booze bonanza, political ramifications?

constitutionus

was just watching BBC news tonight and heard that the european court is to rule on november 23 on a case to see weather people can order drink and ciggarttes over the internet from other EU countries and have em delivered to their door but without paying tax in the country their in because theyve paid it in the country of origin.

now on the surface this doesnt look like a political issue but when you consider the amount of tax our government levies on both these products you can begin to see the millions the exchecquer could miss out on impacting on public services and other campaigns like the one to cut smoking would be compleatly undermined when you consider lobby groups want the minister to double the price of the fags to cut consumption.that wont mean anything to someone who can just click on a thousand fags to be sent to their house and thats just two issues off the top of my head. what do the rest of you think, any other ramifications you can think of if this goes through?

mike65

Ya beat me too it! I ws just reading the Sunday Times about this, the ramifications are obvious enough to the Dept of Finance.

Even in this country where the concept of buying on-line is still alien to the majority the impact of taxes revenue will be significant. The whole ramping up of taxes on fags will have to end really and the anti-smoking lobby will get even tougher demanding no-smoking pretty much anywhere outside your own front door.

No doubt the govenment will find plenty of ways to raise money from the motorist and home (mortgage) owner.

Mike.

newby.204

Personnally speaking, i think its great:D , we are constantly getting ripped off in Ireland with taxes, inflation etc etc and with the cost of drink ludicrous in comparison to other countries it will be a welcome break to my wallet. I think if it passes, the benefits(financially) of having people over for drink, chat etc will far outway the pub/niteclub. Dont get me wrong i love the pub but the hole it leaves in my wallet between taxies, food, paying in and then beer its sometimes not worth it!! I think even off licences will feel the pinch with rock bottom prices on spirits!!

SeanW

the government should reduce taxed on stuff sold at off-licenses IMO.

gandalf

I think we have found the magic bullet that will drive broadband to the masses

But Revenue must be quaking, if this goes through then there is no way stamp duty goes, if anything it may go up !

bonkey

I'm not sure it will go through, personally.

If you love the tax systems in other EU nations, you're free to go live there to take advantage of them.

LostinBlanch

They'll just introduce some other kind of tax to make up for the shortfall. Just like they introduced VRT because the European Court ruled that they were keeping car prices artificially high and they had to comply with that ruling. Then they introduced VRT!

Glenbhoy

My understanding is that this will be restricted to the importation of these goods for personal use, if this is the case, could the govt. not just change these to the bare min. eg, currently 800 fags, make the new personal use allowance 1 packet and so on.
I would prefer if the status quo were maintained (and I say that as a smoker and a drinker), as the revenue will have to be raised somewhere else anyway.

constitutionus

LostinBlanch wrote:

They'll just introduce some other kind of tax to make up for the shortfall. Just like they introduced VRT because the European Court ruled that they were keeping car prices artificially high and they had to comply with that ruling. Then they introduced VRT!

i was thinking something similar myself. the only way i can see em getting around it is some form of parcel delivery levie on article above a certain size and dimension. seeing as An Post is a state body they could use it as a figleaf to cover the collection of this tax and christ knows An Post need the revenue. that said theyre supposed to be opening up the mail service to competition sometime soon so that could play right into the private sectors hands.

the real problem for em is business now can import goods sans any tax for resale as long as its from a fellow EU country (which is responsible for the whole carosel tax fraud scheme) so it could be used as an example of a precedent. considering the personal user is actually paying tax at source they could probably make a good case on it.

as a consumer i think its great. the internet has saved me a fortune on goods ive ordered ,case in point a 2GB memory card i bought for a quater of the going rate in an irish shop (thanks Ruu ), but as a taxpayer im worried as has been previously mentioned if this goes something else has to go up.

any ideas where you think the gov. will claw it back? considering our dependancy on it i reckon another tier of car tax. probably on petrol usage "you know , to protect the enviroment":rolleyes:

mike65

from unison.

The potential is for big savings for Irish consumers - 200 Marlboro Lights cigarettes purchased in Latvia cost only €10.70 compared to over €60 here. A litre bottle of Jameson can be bought in Spain for €12 - substantially less than half of the price here.

The excise duty on cigarettes alone is worth over €1bn a year to the Irish Exchequer.

And a number of European countries - including Spain, Portugal and Italy - charge no duty on wine, while Ireland charges the highest rate in the EU.

For instance, a bottle of Jacob's Creek Chardonnay, which is €9.99 here, costs just €4.50 in France.

Excise duty on spirits and beer is also higher in Ireland than in most other EU countries, with intrepid shoppers likely to find savings of up to 60pc on whiskey and vodka.

The ruling, which is expected on November 23, cannot be appealed and will take immediate effect.

http://www.timesonline.co.uk/article/0,,2-2451928,00.html

Just a thought - if the law changes who will be hit hardest? The shops and pubs which have been stocking up for Xmas or the freight companies who will be snowed under?

Mike.

constitutionus

there was a spokesperson from IBEC i think (im sorry she was actually quite the fine looking hottie so i missed her name and position:D ) basically saying the only way business could tackle this would be to drop prices to remove the temptation to buy on line. i bet the vintners arent happy with that one (on rte six one news)

Victor

An Post don't carry liquids.

gandalf

Victor wrote:

An Post don't carry liquids.

Well they will lose the business if the decision is upheld, anyway given how friendly their normal service is then that's a blessing in disguise.

bonkey

from the posted unison article wrote:

For instance, a bottle of Jacob's Creek Chardonnay, which is €9.99 here, costs just €4.50 in France.

Why not look at how much French wine costs in France, and compare that to what French costs in Ireland. I'm willing to bet its even scarier.

Gurgle

Victor wrote:

An Post don't carry liquids.

Couriers do, and on a case of wine the courier cost would easily be less than the difference.

tbh, the irish being the irish, it will all make no difference whatsoever.

You can buy boozes much cheaper in Lidl/Aldi than the other supermarkets but how often do people go in and stock up?

Likewise, ciggarettes are sold at the markets at €20 for 200, but very few people make a trip to buy a few weeks worth.

A few hundred people will start buying in their booze & fags by mail order, the ones being sold at the market will have a new source and everyone else will carry on as normal.

milltown

Glenbhoy wrote:

My understanding is that this will be restricted to the importation of these goods for personal use, if this is the case, could the govt. not just change these to the bare min. eg, currently 800 fags, make the new personal use allowance 1 packet and so on.
I would prefer if the status quo were maintained (and I say that as a smoker and a drinker), as the revenue will have to be raised somewhere else anyway.

Why will the revenue need to be raised elsewhere? Why can't the government just tighten their belts and look for better value for money when times are tougher? That's what you and I have to do.

Do you not see any correlation between the enormous budget surpluses our govt. has had over the past number of years and the unbelievable ways it had found to waste it? The PPARS (sp?) computer system. The land for the new prison. The port tunnel. I'm even tempted to throw in the illegal nursing home charges, the cost of which was so severely underestimated because this government of ours doesn't know the value of money because we give them too much of it.

I am open to correction by somebody with a better understanding of our Dept. of Finance but I think if in year one the govt. finds itself with a lot more cash from any source, be it stamp duty, VRT or whatever, in year two it will budget for that extra income. What has been happening is that in year two and every year for the last while, the tax take has exceeded even the upwardly revised figures from previous years.

They don't care how they spend our money because every year we give them more of it.

ixtlan

milltown wrote:

Why will the revenue need to be raised elsewhere? Why can't the government just tighten their belts and look for better value for money when times are tougher? That's what you and I have to do.
...
They don't care how they spend our money because every year we give them more of it.

Sorry... I cut out the very valid points you made about government spending, which come down to questioning competence.

The problem is that when the government tightens it's belt, that means cutbacks for public services. It's our money and mostly being spent on us.

You are right to question serious wastage, and question the competence of the people involved. However the big picture is that these particular bad decisions, though seemingly involving large sums of money are only drops in the ocean of government spending.

In the grand scheme of things, there's very little that the government could cut which would not produce howls of criticism from those groups affected.

Ix.

flogen

SeanW wrote:

the government should reduce taxed on stuff sold at off-licenses IMO.

that'd cause an uproar as off-licences are arguably the weakest link in stopping kids from buying booze (not to suggest it's the only route or that the high-prices stop them).
If this were to go ahead I wonder what effect it would have on pubs; the rise in people drinking at home in the last 10 years is forcing pubs to consider the once impossible, lowering prices... would this finally force their hand?

layke

bonkey wrote:

Why not look at how much French wine costs in France, and compare that to what French costs in Ireland. I'm willing to bet its even scarier.

€1-5 the GF brings me back bottles from France when she's home visiting the Family. The French consider €10 a rip off price for an expensive wine.

The thing that gets my goat is Irish whiskey is about 1/2 price in Spain compared to here dispite the fact we brew it here.
The Gov don't give a hoot about the moans the people wuold give it it becomes cheaper, it's the revenue it pulls.

Perhaps some one can tell me how the hell I pay so much tax and get such ****ty public services in return.

bonkey

layke wrote:

Perhaps some one can tell me how the hell I pay so much tax and get such ****ty public services in return.

Simple.

You cannot build a system overnight.

For much of its lifespan the irish state has been, for lack of a better term, chronically poor.

Now that its no longer chronically poor, people expect that we should immediately have the same level of quality in services across the board that nations which have invested heavily in them for decades.

Its wishful thinking. We've got the double-handicap of problems to solve and improvements to make. In some cases, we're literally starting from a negative position - the difficulties would be less if we had nothing in place than what we have.

Yes, the governemnt can do better, but never kid yourself into thinking that the governments in other countries are some model of efficiency which is where the difference lies.

Yes, in some cases, the government mismanagement has been disastrous. Then again...its not like they know hiow to deal with money, never having really been in this position. And they seem to be slowly making progress. Too slow, I admit, but still.

The sh1tty services you complain about...compare them to the services you would have had in Ireland in the 80s, 70s, or 60s. I believe it will be a rare situation where you'll conclude that as a nation we were better off 20, 30 or 40 years ago.

ETA: Do you really pay that much tax, though? I'm asking relative to what other countries pay. I haven't seen a comparison in a long time, so I've no idea how Ireland fares these days.

mike65

Slightly sideways thought - if additonal taxes will not be levied on imported booze and fags then what about cars? Would'nt this case if succesful drive a coach and four through the current VRT system?

from Sunday Times

The European Court of Justice is expected next month to rubber-stamp an earlier decision that goods can be bought in other European states with only the duty levied in the country of origin being paid.

Mike.

Glenbhoy

I was thinking exactly the same thing mike, i don't see that any differentiation can be made.
To answer Bonkey, we have the lowest tax burden in Europe and probably close to the lowest in the world. That includes indirect taxation before anyone starts moaning.
That of course makes the PD's quest for lower taxation even more ridiculous, if I'd my way there'd be another band of say 60% at earnings over say 100K, but I digress.

mike65

http://www.finfacts.com/taxfacts.htm

Mike.

Victor

Gurgle wrote:

You can buy boozes much cheaper in Lidl/Aldi than the other supermarkets but how often do people go in and stock up? Likewise, ciggarettes are sold at the markets at €20 for 200, but very few people make a trip to buy a few weeks worth.

You realise that Lidl are paying the duty and the guys down the "market" aren't?

Gurgle

Victor wrote:

You realise that Lidl are paying the duty and the guys down the "market" aren't?

And yet they (Lidl) still manage to undercut the British and Irish supermarkets, who undercut the off-licenses, who under cut the pubs.

And even with all this undercutting, how many off-licenses and pubs closed last year due to bankruptcy?

As for the guys down the market - blatantly, openly breaking the law; nobody cares.

mike65 wrote:

Slightly sideways thought - if additonal taxes will not be levied on imported booze and fags then what about cars? Would'nt this case if succesful drive a coach and four through the current VRT system?

Technically VRT isn't a tax on the purchase of a vehicle - its a fee for registering and licensing it to drive on Irish roads. You can buy any vehicle you like without paying VRT if its only ever going to be used on private property.

Actually, if you're in the market for e.g. an SLR, you might find it cost-effective to buy a strip out of every field between where you live and where you work to avoid paying VRT.

mike65

So we can look forwards to registering a bottle of Malt then?

Mike.

Gurgle

mike65 wrote:

So we can look forwards to registering a bottle of Malt then?

Mike.

Please delete that post before someone in customs & excise sees it:D

sovtek

bonkey wrote:

Simple.

You cannot build a system overnight.

For much of its lifespan the irish state has been, for lack of a better term, chronically poor.

Now that its no longer chronically poor, people expect that we should immediately have the same level of quality in services across the board that nations which have invested heavily in them for decades.

Its wishful thinking. We've got the double-handicap of problems to solve and improvements to make. In some cases, we're literally starting from a negative position - the difficulties would be less if we had nothing in place than what we have.

Yes, the governemnt can do better, but never kid yourself into thinking that the governments in other countries are some model of efficiency which is where the difference lies.

Yes, in some cases, the government mismanagement has been disastrous. Then again...its not like they know hiow to deal with money, never having really been in this position. And they seem to be slowly making progress. Too slow, I admit, but still.

The sh1tty services you complain about...compare them to the services you would have had in Ireland in the 80s, 70s, or 60s. I believe it will be a rare situation where you'll conclude that as a nation we were better off 20, 30 or 40 years ago.

ETA: Do you really pay that much tax, though? I'm asking relative to what other countries pay. I haven't seen a comparison in a long time, so I've no idea how Ireland fares these days.

I agree with you to a point. However I've seen historically poor countries pull it together a lot faster and a lot better. Italy comes to mind.
I'm curious how long ago the EU started pumping billions into Ireland for infrastructure (which they didn't for Poland etc etc).

sovtek

I don't know how much effect it will have on the price of drink. From what I can tell its not the tax that makes it so expensive, but a cartel known as the VFI that collude to keep it expensive. I've seen the price of a (crap) pint go from around €3 to at least €4.50 since the inception of the yoyo. In that time there has been a slight increase in the tax.
I know for a fact that Obriens off license do not sell anything that they don't make at least a %40 profit from. That also explains your poor selection as well.
I suppose being able to go around the VFI members then there might be an effect...but then your talking about having it shipped as well. Might not offset the price a whole lot then...and it's less convenient than popping into the shop before a party.

mike65

Eh? The Poles are getting money as we did from 1973, though the big transfers did'nt occure until the 80s.

Mike.

sovtek

mike65 wrote:

Eh? The Poles are getting money as we did from 1973, though the big transfers did'nt occure until the 80s.

Mike.

Did a quick google and see that you are right about the accession states. Ireland has for about 3 decades then.

mike65

I read recently that this state has received 31 billion euro (not sure if that inflation-adjusted) since joining.

Mike.

Colonel Sanders

milltown wrote:

Why will the revenue need to be raised elsewhere? Why can't the government just tighten their belts and look for better value for money when times are tougher? That's what you and I have to do.

Do you not see any correlation between the enormous budget surpluses our govt. has had over the past number of years and the unbelievable ways it had found to waste it? The PPARS (sp?) computer system. The land for the new prison. The port tunnel. I'm even tempted to throw in the illegal nursing home charges, the cost of which was so severely underestimated because this government of ours doesn't know the value of money because we give them too much of it.

I am open to correction by somebody with a better understanding of our Dept. of Finance but I think if in year one the govt. finds itself with a lot more cash from any source, be it stamp duty, VRT or whatever, in year two it will budget for that extra income. What has been happening is that in year two and every year for the last while, the tax take has exceeded even the upwardly revised figures from previous years.

They don't care how they spend our money because every year we give them more of it.

Exactly what i have been saying for years milltown. look at ESB price hikes. Any business on the high st would look at its cost base before lumping on such a high price increase. Not a semi state tho, despite the fact deloitee published a report saying it was wasting 100m a year due to poor power plant maintanence and what they deemed 'excessive' wages the consumer still has to stump up more cash to fund this continued fether bedding.

Colonel Sanders

milltown wrote:

Why will the revenue need to be raised elsewhere? Why can't the government just tighten their belts and look for better value for money when times are tougher? That's what you and I have to do.

Do you not see any correlation between the enormous budget surpluses our govt. has had over the past number of years and the unbelievable ways it had found to waste it? The PPARS (sp?) computer system. The land for the new prison. The port tunnel. I'm even tempted to throw in the illegal nursing home charges, the cost of which was so severely underestimated because this government of ours doesn't know the value of money because we give them too much of it.

I am open to correction by somebody with a better understanding of our Dept. of Finance but I think if in year one the govt. finds itself with a lot more cash from any source, be it stamp duty, VRT or whatever, in year two it will budget for that extra income. What has been happening is that in year two and every year for the last while, the tax take has exceeded even the upwardly revised figures from previous years.

They don't care how they spend our money because every year we give them more of it.

Exactly what i have been saying for years milltown. look at ESB price hikes. Any business on the high st would look at its cost base before lumping on such a high price increase. Not a semi state tho, despite the fact deloitee published a report saying it was wasting 100m a year due to poor power plant maintanence and what they deemed 'excessive' wages the consumer still has to stump up more cash to fund this continued feather bedding.

constitutionus

mike65 wrote:

Slightly sideways thought - if additonal taxes will not be levied on imported booze and fags then what about cars? Would'nt this case if succesful drive a coach and four through the current VRT system?

from Sunday Times


Mike.

if memory serves the irish MEPs voted to retain VRT in a vote in the parliment stating that if they did away with it they'd have to introduce a tax on fuel consumption to replace it(maybe carbon emmission? cause like they reallycare about the enviroment :rolleyes: ), which sounds like a double tax on petrol to me. some fairly unlikely bedfellows were involved as well. sorry im so vague but it was months ago and was only listening in passing. the point im trying to make is if your right, and i think your on to something, they'll just find another way to claw it back. possibly instituted the day of the judgement and definetly connected to car usage

funny how we've just happened to become the most car dependant country in europe now isnt it

gazzer

No booze bonanza for us it seems

http://www.breakingnews.ie/business/?jp=CWIDGBCWQLAU

sovtek

This is what you get when you "run a government like a business."

constitutionus

anyone know if this is done and dusted or just one step in the process? couldve sworn i heard somewhere they'd appeal it if they lost.
far as i can tell the central premise for the judgement is you must collect the goods personally cause if you dont its "obviously" for comercial and not private use. now im no legal expert but it seems to me someone whos crippled and cant fly to poland to buy his fags in person could have a case for discrimination here, particularly if the amounts are under the existing limits.

this mightnt be over yet

Glenbhoy

Once again we see just how separate the judiciary at the highest level really are from those who appoint them (ie the state, or in ireland the current government party in the case of virtually all our supreme court judges).