Vat scam

[grober]

Exposed today VAT scam by leading retailers in AIRPORT duty free areas.
Airport shops urged to pass VAT savings on to customers - BBC News
Vat Scams, people on direct debit being routinely overcharged by their utility companies, Customers mis-sold PPI, Banks fiddling the libor rate, multinationals with their headquarters in a broom cupboard in Lichtenstein ---the sickening litanty of deception and tax evasion goes on
Are there any honest "big business" people left in the UK- apparently not.

 

[Red C220]

Realistically we have two options.

Capitalism or Communism.

Neither of them are particularly palatable but the former is less unpleasant than the latter.

Ultimately the former allows us to buy Mercedes and congregate on a forum of this nature as a result, it does have it's downsides though.

 

[Deleted member 37751]

Realistically we have two options.

Capitalism or Communism.

In their purist forms, they are ultimately the same; all the power concentrated in a few hands while the rest scramble around for crumbs.

I prefer capitalism with a social conscience; where everyone gets a lift. Might not always work but it's worth a try.

 

[whitenemesis]

With regard to airport shops, how are they to distinguish between eligible customers and those flying within the EU, except by scanning the boarding card?
True, they should then discount qualifying shoppers at the till.
They can't drop the price for all.

 

[Palfrem]

W H Smith and Boots don't have two tier pricing like EU/Non EU have in the fags and booze area, so as they don't offer a reduction why should they be able to reclaim VAT.

At the end of the day, the VAT is paid by the traveller and it belongs to HMRC.

 

[scumbag]

that's the whole point of duty free. The Tax duty on those goods does not have to be paid by persons living outside the Tax area (such as those going outside the EU).

However, there are restrictions on what you are permitted to buy so you don't bankrupt the country you are buying it in and also so you don't have import issues at the other end.

Airports however, charge duty free shops loads as it is an unregulated income for the airport. And the airport has to make money somehow to pay for all the services it provides.

And thanks to low cost airlines (and it has to be said, dimwit commercial managers at airports), most of the cost of running the airport is passed on to the travelling public through things like car park fees, income from duty free and other shops and various non aviation related areas.

So you want to pay no more than £100 to fly somewhere and then baulk at the £250 car park fees.

Of course, you could pay £350 to fly and get free parking. (But the low cost airlines won't get passengers, as unfortunately there target customer is those who cannot afford to fly, and the legacy carriers will just get greater yield from those who can, so you still pay the £250 parking fee, courtesy of the dim-witted commercial manager)

Heathrows landing charges are set by the CAA. However, they can charge what they want for non aviation related income streams. so they do.

Other airports are not regulated in cost charges so they can squeeze the airline market as best they can. So, stupidly, they jump at getting low costers in, who shuffle hundreds of cost conscious persons through their terminals and hope they can tip you upside down and empty your pockets to pay for the bits the planes need to land on etc.


The tip here. Know your prices before going into a duty free shop.

(Example. Oban Whisky in Oban distillery is £42 or was last time I bought some. £35 in Heathrow whisky shop - £53 in Abu Dhabi airport whisky shop).

(1ltr of Jack Daniels in Guernsey duty free is £14.99 by the way)

Airports make nothing out of me when I go through them. save 100% everytime.

 

[camerafodder]

Airports make nothing out of me when I go through them. save 100% everytime.

Exactly, I often wonder who purchases the expensive and often over-priced tat that's peddled in these places.

 

[markjay]

Just to keep some sense of proportion... tax scams make good headlines. But 'Corporate pays all its taxes on time' does not....

Of course the system is open to abuse and these loopholes need to be tackled. But not all is rotten in UK Corporate world.

 

[scumbag]

there is also the fact that some of the costs they have to include, offset some of the tax, so in fairness to the bigger outlets, they are offering tax free, but not as cheap as it could be if they were in the streets offering it.

And of course, some of them will be pocketing the difference.

I think the biggest duty free profits are made in Dubai airport. Where of course there is no duty added to most of the stuff in the first place.

And cheap airport shop rental too, but lets not get into that.

 

[Deleted96908]

Realistically we have two options.

Capitalism or Communism.

In their purist forms, they are ultimately the same;

I don’t quite see it that way. Communism has probably never been practiced at the state level with Lenin for example dismissing Marx's proposed collective unionised action (Communism) as unworkable and never likely to result in power for the people - unless led by a dominant totalitarian force. That didn't stop Lenin claiming to follow Marx's ideas and labelling them as such, but not even Marx claimed to be Marxist commenting to Engel that the Marxists emerging in Germany in the mid 19th Century were strangely following a code unbeknownst to him. (Marx a 19th Century Life, Sperber and Marx’s Das Kapital, a Biography, Wheen). Ironically, Marx saw Russia as the least suitable country for adopting his armed revolt ideology, stating that it was targeted at those countries with a more obvious imbalance between the very rich and the people as a whole - Germany, France and so on. In view of this Marx was barred from France as the French govt considered his writing alone as being, in part, responsible for the recent French revolution - Marx largely rejected this and as attitudes changed was eventually allowed access, although lived most of his later years in liberal London.

When Mao took power he loosely followed the Soviet Union and Lenism/Stalinism but rejected Soviet industrialisation as unworkable (or possibly undesirable) in China and in doing so committed China to more than half a century of regional poverty (Stalin, Sebag). That didn't stop the Japanese from being scarred witless at what they saw as the Communist threat and it was the Japanese’s attempts to contain Chinese’s ‘Communism’ that eventually led to Japan attacking Pearl Harbour following the breakdown of talks between the US and Japan over what the US saw as Japan’s aggression against harmless, defenseless China. (Toland, The Rising Sun).

But I agree with your general point in that whatever you label these systems, they both result in the powerful and or influential and or corrupt rising to the top (assuming you consider the top to mean being in control). But that’s nothing to do with the system being practiced and everything to do with the people themselves acting that way in the first place and the rest of us not being capable or bothered to do anything about it.

.

 

[renault12ts]

Exactly, I often wonder who purchases the expensive and often over-priced tat that's peddled in these places.

My daughter, the same one who would present us with a Christmas list when she was young with where to buy the items at the best price, buys her Mulberry bags at Heathrow...and she knows a (relatively speaking) bargain.

 

[MD5]

I don’t quite see it that way. Communism has probably never been practiced at the state level with Lenin for example dismissing Marx's proposed collective unionised action (Communism) as unworkable and never likely to result in power for the people - unless led by a dominant totalitarian force. That didn't stop Lenin claiming to follow Marx's ideas and labelling them as such, but not even Marx claimed to be Marxist commenting to Engel that the Marxists emerging in Germany in the mid 19th Century were strangely following a code unbeknownst to him. (Marx a 19th Century Life, Sperber and Marx’s Das Kapital, a Biography, Wheen). Ironically, Marx saw Russia as the least suitable country for adopting his armed revolt ideology, stating that it was targeted at those countries with a more obvious imbalance between the very rich and the people as a whole - Germany, France and so on. In view of this Marx was barred from France as the French govt considered his writing alone as being, in part, responsible for the recent French revolution - Marx largely rejected this and as attitudes changed was eventually allowed access, although lived most of his later years in liberal London.

When Mao took power he loosely followed the Soviet Union and Lenism/Stalinism but rejected Soviet industrialisation as unworkable (or possibly undesirable) in China and in doing so committed China to more than half a century of regional poverty (Stalin, Sebag). That didn't stop the Japanese from being scarred witless at what they saw as the Communist threat and it was the Japanese’s attempts to contain Chinese’s ‘Communism’ that eventually led to Japan attacking Pearl Harbour following the breakdown of talks between the US and Japan over what the US saw as Japan’s aggression against harmless, defenseless China. (Toland, The Rising Sun).

But I agree with your general point in that whatever you label these systems, they both result in the powerful and or influential and or corrupt rising to the top (assuming you consider the top to mean being in control). But that’s nothing to do with the system being practiced and everything to do with the people themselves acting that way in the first place and the rest of us not being capable or bothered to do anything about it.

.

I always thought that Communists had nothing, but they wanted to share it with everyone else?!

 

[grober]

Just to keep some sense of proportion... tax scams make good headlines. But 'Corporate pays all its taxes on time' does not....
Of course the system is open to abuse and these loopholes need to be tackled. But not all is rotten in UK Corporate world.

Capitalism or Communism. This is of course the well rehearsed ad extremis arguement. And echoed to a lesser extent by the posts following. I see it slightly differently ---as ultimately a choice between societal stability and anarchy. Obtaining money by deception or manipulation of the facts is bad capitalism not good capitalism. The old arguement that the success generated by business somehow always rubs off on society in general rings pretty hollow now. Capitalism once meant innovation and development where people did in fact create new wealth for everyone to share but increasingly it means large corporations bereft of new ideas using their position of private monopoly to extract more revenue from a captive customer base by deception all the while peddling the old adage that somehow this will benefit everyone. Nothing wrong with capitalism but I draw the line at theft or obtaining money by deception. Why---because its immoral and morality --that quaint old fashioned idea--- ultimately goes to societal stability. I'm a great believer in the philosophy ---treat people well and get the best out of them, treat them badly expect the worst.
__________________
As ol Abe Lincoln said:-
You can fool all the people some of the time, and some of the people all the time, but you cannot fool all the people all the time.

 

[Bellow]

Capitalism once meant innovation and development where people did in fact create new wealth for everyone to share

Lately, the money spinners have been spun off from huge government projects eg GPS - a US military creation. Without large state funded projects, where would capitalism be?

 

[markjay]

People being crafty with money is something that exists everywhere.

It has different manifestations under different economic regimes, but ultimately it's the same human endeavour for an un-fair advantage.

In the West is was Corporate tax tactics and use of tax havens, in the Soviet Union is was mostly practiced through a thriving black market and through outright profeetring by shrewd individuals.

Same Lady, different dress.

But you could also argue that this is just human nature being what it is, and that the flip side of this is the spirit that drove Marco Polo and Christopher Columbus to seek treasure in unknown continents.

 

[markjay]

This reminded me of a story I heard many years ago from someone who emigrated from the then-Soviet Russia.

The price of a new Lada was very cheap as it was controlled by the Soviet Government. However, the waiting list was between 7 and 10 years.

The price of a second hand Lada, which was available immediately, was therefore many times that of a new Lada...

The funny thing was that the main reason that there was such a long waiting time for new Ladas was that everyone ordered one. Even people who did not need a car. People just considered this as a must-have investment, order a new Lada now and in 10 years you will have something that you can sell at great profit.

Just goes to show you that Joe Public will always be craftier than those who make the rules... bend, break, or just exploit loopholes, but they will find a way around them.

 

[camerafodder]

My daughter, the same one who would present us with a Christmas list when she was young with where to buy the items at the best price, buys her Mulberry bags at Heathrow...and she knows a (relatively speaking) bargain.

Don't get me wrong renault, my daughter does exactly the same but like a lot of others on this forum I spend a lot of time in Airports and I find the kind of rampant consumerism that is sponsored in such places a little too much for my taste. Not really a logical argument as at the end of the day what is any retail outlet for? Yet somehow it seems worse in the 'bargain' luxury goods cornucopia that is a terminal in any large international airport these days. Its just something that I have to deal with in my own mind.

 

[markjay]

Don't get me wrong renault, my daughter does exactly the same but like a lot of others on this forum I spend a lot of time in Airports and I find the kind of rampant consumerism that is sponsored in such places a little too much for my taste. Not really a logical argument as at the end of the day what is any retail outlet for? Yet somehow it seems worse in the 'bargain' luxury goods cornucopia that is a terminal in any large international airport these days. Its just something that I have to deal with in my own mind.

Research has shown that going on holiday removes many inhibitions - including regarding sex, drinking, and spending money.

There is a science behind it, I won't go into details but suffice to say that in a nutshell this is the main reason why retailers proliferate around holiday hubs.

 

[Bellow]

Research has shown that going on holiday removes many inhibitions - including regarding sex, drinking, and spending money.

There is a science behind it, I won't go into details but suffice to say that in a nutshell this is the main reason why retailers proliferate around holiday hubs.

Not forgetting 'dwell time'. They are exploiting the fact that punters have SFA to do between the time they have to arrive (at the airport) and the time they actually depart. It is absolutely exploitative of every trick in the marketeer's handbook.

 

[grober]

People being crafty with money is something that exists everywhere.

It has different manifestations under different economic regimes, but ultimately it's the same human endeavour for an un-fair advantage.

In the West is was Corporate tax tactics and use of tax havens, in the Soviet Union is was mostly practiced through a thriving black market and through outright profeetring by shrewd individuals.

Same Lady, different dress.

But you could also argue that this is just human nature being what it is, and that the flip side of this is the spirit that drove Marco Polo and Christopher Columbus to seek treasure in unknown continents.

Marco Polo and Christopher Columbus were good salesmen promising untold wealth to the speculative backers of their expedition. The difference is that they actually got on the ships and set sail in to the wide Blue Yonder. Nowadays you would invest in Worldwide Explorations Plc. Their main offices would be in the Shard Building [ We chose it because it looked like a sail- yeah right Marco!] but their headquarters would be in the Bahamas for tax purposes. Chief executive M Polo - no relation as he changed his name
after that unpleasant misunderstanding with the Genoans ---speaking from his New York appartment overlooking the pond in Central Park defended his annual 5 million pound bonus while admitting that WorldWide Explorations Plc had not yet purchased any ships or hired any crew --citing problems with organised labour in Venice and the slide of the Yuan on the Chinese stock market-- as " unfortunate circumstances beyond our control"- maybe next year.