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.

[femmefan1946]

It should also be noted that it is the country of manufacture not the country of purchase.

If you buy a .... television.... made in Mexico there would be no duty since Mexico is a signatory to NAFTA.

If you buy a television made in China it would attract duty, even if you bought it from a Mexican or US seller.

[mp187264]

I think the main point of the whole argument against GSP for Canadians, is the fact that almost 90% of the time, when we receive items from the US by either First Class or Priority mail, there is no customs fee incurred.  GSP thinks they can charge a customs fee every time like Fedex, or UPS would, regardless of whether or not the CBSA decided to charge the fee.  Not to mention that Pitney Bowes chooses to mail items using the Expedited option (this is the same as regular parcel, but for businesses - slowest method.) after they reach Canada, regardless of what method was used in the States.  If I paid for Priority service from the US, I expect the item to continue on as Xpresspost when it gets to Canada.  Especially when I'm paying what is likely a bogus customs fee.

[walker0017]

IMO the whole issue here is that with the GSP there is zero, repeat for the slow learners "ZERO" accountability from either eBay or PBI. If they overcharge you which chances are they will they get to keep the extra, says so in their T&C and you cannot appeal unlike your local CBSA where you can. As Canadians we are use to being hosed for taxes by our various levels of government and really if we know where it is going there the majority of us are fine with it, we don't like it but we are fine with it. But the idea that an American (Swiss in this case) company that coordinates the selling of basically garage sale items and now new items and sticks us with a pseudo-tax bill and additional shipping charges that they lump in with a so called "Import Charge" rankles people as well especially when it then states in their own T&C that they are not responsible if you get dinged for any additional duties or taxes. Kind of makes a person ask the question " if that's the case then why am I paying this in the first place.

Here is my take on this useless incompetently run program that has had ample time to get it's act together but  cannot, when I use the term "they or their" I am referring to eBay and PBI:

1. Is it legal - yes most likely but there are a few grey areas in their T&C;

2. Is it ethical or morally right - from a business standpoint yes in the short term but from a personal standpoint no in either long or short term, it is  a lot of people off;

3. Are they accountable - not a chance in spite of numerous requests from buyers;

4. Is the program fees transparent - not even close, at times this program is a solid block of secrecy and hidden items, US sellers are not clearly informed that they are enrolled in the program;

5. Will it create steady profits - for short term yes but for not in the long term no as US sellers are no longer competitive with just about everyone else on the planet;

6. Has this program improved things - No but it has increased business for the competition and for overseas sellers instead of US sellers, new eBay clone sites are popping up and are gaining traction;

7. Is using the program more expensive - Yes, it can cost twice to three times the shipping cost of a non-GSP item, as stated on other posts small light items should not be used with this program;

8. Will things improve - No, for now they are making a profit but I am willing to bet there has been a significant drop off of related GSP sponsored purchases in favour of non GSP and overseas purchases;

9. Could there be any sort of legal litigation or lawsuit in the future because of their conduct running this program - Possibly, as from some reports they have been violating their own T&C in which case outside of the US litigation is possible, their T&C was written to be bullet proof but what works in the USA does not equate outside those borders, ask Microsoft how they are making out in Europe. Even from a USA point of view the program is allowing items to be listed on it that should not be listed and they have not done their due diligence in fixing it.

Sort of "they knew or ought to have reasonably known that their inaction to correct a known software defect in the GSP seller parameters caused the loss of delivery of items that should not have been allowed to be listed under it causing potential emotional damage to the buyer who thru no fault of their own were deprived of their property that they had honestly expected and faithfully paid for" or words to that effect. 

That is my take on this. Have a great upcoming week.

[afantiques]

 GSP thinks they can charge a customs fee every time like Fedex, or UPS would, regardless of whether or not the CBSA decided to charge the fee

GSP items are not sent internationally by post or imported through postal channels so they are bound by the strict rules FedEx and UPS are.

So yes, they have to charge a customs fee every time.

[afantiques]

sticks us with a pseudo-tax bill and additional shipping charges that they lump in with a so called "Import Charge" rankles people as well especially when it then states in their own T&C that they are not responsible if you get dinged for any additional duties or taxes. Kind of makes a person ask the question " if that's the case then why am I paying this in the first place.

Your other points are generally valid but the tax bill is genuine, based on what information the sellers supply, the 'service charge is only about $5 fer item, and all the tax money goes to the Canadian government.

If the items are shipped through the GSP, you will not get dinged for any extra charges.

If a GSP seller sends direct to you an item you paid GSP charges on you might get dinged for extra charges, these would be normal postal import charges, and not the fault of the GSP but the fault of the seller.

[arlene_v]

What evidence does anyone on this thread have that Pitney Bowes, or a broker, isn't pocketing the discrepancy in overcharges in calculated "import charges" due to the current glitch in programming that is calculating duty on items that should be exempt under NAFTA? I am specifically speaking of items that are exempt because they were manufactured in the USA, Canada or Mexico AND meet additional requirements under NAFTA.

We keep seeing it stated as fact that all estimated charges are remitted.

So could someone please supply concrete evidence for this assertion since at no time have we ever been presented with tangible documentation from PB or eBay.

[arlene_v]

Great post, Walker.

The posts that unequivocally state that PB remits all the "import charges" calculated  under this program to various Govt authorities, are,  IMO, as irrational as those that cry "scam"

All that can be said at this point is that there is zero accountability. Buyers are paying in blind faith, knowing nothing about what happens after the fact.

Doubtless all tax and any legally owed duty will be paid, as for the rest ..the portion not legally owing due to incompetence on the part of sellers or programming issues ... this is all just speculation,  since Pitney Bowes and eBay have not deigned to supply us with a fragment of info on this score.

This much we know ... items that don't have the place of manufacture in the item description are opened in Kentucky, routinely.

Draw your own conclusions.

[pierrelebel]

"So could someone please supply concrete evidence"

No.

That evidence does not exist publicly.

Next time you shop at Walmart or Sears or Canadian Tire or Tim Horton or anywhere where consumption tax is charged and paid, do you have any evidence that the tax paid is in fact remitted to the government? The same answer applies; No.

Is the fact no evidence exists a valid reason to question everyone's honesty? No.  Then why question Pitney Bowes?

There are many problems with GSP.  One of them is lack of clarity with amounts charged by PB and paid through PayPal. That problem creates another one: the lack of system allowing importers (buyers) to claim refunds for classification errors (regardless whose fault it is).

I think that posts constantly implying dishonesty or criminal activities by anyone do not help advance the discussion.

After a while, eBay, PayPal and Pitney Bowes simply tune out.

[micaylah]

Thank you. I was not aware that NAFTA in no way applied here.

[micaylah]

---

@afantiques wrote:

 GSP thinks they can charge a customs fee every time like Fedex, or UPS would, regardless of whether or not the CBSA decided to charge the fee

GSP items are not sent internationally by post or imported through postal channels so they are bound by the strict rules FedEx and UPS are.

So yes, they have to charge a customs fee every time.

---

As long as they are within the policies and law. If I receive something from a Courier, and it's value is under $20, I pay nothing but a signature. Sometimes even if it is over by a few dollars they don't charge in my experience.

At one point, I purchased a chair from the Netherlands (well over $20 by a few hundred). However the shipping was free (I love this Seller); I paid nothing when it arrived! Was it a glitch on Canada's part? I suspect so. And they obviously do happen.

Imo, I believe the GSP charges whatever they feel like by whichever side of the bed the computer gets up in the morning.  I have seen too many inconsistencies to trust it and don't purchase.

I also agree that there are now many other Sellers sites. I don't sell here, I buy. But I do sell elsewhere where it is simple and easy and the rules are fairly clear.

[pierrelebel]

"Was it a glitch on Canada's part?"

"glitch" may be the wrong word.

The problem resides with the way tax laws are administered.

We all know the rules: postal imports valued over $20 are taxed (rate varies depending on province of recipient).

Custom brokers, couriers and forwarders are expected to respect and apply the rules (meaning charge taxes to buyers).  They generally do.

Canada Customs on the other hand, often (generally?) ignores low value parcels on which taxes should be levied.  Years ago they claimed "shortage of staff" (I suspect the decision is political but that is another discussion).

So we find ourselves in the weird situation where Canadians often avoid paying taxes on imported parcels because government workers do not do their jobs while those in the private sector (brokers, couriers, forwarders) do.

That is one major reason so many Canadian buyers object to GSP.  They would rather take their chances with Canada Customs not charging them tax on a postal import than the guaranty of being charged when the seller uses GSP.

[micaylah]

---

@pierrelebel wrote:

Next time you shop at Walmart or Sears or Canadian Tire or Tim Horton or anywhere where consumption tax is charged and paid, do you have any evidence that the tax paid is in fact remitted to the government? The same answer applies; No.

-But they are accountable monthly to RevCan, no? They have to fill in forms for taxes collected.

Is the fact no evidence exists a valid reason to question everyone's honesty? No.  Then why question Pitney Bowes?

-One simple answer - Audit. I would like to see PB and eBay audited for their actions. We might be surprised with what the come up with!

After a while, eBay, PayPal and Pitney Bowes simply tune out.

-I was not aware they were tuned in.

[pierrelebel]

" I would like to see PB and eBay audited for their actions. "

What makes you think they are not?

Is Tim Hortons audited?  Yes

Is Walmart audited?  Yes

Is Sears audited? Yes

Yet, those audits will never made public.

I just don't get why some folks focus on Pitney Bowes or eBay so much while alluding to wrongdoing.

Life is too short to be the world police.

[pierrelebel]

"-I was not aware they were tuned in."

Of course they were.  That is why those threads here were started - so eBay could get a "feel" for what its members think of the program.

After a while, they got tired of reading the same "stuff" and tuned out.  You do not see eBay staff address this issue anymore.  As far as they are concerned, there is nothing for them to do but expand the program to other countries which is what they have been doing.

[walker0017]

---

@pierrelebel wrote:

"So could someone please supply concrete evidence" 

No.

That evidence does not exist publicly.

Next time you shop at Walmart or Sears or Canadian Tire or Tim Horton or anywhere where consumption tax is charged and paid, do you have any evidence that the tax paid is in fact remitted to the government? The same answer applies; No.

______________________________________________________________________________________________________

I hate to disagree with you but there is evidence that tax moneys are remitted to the government in the form of a GST Registration number  and a detailed GST/PST/HST/QST breakdown on the receipt. eBay/PBI have neither.  So no concrete or implied evidence that the buyer is paying the correct amount.

______________________________________________________________________________________________________

Is the fact no evidence exists a valid reason to question everyone's honesty? No.  Then why question Pitney Bowes?

______________________________________________________________________________________________________

It has been proven with other companies where there has been a lack of transparency that they will take advantage of that to improve their bottom line. We question PBI/eBay because not once have they directly answered anyone's concerns except to give the usual canned neutered response.

_______________________________________________________________________________________________________

There are many problems with GSP.  One of them is lack of clarity with amounts charged by PB and paid through PayPal. That problem creates another one: the lack of system allowing importers (buyers) to claim refunds for classification errors (regardless whose fault it is).

_______________________________________________________________________________________________________

I whole heartily agree there, this lack of clarity is one of the big problems they refuse to address.

_______________________________________________________________________________________________________

I think that posts constantly implying dishonesty or criminal activities by anyone do not help advance the discussion.

After a while, eBay, PayPal and Pitney Bowes simply tune out.

---

Considering how both organizations have made this an entire disaster from day one is it any surprise? As for tuning us out, they started doing that by not addressing the issues.

[walker0017]

---

@pierrelebel wrote:

" I would like to see PB and eBay audited for their actions. "

I just don't get why some folks focus on Pitney Bowes or eBay so much while alluding to wrongdoing.

---

Could it be that since they are the ones running the program and have allowed these issues to fester doubts as to their honesty. Any organization which uses similar tactics will always be questioned as to their veracity and forthrightness. If this program was such a good deal, why did they have to enroll US buyers without their clear knowledge, why do they not give a detailed breakdown of monies paid like other companies, why haven't they fixed the program fault that automatically prevent prohibited items from being registered for sale such as guitars.

This is just a few issues they have chose to ignore, so is it any surprise that buyers allude to such type of wrongdoing, no it is human nature and we need to question their motives. As the saying goes "I didn't write the tune, I just have to dance to the music". 

[pierrelebel]

" there is evidence that tax moneys are remitted to the government in the form of a GST Registration number  and a detailed GST/PST/HST/QST breakdown on the receipt. "

???

This is evidence that the buyer paid the tax and the vendor is registered to collect it.

Absolutely no evidence that the tax was in fact remitted to the government.

We often see in cases of bankruptcy or receivership or protection from creditors proposals, statements showing GST/HST collected has in fact not been remitted to the government (same for income tax withholdings and CPP from employees). The amounts become a claim by the government against the assets. The fact receipts showing HST number were issued to buyers is irrelevant.

Now, I agree that there is a problem with eBay/PayPal (collecting the money) not providing buyers with a GST/HST registration number for the tax collected.  If you read these threads, you will notice I raised that question over a year ago.  The response given by eBay was total nonsense. They are aware of the problem but have failed to correct the situation until now.

[walker0017]

---

@pierrelebel wrote:

" there is evidence that tax moneys are remitted to the government in the form of a GST Registration number  and a detailed GST/PST/HST/QST breakdown on the receipt. "

???

This is evidence that the buyer paid the tax and the vendor is registered to collect it.

Absolutely no evidence that the tax was in fact remitted to the government.

We often see in cases of bankruptcy or receivership or protection from creditors proposals, statements showing GST/HST collected has in fact not been remitted to the government (same for income tax withholdings and CPP from employees). The amounts become a claim by the government against the assets. The fact receipts showing HST number were issued to buyers is irrelevant.

Now, I agree that there is a problem with eBay/PayPal (collecting the money) not providing buyers with a GST/HST registration number for the tax collected.  If you read these threads, you will notice I raised that question over a year ago.  The response given by eBay was total nonsense. They are aware of the problem but have failed to correct the situation until now.

---

To look at this a different way, If a corporation goes through effort to supply a detailed receipt with a breakdown of taxes and by chance has a tax registration number as the buyer based upon what you can physically see and have it can be safely inferred that this corporation is trying to be as transparent in its dealings and is remitting that money to the proper authorities. This cannot be said of eBay/PBI/PayPal because their business model is based on no transparency and a lot of deceit. They can say that the money is being sent to the appropriate agencies but with no detailed breakdown of the costs as you would see on any real receipt who is to say if the full tax amount is being sent and unless someone complains directly to the CBSA or CRA with proof they will not investigate. I will believe Wal-Mart if they tell me the tax money is going where it is suppose since they give me a receipt before I believe eBay/PBI/PayPal who do not give anything.

[afantiques]

Buyers are not importing the items. Buyers have no standing as far as the payment of taxes go, and details would be useless to them BECAUSE THEY DID NOT IMPORT THE ITEMS OR PAY THE IMPORT TAXES.

Read the details in the user terms and conditions. PB is the importer of record. The buyer has no more standing than a Walmart customer wanting an import tax receipt for a widget imported by Walmart from China.

That is why no detailed breakdown has been or will be given, and why the terms and conditions are written as they are.

I'm not saying this is good, I'm just saying this is how it is.

[walker0017]

---

@afantiques wrote:

Buyers are not importing the items. Buyers have no standing as far as the payment of taxes go, and details would be useless to them BECAUSE THEY DID NOT IMPORT THE ITEMS OR PAY THE IMPORT TAXES.

Read the details in the user terms and conditions. PB is the importer of record. The buyer has no more standing than a Walmart customer wanting an import tax receipt for a widget imported by Walmart from China.

That is why no detailed breakdown has been or will be given, and why the terms and conditions are written as they are.

I'm not saying this is good, I'm just saying this is how it is.

---

If that is the case when why is it that other companies who are the importer of record do issue detailed receipts. Just because it says so in the T&C does not mean it is right. Their T&C also states that it absolves them of any legal obligations or responsibilities but in reality it is not enforceable outside the US. Their how it is as you put it is slowly biting them in the backside as it has now helped to create competition and force buyers to other sites that are more competitive.

Regardless, this receipt issue was flogged to death pages ago with the same result as all the other issues with this, absolutely nothing.