Comments about the Global Shipping Program

[kalvin@ebay.com]

Feel free to share your thoughts about the Global Shipping Program here. 

A few questions to get the ball rolling:

• What has worked well for you with the Global Shipping Program?
• Any ideas to help improve the experience for Canadian buyers?
• What has deterred you from buying items offered using the Global Shipping Program?
• How have you managed to search for items outside the program?

Please try & keep the comments constructive 🙂

If you have any questions about the program, please post them here.

[marnotom!]

---

@mwc1942 wrote:

"As for your 6% rule, here is an item that's not made in a NAFTA country nor is the country of manufacture specified.  What are your thoughts on what's leftover after GST, etc. is taken off the import charges?"

http://www.ebay.ca/itm/221422816724

Did not say it was a rule.

It just shows the inconsistency in the import charges, applied to all items NAFTA or otherwise, does it not?

---

How can one expect consistency in import charges when duties applied vary according to the nature of the item and the item's country of origin/manufacture?  In this case, it seems to me that mobile phones aren't subject to duty no matter what the country of origin.

Also consider that not all items require the same customs clearance processes and thus won't get charged the same fees for paperwork and rubber-stamping.

Review the terms and conditions page for buyers.  Import charges are described as variable.

[arlene_v]

---

@marnotom! wrote:

---

Seeing that an item valued at less than C$20 and shipped via the GSP would have the "import charges" folded into the shipping charge, and noting that we currently don't get a breakdown of what Pitney Bowes charges buyers, how do we know that we're not being charged duty?  After all, some of the biggest complaints from Canadian buyers appear to be about the shipping charges for items valued at less than $20.

________________________

Yes, indeed who knows?.

If PB weren't so coy (or is it duplicitous?) about these charges, a lot of this could be avoided. 

At time of purchase, simply provide the buyer with the following:

Amounts charged for HST/GST and Duty (if applicable) and Sundry Program Fees. 

So logical. So simple.

Spell it out so that buyers can make an informed decision about whether this program is in their best interests or not.  Let buyers see that this program is not anything like what they are used to when buying from sellers on eBay, totally different, and best looked at with caution.

This would go a long way towards making buyers trust that PB is not doing anything underhand. Ridiculously overpriced, naive for this site,  but not a scam. 

This program is not going over well for many reasons, but this is one very big area ... the lack of clear explanation about the inflated costs.  

Thanks Bennett for continuing to press this issue on our behalf.

[arlene_v]

@marnotom! wrote:

---

@mwc1942 wrote:

PB makes approx. 40% more off an item thats worth about 85% less all because seller did not mention country of origin.

** item was in fact made in the USA by American call maker Glynn Scobey, therefore both items would have qualify under NAFTA.

---

A computer subroutine isn't going to know Glyn Scobey from a hole in the wall.

__________________________________________

I really would hope that someone at PB has a neuron firing that tells them that on the "odd occasion" it might be smarter to do a 30 second google than to open a parcel, check for place of manufacture, and so on.

I have seen many listings where  the listing contains a picture of the place of manufacture  or even states the place of manufacture in the description, but this is not included in the item specifics! 

Surely someone in Kentucky needs to  check the item when it arrives, matches parcel  to item number, and being literate (ones hopes) takes a quick look at the listing.

We can do this in 30 seconds knowing what to look for. They should be trained to do this as a matter of routine.

Let's say a seller  lists the following "Vintage KISS made in USA t-shirt 100% cotton" and doesn't put  USA in item specifics, but has a clear picture of the label saying "Made in USA" in the listing.

Why open this parcel,  just amend the item specific online when it arrives in KY, and voila, duty paid but now gone, to the great advantage of PB.  If they are spending time and money opening parcels to determine place of manufacture, spend money at the start by avoiding having to do this!  But I suspect they are already doing this, and this is why Bennett states that only few parcels are opened. 

[arlene_v]

Oh, and if PB were "on the level" they would amend the duty in the favour of buyers should this be necessary once an item is checked in Kentucky, but this is not the case. No refunds of over payment as per T&C. 

If they are not invested in making sure that sellers get this right for buyers when listing items under the GSP, you can bet your bottom dollar they are invested in getting it right when they are the "importer of record" after purchase  ....and paying the "actual" charges. Every last dime would be to their advantage if they are half competent. 

Not to do so would be very stupid. 

I know this is off-topic to the issue of the duck, and the calculation of duty at the stage of the buyer looking at the item and purchasing it through the GSP, but really the two go together. 

Andt if it walks like a duck, quacks like a duck ...well, we know the rest. 

So, any  wonder why PB is painfully slow making the item specifics needed compulsory.  I am cynical enough to believe this is part of the way they are making money. 

[Anonymous]

Attention ebay sellers. I live in Canada and 99% of parcels that come through customs are not charged extra fees. Global shipping charges on all parcels. So that means they are charging nonexistent fees. Where are they going? Guess. Also, here in Canada, no fees are charged on any items that are considered toys, hobbies or second hand items even if they are new in original box no matter what country they come from, yet Global Shipping charges fees for these items. I buy a lot from ebay but now when I am searching for a product I don't even look at items that have Global Shipping. I refuse to be ripped off anymore.            the_ghost_of_jane

[afantiques]

I am cynical enough to believe this is part of the way they are making money.

Anyone got the time or inclination to trawl through the last PB Inc accounts to see if in fact they are making any money?  There should be a line item there somewhere.

[afantiques]

http://media.corporate-ir.net/media_files/IROL/83/83377/PBI_AR_2013.pdf

[mwc1942]

"I thought that was a given, but seeing as it isn't I'll also point out to you that that publication you linked to also states that not all sub-C$20 items qualify for that exemption."

Did not make that claim.

"import charges" folded into the shipping charge, and noting that we currently don't get a breakdown of what Pitney Bowes charges buyers, how do we know that we're not being charged duty?

Not likely to happen, it would show just unscrupulous some of the charges are. 

[mwc1942]

"How can one expect consistency in import charges"

By ensuring that the provincial sales tax is applied to all provinces, would be a reasonable place to start.

[marnotom!]

---

@mwc1942 wrote:

... "import charges" folded into the shipping charge, and noting that we currently don't get a breakdown of what Pitney Bowes charges buyers, how do we know that we're not being charged duty?

Not likely to happen, it would show just unscrupulous some of the charges are. 

---

Technically speaking, Pitney Bowes' position is that buyers using the GSP aren't getting taxes and duty on their purchase.  The "import charges" go toward--among other things--reimbursing PBI for paying taxes and duty on the buyer's behalf.

This may be one reason we haven't seen charge breakdowns or receipts for taxes/duties paid.  Buyers can't receive a receipt for something that they technically haven't paid to the government themselves.

Also note the section near the end of the description of the GSP import charges (from the buyer T&C):

 ... this Program Fee consists of charges associated with the customs service described above and is comprised of the following variable amounts: sales, goods and services, and value added taxes, duties, tariffs, excise taxes, and other amounts assessed or levied by any government authority in connection with the importation of goods into the applicable country of importation (but excluding income taxes) ("Commodity taxes"); third party brokerage fees (including advancement and disbursement charges and customs brokers handling and filing fees); penalties (but excluding any customs duties, taxes, surcharges, fines, penalties, or other charges which may be imposed on you by customs or tax officials after a GSP Item has successfully cleared customs and been delivered to, or made available for pickup at, the delivery address that you specify); classification charges associated with the assignment of a Harmonized System ("HS") classification code; charges for export compliance screening and verification and the assignment of an Export Control Classification Number (ECCN); and operational expenses associated with short-term loss recovery and the management of variances between the quoted Import charges and actual costs. Note: at eBay's discretion, applicable classification and export compliance charges, third party brokerage fees, and operational expenses may instead be included within the Shipping amount that is quoted to you.

There's likely some "subsidization" of duties and taxes being paid.  Some of the "mad money" from the import charges would go toward paying for duties (or taxes) that may have gone uncharged by the GSP bot in other transactions.

[marnotom!]

---

@mwc1942 wrote:

"How can one expect consistency in import charges"

By ensuring that the provincial sales tax is applied to all provinces, would be a reasonable place to start.

---

Even if the BC government suddenly insisted that it wanted to collect PST on all internet purchases, there still wouldn't be this consistency you seek.  PST varies from province to province (in the provinces that still charge it) and what may be a taxable item in one province may be tax-free in another.

[marnotom!]

---

@arlene_v wrote:

Why open this parcel,  just amend the item specific online when it arrives in KY, and voila, duty paid but now gone, to the great advantage of PB.  If they are spending time and money opening parcels to determine place of manufacture, spend money at the start by avoiding having to do this!  But I suspect they are already doing this, and this is why Bennett states that only few parcels are opened. 

---

It may be that regulatory requirements are that items presented for processing can only be visually inspected for origin information if the information isn't already documented.  Regulations may not have caught up with the ways of the internetz.

[marnotom!]

---

@afantiques wrote:

http://media.corporate-ir.net/media_files/IROL/83/83377/PBI_AR_2013.pdf

---

Thanks for digging that up, AF.

[00nevermind00]

---

@marnotom! wrote:

---

 

There's likely some "subsidization" of duties and taxes being paid.  Some of the "mad money" from the import charges would go toward paying for duties (or taxes) that may have gone uncharged by the GSP bot in other transactions.

---

This may make sense to PB, but I doubt that Joe Smith in Oakville takes much comfort in knowing that the amount he overpaid on his GSP transaction is making up for the underfunded GSP transaction entered into by Jane Jones in Flin Flon.

Imagine if the CRA decided that instead of sending you a refund cheque at tax time, they would simply keep your overpayment to compensate for some other taxpayer's underpayment.  They would come out even but you sure wouldn't.

This "no refund" policy by PB is just one of the many small things which, when you add them all up, turn into a pretty big "thanks but no thanks" for a lot of people.

[mwc1942]

"Even if the BC government suddenly insisted that it wanted to collect PST on all internet purchases, there still wouldn't be this consistency you seek.  PST varies from province to province (in the provinces that still charge it) and what may be a taxable item in one province may be tax-free in another."

According its T&C, the GSP is to collect the provincial sales tax under import charges, if BC gov't insists on it or not, going by the rules.  But as pointed out earlier if GST did not collect and gov't wanted it [the tax] bidder would be responsible for its payment.   Referring to the collection of the PST, not the amount.  Obviously no PST would be collected for provinces that don't have it. 

[mwc1942]

"No. PB is the 'importer of record' (the person or entity responsible for the import as far as law and taxes are concerned). They import a  consignment of packages.. There is no casual import exemption."

Not familiar with this but noted its mention while researching NAFTA and Canadian Duty.  More page turning or key stroking ahead, so much for having free time during retirement , it doesn't exist.  Are you privy to additional info or sources other than what was mentioned above? 

"These do not constitute a 'casual import'"

Are they then reclassified as commercial goods? Or am I confusing "casual imports" and "casual goods" and/or they the same or did you mean "casual goods" and not "casual imports"

 "no chance of the buyer being asked for more money later."

The T&C's of the GSP states under #3[i] Exclusions, in short, that you [the buyer] are ultimately responsible for any monies owed, etc.   If the buyer is bound #1b.[ii] Power of Attorney clause, why would the same buyer not be bound by the exclusions clause.  Would it not be logical to say that the buyer is bound by all the T&C's of the GSP?

When responding would appreciate input to all questions, thanks

[marnotom!]

---

@00nevermind00 wrote:

This may make sense to PB, but I doubt that Joe Smith in Oakville takes much comfort in knowing that the amount he overpaid on his GSP transaction is making up for the underfunded GSP transaction entered into by Jane Jones in Flin Flon.

Imagine if the CRA decided that instead of sending you a refund cheque at tax time, they would simply keep your overpayment to compensate for some other taxpayer's underpayment.  They would come out even but you sure wouldn't.

---

Any overage or underage is in program fees, not the taxes or duties themselves because Pitney Bowes figures that the buyers aren't paying taxes or duties, remember?  What buyers are paying is a reimbursement of sorts.

Keep in mind that this isn't unlike how the telephone companies used to operate.  Long distance calling rates subsidized local and base rates until the industry was deregulated.

[marnotom!]

---

@mwc1942 wrote:

According its T&C, the GSP is to collect the provincial sales tax under import charges, if BC gov't insists on it or not, going by the rules.  But as pointed out earlier if GST did not collect and gov't wanted it [the tax] bidder would be responsible for its payment.   Referring to the collection of the PST, not the amount.  Obviously no PST would be collected for provinces that don't have it. 

---

Arlene can correct me if I'm wrong, but I think she noted that with the GSP, only GST is charged in provinces with a GST/PST combination, while those in HST provinces have to pay HST.

[tango69]

I have expensive experience with ebay [since 1998]  and with Canada Customs [since195]].  Yes, I am nearly 80 and have been retired 18 years.  I buy extensively on line and very rarely does Canada Customs even bother with imports less than $200 - too much effort for what they get.  I live in the most expensive province - Nova Scotia - and the most that Adolf [the tax man] can charge is 15%.  In Alberta, it is 5% - that being the Horse S---- Tax.  The eBay Global whatever would cost me $46 on a $120 pair of shoes - almost three times the legitimate tax, if the even Canada Customs demanded payment.  Packages up $200 or $300 simply seen to just slip through.  I advise US sellers using Global whatever to remove it or I will not buy/bid.  Some do, some don't.  

[00nevermind00]

---

@marnotom! wrote:

---

Any overage or underage is in program fees, not the taxes or duties themselves because Pitney Bowes figures that the buyers aren't paying taxes or duties, remember?  What buyers are paying is a reimbursement of sorts.

Keep in mind that this isn't unlike how the telephone companies used to operate.  Long distance calling rates subsidized local and base rates until the industry was deregulated.

---

Semantics. PB can call them anything they wish, in the long run some of the money ends up going to the CRA. And if duty is charged on an item that is later discovered to have been manufactured in a NAFTA country, it becomes an overpayment of duty. No matter what PB calls it.

Back when the phone companies subsidized the local service with long-distance charges, they were monopolies. PB isn't a monopoly.

But are buyers really going to think of Ma Bell when they're overcharged? Are they really going to remember they're paying "import charges" (whatever those are), not "taxes"? Or are they going to think "I've been overcharged and didn't receive a refund"?