eBay

sylviebee · ‎05-07-2016

This is a question for those who have used the GSP. I'm hoping this doesn't get burned in the long threads at the top of this page because it's a little different and I'm hoping to get some FB from other buyers. (Lizzie please don't bury it.)

Recently numerous listings have appeared with no import charges even though item cost can be well over $20.

Has anyone actually had to pay import fees even though the listing says there are no added charges?

00nevermind00 · ‎05-09-2016

@afantiques wrote:
I used various EU countries as a point of comparison with the UK. Since the UK is (at least for the time being!) also a EU country, the tax rate should be about the same as for other EU countries. Yet the numbers clearly don't add up.

This is very odd as all the EU imports are routed through Britain and are taxed on arrival at the British 20% VAT rate.

It is double strange that items destined for UK delivery should show no tax, and ones for Germany should show about the expected amount of tax.

I agree completely. I kind of anticipated this, which is why I checked a sample of EU countries. It is a complete mystery to me why eBay keeps tinkering with the program like this while keeping buyers in the dark. Do they think we're not going to notice? The program is already widely misunderstood (or at least it seems to be), yet they decide to add yet another layer of unexplained complexity. Buyers are left to wonder what's going to happen when/if they click the "Buy" button. That's just not a good feeling to have when you're about to part with some of your hard-earned money.

I tried finding out more during a recent weekly chat session on the .com board and got nowhere. Maybe you'd have more luck on the UK boards? Since the UK has its own version of the program, maybe they know more about this and maybe, just maybe, they'd be willing to tell us more than what we know, which is nothing.

sylviebee · ‎05-09-2016

P.B. has done a complete 180. In the past they seemed to be overcharging and now they seem to be undercharging for so many transactions.

If they were overzealous in the way they collected Import taxes in the past they would have ended up with a surplus of tax money .

Not remitting money collected as taxes is a serious crime and even though it sounds twisted, perhaps they're "just" balancing the books.

marnotom! · ‎05-09-2016

@sylviebee wrote:

P.B. has done a complete 180. In the past they seemed to be overcharging and now they seem to be undercharging for so many transactions.

If they were overzealous in the way they collected Import taxes in the past they would have ended up with a surplus of tax money .

Not remitting money collected as taxes is a serious crime and even though it sounds twisted, perhaps they're "just" balancing the books.

Once again, Pitney Bowes is not collecting taxes and duty from buyers who choose to purchase an item that's being forwarded through the GSP.

According to the GSP terms and conditions, Pitney Bowes pays the taxes and duty itself and is on record as having paid those monies, not the buyer. The buyer reimburses what PB pays CBSA as part of the "import charges" on a GSP item. Anything leftover from that goes towards various administrative and customs clearance related fees. eBay may get a small referral fee. Any surplus goes into a contingency fund.

That's why PB calls 'em "import charges" and not a term that uses words like "tax" or "duty".

There's probably some truth to your suggestion that PB has collected way more in its contingency fund than expected, though. However, it's likely been generated more from the GSP's shipping charges than the "import charges".

pjcdn2005 · ‎05-09-2016

Once again, Pitney Bowes is not collecting taxes and duty from buyers who choose to purchase an item that's being forwarded through the GSP.

According to the GSP terms and conditions, Pitney Bowes pays the taxes and duty itself and is on record as having paid those monies, not the buyer. The buyer reimburses what PB pays CBSA as part of the "import charges" on a GSP item. Anything leftover from that goes towards various administrative and customs clearance related fees. eBay may get a small referral fee. Any surplus goes into a contingency fund.

That's why PB calls 'em "import charges" and not a term that uses words like "tax" or "duty".

You say tomato....

They call them import charges because they not only include tax and duty, they include a handling charge. I don't understand why you say that they are not collecting taxes and duty from the buyer...of course they are. If they weren't collecting tax and duty then in the past, the amounts would not have been based on the buyer's location, the item's origin, the type of item etc. etc. There were some anomalies but for the most part the amounts charged made some sort of sense. It really doesn't matter if PB submits taxes and duty in their name or in the buyer's name...they are getting the money from the buyer.

But now there doesn't seem to be any rhyme or reason as to what they are basing those imports charges on. They vary for identical products and in some cases they are the same regardless of the buyer's location within Canada. I agree that they are not using formerly collected amounts to pay current taxes and duty but they are definitely doing something different. In the past, my import charges would always be less than Sylvie's because taxes in Alberta or less. Now it seems that in 'some' situations they aren't taking the buyer's location into account and they are probably averaging out the amount that they collect. But whatever they are doing they aren't being consistent and that's what makes things seems sneaky and very confusing.

marnotom! · ‎05-09-2016

@pjcdn2005 wrote:

They call them import charges because they not only include tax and duty, they include a handling charge.

That's roughly what I said.

@pjcdn2005 wrote:

I don't understand why you say that they are not collecting taxes and duty from the buyer...of course they are. If they weren't collecting tax and duty then in the past, the amounts would not have been based on the buyer's location, the item's origin, the type of item etc. etc. There were some anomalies but for the most part the amounts charged made some sort of sense. It really doesn't matter if PB submits taxes and duty in their name or in the buyer's name...they are getting the money from the buyer.

Short answer: Pitney Bowes can't collect what it isn't charging for in the first place.

Longer answer: To me, calling what PB does "collecting" taxes puts it on the same pigeon-hole as Canada Post, who holds items until importers cough up any taxes/duty owing on a postal import. The importer's money actually does go to CBSA and the CRA. It doesn't in a GSP shipment. Pitney Bowes has "advanced" that amount instead.

If PB was collecting taxes and duties from buyers using the GSP, it would be able to provide a receipt that had those charges as line items. We've seen in the past that it's unable to do that.

I'll admit that it does seem like yet another of my nit-picky distinctions. Perhaps it would be more accurate to say that Pitney Bowes does not charge for tax and duty, but I think that might confuse the issue further for some.

There are some users who haven't read or don't understand the GSP terms and conditions who see the term "import charges" and think it's all going to a massively miscalculated set of charges for taxes and duty. Then there are some who think that PB is sitting on a Scrooge McDuck-esque pile of money based on miscalculated taxes and duty. This all strikes me as being a sign that we have to make clear that what PB is doing is different than what Canada Post is doing when it comes to its handling of taxes and duty owing on a casual import.

@pjcdn2005 wrote:

But now there doesn't seem to be any rhyme or reason as to what they are basing those imports charges on. They vary for identical products and in some cases they are the same regardless of the buyer's location within Canada. I agree that they are not using formerly collected amounts to pay current taxes and duty but they are definitely doing something different. In the past, my import charges would always be less than Sylvie's because taxes in Alberta or less. Now it seems that in 'some' situations they aren't taking the buyer's location into account and they are probably averaging out the amount that they collect. But whatever they are doing they aren't being consistent and that's what makes things seems sneaky and very confusing.

Well, you're not paying "import charges" in these instances, are you? 😉

Here's one possible way of looking at it: It costs the same for me in British Columbia to mail a 200 gram oversized letter to my neighbour across the street as it does to my friend in New Brunswick. Does it cost Canada Post the same?

Perhaps Pitney Bowes believes that nixing the import charges and trying to level shipping charges across the country is one way to make the GSP more palatable. Who knows? As my one experiment using Checkout on one of these "no import charge" GSP listings shows, though, even those shipping charges can change when it comes time to purchase the item. Perhaps I should do more experimenting to see if this is a regular occurrence.

retroman_studios · ‎05-09-2016

Fun fact: Canada Post subsidizes lettermail rates unlike in the US where you pay for both size/weight and distance to final destination.

Source: Local Canada Post Hub (Corporate Run Store & Processing Centre/Distribution Hub.)

marnotom! · ‎05-09-2016

@nvigate.systems wrote:
Fun fact: Canada Post subsidizes lettermail rates unlike in the US where you pay for both size/weight and distance to final destination.

Source: Local Canada Post Hub (Corporate Run Store & Processing Centre/Distribution Hub.)

It costs exactly the same to send a 200 gram large envelope by First Class domestic within Los Angeles as it does to send it from LA to Boston, Massachusetts or Anchorage, Alaska.