@kxeron wrote:
The difficulty is that a transaction without a receipt is a transaction that didn't take place at all legally, so if you paid "Import Charges", PBI can claim you never paid any money for the express purpose of duty, just the import and that the duty was best-effort, but not guaranteed, as is their actual processing of packages best effort without guarantee.
I'm not sure about your claim that a purchase without a receipt is not legal, but receipts do have to be issued for transactions where taxes were collected. And as far as Pitney Bowes (and probably those other two importing agents I've mentioned), the consumer didn't pay tax, only a deposit or advancement of sorts.
There likely will be a receipt of sorts floating around with Pitney Bowes' (or a contractor of) name on it that has all the necessary tax numbers on it, but that's because they're the ones on record with CBSA as having paid the taxes and duty concerned. Pitney Bowes can't issue receipts to eBay buyers for something that they believe that the buyer hasn't actually paid.
@kxeron wrote:
PBI obviously doesn't want to issue receipts for specific fees to avoid accountability, otherwise if they were trying to actually fix the problem, we'd have itemized receipts by now.
If PBI started issuing valid receipts, they'd be required by law to comply with every cent of what the receipt stated, and would be required by law to process the package and get it on its way regardless if it costs them any more to ship it than they charged because the consumer paid for shipping already and they accepted the package as it was described on the eBay website. The onus is on eBay to ensure sellers are providing information to PBI to determine if the item qualifies for the GSP or not and to ensure the proper amounts are being charged for that item.
I think that claiming that Pitney Bowes is issuing "invalid receipts" is a bass-ackwards approach to the problem. What needs to be scrutinized is the process in which Pitney Bowes appoints itself importer of record and thus becomes the "name on the receipt" from whoever ends up collecting the taxes and duty owed on a shipment. Is Pitney Bowes (and by extension Borderfree and Amazon Export) within its rights to claim "power of attorney" or some sort of agency and remit taxes on behalf of a consumer who is not a signatory to such an agreement?
Seeing as Borderfree has been around for ages now and it was once owned by Canadian taxpayers, I would be very interested to see how it goes about issuing receipts with tax registration numbers. Assuming that it does, or ever did.
Pitney Bowes charges "import charges" not "taxes and duty." That wording was chosen very carefully to avoid mention of taxes and duty. This is why they have the condition in its terms that items purchased through the GSP are not for resale; because they're unable to issue receipts that state that the eBay buyer actually paid taxes and duty. What they probably didn't anticipate was the fact that there are other circumstances in which an eBay purchase can be tax-exempt or the purchaser can receive a credit for said taxes paid.
@kxeron wrote:
I never absolved those two organizations from any accountability in my disputing PBI's activities. But I must note, I haven't had a chance to review their programmes, but provided they remit a document marked as a receipt with each product, service, tax, duty or other fees itemized, that they have done their part in ensuring consumers are protected.
I am holding PBI accountable because that is the subject of this thread, these are not the Amazon or Borderfree messageboards.
Fair enough. My somewhat obliquely mentioned point is that there are at least two other online services doing what the GSP is doing, and one would hope that they each had separate phalanges of lawyers and accountants advising them on how to do this. It just seems interesting that they're all more or less doing the same thing (with the exception of the issue of refunds for overpayments), and I doubt that they'd be able to produce documentation that's substantively different than what Bp-elec1 received.
c!~~_7.JPG "kalvin@ebay.com"){kind=avatar}
