers/exporters always have a more
compliced life. I know, I've dealt with it.

So, your proposal is that we should replace a very simple system with
one that is far more complex, in order to put a large number of people
out of work and that this is somehow a good thing.


No, my suggestion is that we should put a lot of pen pushers and civil
servants out of work by using a much simpler tax system.

and that is?

--
From KT24 in Surrey

Using a RISC OS computer running v5.18

In message , Adrian
writes
On Wed, 18 Feb 2015 11:04:32 +0000, The Natural Philosopher wrote:

Seems to me that the current way of dealing with other EU countries
is by far and away the easier one. Unless, of course, you really
believe that the UK would get shot of any kind of
value-added/goods-and-services/ purchase/sales tax if we left the EU?

Can't see that happening, not least because it would leave a roughly
£100bn hole in the Gov'ts income each year that'd need to be filled
with something else.

Yes, sales tax.

Other than the name, care to explain the difference?

http://www.breitbart.com/london/2015...hrive-outside-
the-european-union/

interesting article.

...written by one of the most profoundly anti-EU of MEPs, outside of
UKIP. So hardly an unbiased reflection.

But about the difference between a sales tax and a value-added tax?
AIUI vat involves a transaction at every stage of the process that fails
to generate any revenue until finally what ever it is that's being sold
goes to someone or some organisation that is not Vat registered. So the
net revenue gained by HMRC per recorded vat transaction can be very low.
It is cost effective for HMRC as all they have to do is police it. It is
very inefficient especially for any small business operating manual
accounts as they are constantly recording VAT transactions which cancel
each other out. Fortunately computerised accounting systems mitigate
much of the cost.
A sales tax is applied once only at the final point of sale. In the past
purchase tax was made unnecessarily complicated by the socialist
insisting on different rates for different classes of goods.

--
bert

In message , The Natural Philosopher
writes
On 17/02/15 19:45, bert wrote:
In message , Adrian
writes
On Tue, 17 Feb 2015 10:22:43 +0000, The Natural Philosopher wrote:

I rather suspect you're conflating the Gov'ts income/expenditure with
the country's income/expenditure.

Until we achieve full Eurocommunist integration, they are not the same
thing.

I'll add "conflate" to the long list of words and concepts you don't
understand, shall I?

No.

Read again carefully.

shrug Fine. So you were pointing out that two different things were
different, in reply to a post suggesting somebody might have confused
them.
You seem very ready to jump to the conclusion that other people don't
understand something rather than accept that you are wrong.

pot kettle black


I don't recall ever having use that particular argument myself BICBW
--
bert

In article ,
bert ] wrote:
In message , Adrian
writes
On Wed, 18 Feb 2015 11:04:32 +0000, The Natural Philosopher wrote:

Seems to me that the current way of dealing with other EU countries
is by far and away the easier one. Unless, of course, you really
believe that the UK would get shot of any kind of
value-added/goods-and-services/ purchase/sales tax if we left the
EU?

Can't see that happening, not least because it would leave a roughly
£100bn hole in the Gov'ts income each year that'd need to be filled
with something else.

Yes, sales tax.

Other than the name, care to explain the difference?

http://www.breitbart.com/london/2015...hrive-outside-
the-european-union/

interesting article.

...written by one of the most profoundly anti-EU of MEPs, outside of
UKIP. So hardly an unbiased reflection.

But about the difference between a sales tax and a value-added tax?
AIUI vat involves a transaction at every stage of the process that fails
to generate any revenue until finally what ever it is that's being sold
goes to someone or some organisation that is not Vat registered. So the
net revenue gained by HMRC per recorded vat transaction can be very low.
It is cost effective for HMRC as all they have to do is police it. It is
very inefficient especially for any small business operating manual
accounts as they are constantly recording VAT transactions which cancel
each other out. Fortunately computerised accounting systems mitigate
much of the cost.
A sales tax is applied once only at the final point of sale. In the past
purchase tax was made unnecessarily complicated by the socialist
insisting on different rates for different classes of goods.

and when you, as a non-trader, bought something from a wholesaler the
accounting became interesting "Where's the purchase tax book?"

--
From KT24 in Surrey

Using a RISC OS computer running v5.18

On Wed, 18 Feb 2015 21:25:14 +0000, bert wrote:

But about the difference between a sales tax and a value-added tax?

AIUI vat involves a transaction at every stage of the process that fails
to generate any revenue until finally what ever it is that's being sold
goes to someone or some organisation that is not Vat registered. So the
net revenue gained by HMRC per recorded vat transaction can be very low.

HMRC don't record VAT transactions. HMRC get a quarterly return from
every VAT-reg business. All those businesses have to record all the
transactions anyway, in order to have any kind of meaningful accounts.

It is very inefficient especially for any small business operating
manual accounts as they are constantly recording VAT transactions which
cancel each other out.

You've never been involved in any kind of book-keeping for a business,
have you?

B'sides, ever heard of the flat-rate VAT scheme for smaller businesses?

A sales tax is applied once only at the final point of sale.

So let's say I walk into a store to buy £100 worth of stuff. How does the
bloke on the till know if I'm buying it for a business, an untaxed sale,
or for personal use, taxed? Or, if both would be taxable, then doesn't
that increase the cost to the business, which is only going to get passed
on to the eventual end consumer?

On 18/02/2015 20:32, Capitol wrote:
Nightjar cpb@ wrote:
On 18/02/2015 15:55, Capitol wrote:
Nightjar cpb@ wrote:
On 18/02/2015 10:54, Capitol wrote:
Adrian wrote:
On Tue, 17 Feb 2015 22:54:09 +0000, Capitol wrote:

The sooner we replace VAT the better. An administrative nightmare.

You ever run a VAT-reg business? If your accounting software's even
quarter-way competent, it's a piece of ****.

Yes. VAT is an unneccessary administrative nightmare. Purchase tax
required a workforce of 30 people, ...

We had that many in one office of one importer to deal with it. It was
far more complicated than VAT.


You did, but HMRC didn't. Importers/exporters always have a more
compliced life. I know, I've dealt with it.

So, your proposal is that we should replace a very simple system with
one that is far more complex, in order to put a large number of people
out of work and that this is somehow a good thing.


No, my suggestion is that we should put a lot of pen pushers and
civil servants out of work by using a much simpler tax system.

So you do want to put a large number of people out of work and introduce
an undefined tax system that is somehow simpler than having just three
rates of tax.

--
Colin Bignell

In message , charles
writes
In article ,
bert ] wrote:
In message , Adrian
writes
On Wed, 18 Feb 2015 11:04:32 +0000, The Natural Philosopher wrote:

Seems to me that the current way of dealing with other EU countries
is by far and away the easier one. Unless, of course, you really
believe that the UK would get shot of any kind of
value-added/goods-and-services/ purchase/sales tax if we left the
EU?

Can't see that happening, not least because it would leave a roughly
£100bn hole in the Gov'ts income each year that'd need to be filled
with something else.

Yes, sales tax.

Other than the name, care to explain the difference?

http://www.breitbart.com/london/2015...hrive-outside-
the-european-union/

interesting article.

...written by one of the most profoundly anti-EU of MEPs, outside of
UKIP. So hardly an unbiased reflection.

But about the difference between a sales tax and a value-added tax?
AIUI vat involves a transaction at every stage of the process that fails
to generate any revenue until finally what ever it is that's being sold
goes to someone or some organisation that is not Vat registered. So the
net revenue gained by HMRC per recorded vat transaction can be very low.
It is cost effective for HMRC as all they have to do is police it. It is
very inefficient especially for any small business operating manual
accounts as they are constantly recording VAT transactions which cancel
each other out. Fortunately computerised accounting systems mitigate
much of the cost.
A sales tax is applied once only at the final point of sale. In the past
purchase tax was made unnecessarily complicated by the socialist
insisting on different rates for different classes of goods.

and when you, as a non-trader, bought something from a wholesaler the
accounting became interesting "Where's the purchase tax book?"

I wasn't particularly arguing that one tax was better than the other.
Just trying to differentiate between the two.
--
bert

In message , Adrian
writes
On Wed, 18 Feb 2015 21:25:14 +0000, bert wrote:

But about the difference between a sales tax and a value-added tax?

AIUI vat involves a transaction at every stage of the process that fails
to generate any revenue until finally what ever it is that's being sold
goes to someone or some organisation that is not Vat registered. So the
net revenue gained by HMRC per recorded vat transaction can be very low.

HMRC don't record VAT transactions.
I didn't say they did.
HMRC get a quarterly return from
every VAT-reg business. All those businesses have to record all the
transactions anyway, in order to have any kind of meaningful accounts.

As I said computerisation takes a lot of the effort out of it - until
something goes wrong.
It is very inefficient especially for any small business operating
manual accounts as they are constantly recording VAT transactions which
cancel each other out.

You've never been involved in any kind of book-keeping for a business,
have you?

Yes both manually and computerised and also have had the pleasure of
trying to explain to someone the difference of 1p that arose because of
the different rounding rules for manual and computerised vat systems.
B'sides, ever heard of the flat-rate VAT scheme for smaller businesses?

Yes, one of those typical civil service ideas to "simplify" things which
can actually make matters worse. I never used it.
A sales tax is applied once only at the final point of sale.

So let's say I walk into a store to buy £100 worth of stuff. How does the
bloke on the till know if I'm buying it for a business, an untaxed sale,
or for personal use, taxed? Or, if both would be taxable, then doesn't
that increase the cost to the business, which is only going to get passed
on to the eventual end consumer?
I didn't say it was better. I was attempting to explain the difference
in response to a question.
--
bert

"Adrian" wrote in message
...
On Thu, 19 Feb 2015 05:27:25 +1100, john james wrote:

If somebody in France buys something from the UK, now, they pay UK VAT
on it in the same way as a UK resident would.

Not with intangibles like ebooks.

Yep, that is an oddity. Basically, digital downloads are viewed as giving
a nice easy "off-shoring" opportunity in low-VAT countries. So anybody
that sells sufficient digital products into a country to get above the
VAT threshold for that country is regarded as having a presence in that
country.

Problem is, some countries have zero VAT thresholds, versus the UK's £81k.

And that is the area where more would export if Britain was not in the
EU because they would not have to collect and remit the VAT that is due.

"Dennis@home" wrote in message
web.com...
On 18/02/2015 19:29, john james wrote:

8

The duty is there to restrict buying goods from overseas rather than
from the EU/UK.

But there is no duty on quite a lot of the imports that are made in the
EU.

Such as?

Such as the lower priced stuff imported from china
individually rather than commercial shipments.

charles wrote:
In ,
] wrote:
In , Adrian
writes
On Wed, 18 Feb 2015 11:04:32 +0000, The Natural Philosopher wrote:

Seems to me that the current way of dealing with other EU countries
is by far and away the easier one. Unless, of course, you really
believe that the UK would get shot of any kind of
value-added/goods-and-services/ purchase/sales tax if we left the
EU?

Can't see that happening, not least because it would leave a roughly
£100bn hole in the Gov'ts income each year that'd need to be filled
with something else.

Yes, sales tax.

Other than the name, care to explain the difference?

http://www.breitbart.com/london/2015...hrive-outside-
the-european-union/

interesting article.

...written by one of the most profoundly anti-EU of MEPs, outside of
UKIP. So hardly an unbiased reflection.

But about the difference between a sales tax and a value-added tax?
AIUI vat involves a transaction at every stage of the process that fails
to generate any revenue until finally what ever it is that's being sold
goes to someone or some organisation that is not Vat registered. So the
net revenue gained by HMRC per recorded vat transaction can be very low.
It is cost effective for HMRC as all they have to do is police it. It is
very inefficient especially for any small business operating manual
accounts as they are constantly recording VAT transactions which cancel
each other out. Fortunately computerised accounting systems mitigate
much of the cost.
A sales tax is applied once only at the final point of sale. In the past
purchase tax was made unnecessarily complicated by the socialist
insisting on different rates for different classes of goods.

and when you, as a non-trader, bought something from a wholesaler the
accounting became interesting "Where's the purchase tax book?"

The wholesaler IME had already paid the purchase tax which was applied
at source. Hence a lower selling price did not reduce the tax paid.

On 18/02/2015 22:39, john james wrote:


"Dennis@home" wrote in message
web.com...
On 18/02/2015 19:29, john james wrote:

8

The duty is there to restrict buying goods from overseas rather than
from the EU/UK.

But there is no duty on quite a lot of the imports that are made in
the EU.

Such as?

Such as the lower priced stuff imported from china
individually rather than commercial shipments.

We have been through that.
Its subject to duty and VAT but it costs too much to collect for small
orders. Try it with a larger order and see if you get to pay duty and VAT.

"Dennis@home" wrote in message
web.com...
On 18/02/2015 22:39, john james wrote:


"Dennis@home" wrote in message
web.com...
On 18/02/2015 19:29, john james wrote:

8

The duty is there to restrict buying goods from overseas rather than
from the EU/UK.

But there is no duty on quite a lot of the imports that are made in
the EU.

Such as?

Such as the lower priced stuff imported from china
individually rather than commercial shipments.

We have been through that.

And you asked that question anyway.

Its subject to duty and VAT but it costs too much to collect for small
orders.

What I said in a lot more words.

Try it with a larger order and see if you get to pay duty and VAT.

Irrelevant to whether a there is no duty actually paid
on quite a lot of the imports that are made in the EU.

In article ,
john james wrote:


"Dennis@home" wrote in message
web.com...
On 18/02/2015 19:29, john james wrote:

8

The duty is there to restrict buying goods from overseas rather than
from the EU/UK.

But there is no duty on quite a lot of the imports that are made in the
EU.

Such as?

Such as the lower priced stuff imported from china
individually rather than commercial shipments.

Yes. It seems odd I can import stuff (of similar cost) from China duty
free but not from the US or even Australia.

--
*A bicycle can't stand alone because it's two tyred.*

Dave Plowman London SW
To e-mail, change noise into sound.

In article ,
harryagain wrote:
Something on the telly to watch.
http://www.reddit.com/r/ukpolitics/c...rama_ukip_the/

The smear campaign continues.

Picture in The Guardian of Farage with one of the (alleged) Chelsea
supporters who stopped the black man boarding the Paris Metro. Seems he is
a very vocal supporter of UKIP.

--
*If at first you don't succeed, then skydiving definitely isn't for you *

Dave Plowman London SW
To e-mail, change noise into sound.

On 20/02/15 01:08, Dave Plowman (News) wrote:
In article ,
harryagain wrote:
Something on the telly to watch.
http://www.reddit.com/r/ukpolitics/c...rama_ukip_the/

The smear campaign continues.

Picture in The Guardian of Farage with one of the (alleged) Chelsea
supporters who stopped the black man boarding the Paris Metro. Seems he is
a very vocal supporter of UKIP.

seems being the operative word.

Probably the other 50 supporters vote labour.


--
Everything you read in newspapers is absolutely true, except for the
rare story of which you happen to have first-hand knowledge. €“ Erwin Knoll

In article ,
The Natural Philosopher wrote:
On 20/02/15 01:08, Dave Plowman (News) wrote:
In article ,
harryagain wrote:
Something on the telly to watch.
http://www.reddit.com/r/ukpolitics/c...rama_ukip_the/

The smear campaign continues.

Picture in The Guardian of Farage with one of the (alleged) Chelsea
supporters who stopped the black man boarding the Paris Metro. Seems
he is a very vocal supporter of UKIP.

seems being the operative word.

Probably the other 50 supporters vote labour.

You are rather out of touch. The likelihood is they don't vote at all.

--
*I'm pretty sure that sex is better than logic, but I can't prove it.

Dave Plowman London SW
To e-mail, change noise into sound.

On 20/02/15 01:08, Dave Plowman (News) wrote:
In article ,
harryagain wrote:
Something on the telly to watch.
http://www.reddit.com/r/ukpolitics/c...rama_ukip_the/

The smear campaign continues.

Picture in The Guardian of Farage with one of the (alleged) Chelsea
supporters who stopped the black man boarding the Paris Metro. Seems he is
a very vocal supporter of UKIP.

http://www.breitbart.com/london/2015...nto-overdrive/


For a slightly different take from 'Red' Dave Plowman.

--
Everything you read in newspapers is absolutely true, except for the
rare story of which you happen to have first-hand knowledge. €“ Erwin Knoll

In article ,
The Natural Philosopher wrote:
On 20/02/15 01:08, Dave Plowman (News) wrote:
In article ,
harryagain wrote:
Something on the telly to watch.
http://www.reddit.com/r/ukpolitics/c...rama_ukip_the/

The smear campaign continues.

Picture in The Guardian of Farage with one of the (alleged) Chelsea
supporters who stopped the black man boarding the Paris Metro. Seems
he is a very vocal supporter of UKIP.

http://www.breitbart.com/london/2015...nto-overdrive/


For a slightly different take from 'Red' Dave Plowman.

I simply reported the existence of the pic and the paper's comment. No
'take' at all.

Just hope you never have to sit on a jury, since fact seems so alien to
you.

FWIW, I do wonder why the symbolism of a black man being refused access to
the tube by an an (allegedly) UKIP supporter apparently offends you?

--
*All generalizations are false.

Dave Plowman London SW
To e-mail, change noise into sound.

On Fri, 20 Feb 2015 12:19:56 +0000, The Natural Philosopher wrote:

On 20/02/15 01:08, Dave Plowman (News) wrote:
In article ,
harryagain wrote:
Something on the telly to watch.
http://www.reddit.com/r/ukpolitics/c...rama_ukip_the/

The smear campaign continues.

Picture in The Guardian of Farage with one of the (alleged) Chelsea
supporters who stopped the black man boarding the Paris Metro. Seems he is
a very vocal supporter of UKIP.

http://www.breitbart.com/london/2015...nto-overdrive/


For a slightly different take from 'Red' Dave Plowman.

IRTA Red Dwarf Plowman.



--
Regards, Paul Herber, Sandrila Ltd.
http://www.sandrila.co.uk/