Number26/N26 Mastercard/Account now for Irish Residents

I've always been charged on the 31st of December.

Anyway, I assume some mistake has been made as this is a debit card and we should only be charged up to €5 per year for it. Revenue, or Number26 ballsed it up and I wouldn't be surprised to see it changed soon enough.

Before you go and close your account remember that in Germany once you close a bank account, you can't rejoin that bank. So if the issue is sorted out you can't sign up again. I think there's a 2 month period where you can cancel without Stamp Duty applying so I'm going to hold out for a few weeks and see how it goes.

Having said all that, I think it's extremely poor form that they haven't reached out to us about this. An email or a push notification would be the simplest thing in the world for them to send but they haven't. Not to mention that there is no reliable way to get in touch with them.

I imagine this card is processed as a credit card by merchants and this allows No26 provide it at such low cost, but puts it a certain category with Revenue.

http://www.revenue.ie/en/tax/stamp-duty/leaflets/stamp-duty-financial-cards.html

Will Number26 issue a letter of closure? Will Irish Banks accept it if they do?

The Irish Government are supposed to be encouraging us to become a cashless society. With all this carry on I'm seriously thinking off going back to cash for everything.

Does that €30 cover both the credit card and credit account charges? Apologies, I've only moved to Ireland in recent years and never had a credit card here so unaware of the charges.

ahbell wrote: »

Does that €30 cover both the credit card and credit account charges? Apologies, I've only moved to Ireland in recent years and never had a credit card here so unaware of the charges.

A breakdown of all the charges here

http://www.revenue.ie/en/tax/stamp-duty/leaflets/stamp-duty-financial-cards.html

Its a credit card (with no credit facility) with debit card features. You could argue the toss as to whether the blanket €30 or 12c per ATM transaction should apply.
They should make the Maestrocard that their German and Austrian customers can get available to us too.

I hope they realise they have made a mistake. €30 is wrong -fact.

curiosity wrote: »

Whatever about the rights/wrongs of Number26 applying the 30 euro charge, the fact that Ireland is the only country (of the ones they serve) that required a note on Revenue Service costs is a bit "Really, Ireland, really?".:(

"We need to make xx amount by year xxxx. Anyone, any ideas? Any ideas at all?"

"Tax EVERYTHING!. Anything that's already taxed... TAX SOME MORE!!"

Can we get back on topic folks? The rights and wrongs of stamp duty are not for this thread

JTMan wrote: »

Number26 now have 100,000 customers. More here: https://number26.eu/1-year-old-100-000-customers-strong/

Does anyone have an email address for someone senior in Number26 that we could all email about the tax issue?

The CEOs is valentin.stalf@number26.de.

Allyall wrote: »

I don't think we all need to email anyone. Do we?

It's only been a couple of days, I'm sure they are aware of it, and may be looking into it. Seeing as any charge probably won't happen until the end of March, we could easily give them a week or so to to and fro with Revenue and publish something on their Site or Twitter.

If we hadn't emailed or got in touch they wouldn't have known anything was wrong. I'm still not sure how things are going to turn out but from some posts in the other thread it looks like they've gone from the "charges are staying" and "close your account then" to "We're working on it" due to complaints.

http://www.revenue.ie/en/practitioner/law/notes-for-guidance/stamp-duty/2014/part9-levies.pdf

(in relation to credit card/debit card/ATM card stamp duties)

Revenue Commissioners Guidance Notes wrote:

Because the duty is a stamp duty other appropriate provisions of this Act apply, in particular:

section 14(3) which enables the Revenue Commissioners to mitigate penalties
payable in respect of late payment of duty,
section 126B which enables an appeal against an assessment to duty (the internal review procedures set out in Statement of Practice SP-GEN/2/99 (Revised January 2005) also apply), and
section 152 which enables the Revenue Commissioners to refund duty in certain circumstances – but see also section 159A as regards the time limit for making a refund claim and section 159B as regards interest that may be payable on such refunds.

Think bits of it have been amended since but section 152 is a real doozy

152.—When any person has inadvertently used for an instrument liable to duty a stamp of greater value than was necessary, or has inadvertently used a stamp for an instrument not liable to any duty, the Commissioners may, on application made within 6 years after the date of the instrument, or, if it is not dated, within 6 years after the execution of the instrument by the person by whom it was first or alone executed, and on the instrument, if liable to duty, being stamped with the proper duty, cancel and allow as spoiled the stamp so misused.

No wonder the germans got confused

pasquale83 wrote: »

I asked for clarification on their Facebook page yesterday and they replied today. They said: "We are on it to clarify the issue".

So something is moving and we will have news soon hopefully.

Good Stuff, they need to be seen to sort this quickly as they need to protect the brand from a sticky start.

pasquale83 wrote: »

Do you have a link? At this one: https://number26.eu/support/really-costs/ they still have the 30 euro p.a. fee

Here it is. I went looking for the old one and it was taken down, so I went through the terms and found the link to this one.

pasquale83 wrote: »

I am curious on how they made the change. Did they go to have a look on the Revenue website and didn't find the updated information? Or what?

I mean, I supposed they officially contacted Revenue which should communicate them the latest rules, not an obsolete one!

Anyway, at the moment is 6 times less than the previous fee at least

I have a sneaking suspicion that that's exactly what they did, because the Revenue site has the old information on it. The only reference to the new charges are in a PDF which you need to search ATM Withdrawal Tax to find, and I doubt they know about that.

I wonder did the agent fully understand. Did the agent get that this as a new second mistake? or did "aware of the mistake" refer to the first mistake and not the second mistake?!

Yggr of Asgard wrote: »

I think Section 123B of the SDCA is very clear on that.....

PTSB messed up with me on old rules.