Price presentation moan

[Ellis]

As the original poster I appreciate Erik's comments. I understand the problem of having one store. I did think there was a separate UK store or site - I think there used to be.

SOME other responders don't appear to have properly read my original post.

I do not assume my order will be VAT free - I expect the price I see when I read about the game to be the price I have to pay ie to include the tax.

I do know the VAT tax rate.

I do know that I eventually see the price and don't have to buy the game.

I'm not dismayed about taxes imposed by my government - at least not in this context.

My point - I repeat - was about the presentation of the price to me.
I read about the game and see a price. I think mmmm maybe... Oh all right then... I go to the checkout to pay and wow! a different 20% higher price.
No way is that good news...
It doesn't happen with other companies I buy games from.

I'm glad to hear there may be a solution in time.

[Phatguy]

ORIGINAL: Ellis

As the original poster I appreciate Erik's comments. I understand the problem of having one store. I did think there was a separate UK store or site - I think there used to be.

SOME other responders don't appear to have properly read my original post.

I do not assume my order will be VAT free - I expect the price I see when I read about the game to be the price I have to pay ie to include the tax.

I do know the VAT tax rate.

I do know that I eventually see the price and don't have to buy the game.

I'm not dismayed about taxes imposed by my government - at least not in this context.

My point - I repeat - was about the presentation of the price to me.
I read about the game and see a price. I think mmmm maybe... Oh all right then... I go to the checkout to pay and wow! a different 20% higher price.
No way is that good news...
It doesn't happen with other companies I buy games from.

I'm glad to hear there may be a solution in time.

The other countries might have a local presence(or are a huge conglomerate with oodles of bean counters to take care of things like this) making it easier to implement the VAT thing earlier on in the process. Your best bet if you are adverse to paying that extra tax is to wait for one of matrix's sales and buy it then.....I do that quite a bit and I don't have to worry about the VAT.....

[Wolfe1759]

ORIGINAL: wodin

VAT was brought in to fund the Napoleonic Wars...thought it would be paid off by now...

That was Income Tax - and yes were still paying that as well

[warspite1]

What is VAT? From what I've read is it some sort of sales tax?

VAT was brought in to fund the Napoleonic Wars...thought it would be paid off by now...

I think you were thinking of Income Tax Wodin. Value Added Tax (VAT) was first charged in 1973. Its just another way for the government to take our hard earned, but is supposed to progressive (I think was the economics phrase?) - because it is not charged on certain basic items like childrens clothes - but is used for supposed luxury things - so does not dis-advantage the not so well off. Or something like that.....

[Greyhunterlp]

Maybe you could add something to the main page stating that there is not VAT on, that should cover you. 

[ilovestrategy]

ORIGINAL: warspite1

What is VAT? From what I've read is it some sort of sales tax?

VAT was brought in to fund the Napoleonic Wars...thought it would be paid off by now...

I think you were thinking of Income Tax Wodin. Value Added Tax (VAT) was first charged in 1973. Its just another way for the government to take our hard earned, but is supposed to progressive (I think was the economics phrase?) - because it is not charged on certain basic items like childrens clothes - but is used for supposed luxury things - so does not dis-advantage the not so well off. Or something like that.....

That reminds me of when I was a kid working at a grocery store in Louisiana when the state government decided to tax junk food like Twinkies and candy bars. The cashiers used to tell me it broke their hearts to tell the little kids they didn't have enough money because of the new tax. That tax lasted maybe a year before it was repealed. I remember the head lines on the paper. "They are now TAXING our Twinkies! [:D]

[Mobeer]

ORIGINAL: Grey Hunter
Maybe you could add something to the main page stating that there is not VAT on, that should cover you. 

This would be good.

It also seems odd to me that the FAQ mentions VAT, but makes no mention of VAT being excluded from the prices displayed.

[bairdlander2]

Are the prices in US currency?

[7th Somersets]

Maybe you could add something to the main page stating that there is not VAT on, that should cover you. 

 
Everyone seems to be ignoring the HMRC view that it is a legal requirement to show prices inclusive of vat to consumers.
 
I don't (directly) deal with tax law, but from my other legal dealings with HMRC I have a pretty good idea what their stance will be on this issue. I would not assume that it is an optional requirement.
 
 

[warspite1]

ORIGINAL: 7th Somersets

Maybe you could add something to the main page stating that there is not VAT on, that should cover you. 

Everyone seems to be ignoring the HMRC view that it is a legal requirement to show prices inclusive of vat to consumers.

I don't (directly) deal with tax law, but from my other legal dealings with HMRC I have a pretty good idea what their stance will be on this issue. I would not assume that it is an optional requirement.

Warspite1

So you think the Matrix store website is breaking UK law?

[Phatguy]

ORIGINAL: 7th Somersets

Maybe you could add something to the main page stating that there is not VAT on, that should cover you. 

Everyone seems to be ignoring the HMRC view that it is a legal requirement to show prices inclusive of vat to consumers.

I don't (directly) deal with tax law, but from my other legal dealings with HMRC I have a pretty good idea what their stance will be on this issue. I would not assume that it is an optional requirement.

It depends where the Matrix store page actually originates from. If its in the USA then they don't have to do it and could just make you pay VAT like in the olden days.Once you received the product you had to pay the VAT. it might be enough that eventually it reaches the page that does include the VAT and that it is paid. Eventually the gub'mint gets their pound of flesh.I believe the EU law on inter-country commerce might have some stuff about this kind of thing and I think it supercedes the various individual country codes but I might be wrong on everything I wrote though..........

[E]

ORIGINAL: 7th Somersets
I don't (directly) deal with tax law, but from my other legal dealings with HMRC I have a pretty good idea what their stance will be on this issue.

That their citizens are breaking the law by going to non-UK sites to purchase items? *grin*

[Obsolete]

I think you were thinking of Income Tax Wodin. Value Added Tax (VAT) was first charged in 1973. Its just another way for the government to take our hard earned, but is supposed to progressive (I think was the economics phrase?) - because it is not charged on certain basic items like childrens clothes - but is used for supposed luxury things - so does not dis-advantage the not so well off. Or something like that.....

Well, IMHO the vat is just another excuse to take the people's money like you said.... so they can donate their $9+ billion (no exaggeration here) dollars away to tyranical nations like Israel, and the like, not to mention the secret budget bonuses that are gifted away to these governments against humanity. And yes, you heard me right, these are all gifts, donations, they are NOT LOANS. They are NOT low interest, or INTEREST FREE LOANS, these are, for all intense and purposes, just money the U.S. government gifts way EVERY YEAR at the taxpayer's expense. Yet the people let themselves get raped for it, despite the American education is so low they can't even get on the top 10% bracket. It sure would be nice if the U.S. could take care of their own economy first, and put that money into their educational system, don't you think? After all, if they are funding the bill....

Anyhow, before I go on another rant in that direction, the VAT I believe is regressive, not progressive. At least that's what I remember back in Economics 101. The problem is that the poor income family who scrapes by on 30$ G a year, spends most his cash on items which are under a form of VAT. The guy who brings home 100$ K a year, may also spend roughly about 30K of that on similar items, and hence pay the same amount of vat, HOWEVER, the rest of his cash can be spent on investments and other securities which don't fall under VAT and hence, according to theory by the Tax-Man, is getting a bit of a free ride somewhere in there, despite the higher brackets.

[warspite1]

ORIGINAL: Obsolete

Anyhow, before I go on another rant in that direction, the VAT I believe is regressive, not progressive. At least that's what I remember back in Economics 101.

Warspite1

Not according to our Chancellor of the Exchequer - apparently he thinks it's a progressive tax. Personally I don't care one way or another - it's too high whatever it is [;)]

[Lützow]

Just stick to digital downloads and pretend to live elsewhere. VAT problem solved. [:D]

[Obsolete]

ORIGINAL: warspite1

ORIGINAL: Obsolete

Anyhow, before I go on another rant in that direction, the VAT I believe is regressive, not progressive. At least that's what I remember back in Economics 101.

Warspite1

Not according to our Chancellor of the Exchequer - apparently he thinks it's a progressive tax. Personally I don't care one way or another - it's too high whatever it is [;)]

Hmm! Well I did some checking up with the CRA now to make sure...

TRANSACTION TAX CONCEPTS
The goods and services tax is a tax on consumption similar to "value-added taxes” (VAT) used in other countries. It was introduced in Canada in 1991 and is legislated in the Excise Tax Act (ETA). It originally replaced the Federal Sales Tax (FST) of 12% on goods produced or manufactured in Canada and on imported goods. The FST was a hidden tax, buried in the price the final consumer paid. It placed goods manufactured in Canada at a competitive disadvantage for exporting...-

Maybe your Chancellor of the Exchequer should read this:

Other forms of taxation, such as sales taxes, are generally considered to be less equitable and often described as “regressive” taxes in that they represent a greater relative burden to lower-income persons, as most if not all of their income or resources are generally used to buy basic supplies such as food, shelter, transportation, etc (i.e. “non-discretionary” expenses). By contrast, individuals with a higher income would generally tend to use a smaller proportion of their entire income for non-discretionary expenses. The greater the income, the greater the proportion available for discretionary expenses, such as vacations, luxury items, savings/investments.

[diablo1]

Wow how is this "political" thread lasting so long? [:)]

[warspite1]

ORIGINAL: Obsolete

ORIGINAL: warspite1

ORIGINAL: Obsolete

Anyhow, before I go on another rant in that direction, the VAT I believe is regressive, not progressive. At least that's what I remember back in Economics 101.

Warspite1

Not according to our Chancellor of the Exchequer - apparently he thinks it's a progressive tax. Personally I don't care one way or another - it's too high whatever it is [;)]

Hmm! Well I did some checking up with the CRA now to make sure...

TRANSACTION TAX CONCEPTS
The goods and services tax is a tax on consumption similar to "value-added taxes” (VAT) used in other countries. It was introduced in Canada in 1991 and is legislated in the Excise Tax Act (ETA). It originally replaced the Federal Sales Tax (FST) of 12% on goods produced or manufactured in Canada and on imported goods. The FST was a hidden tax, buried in the price the final consumer paid. It placed goods manufactured in Canada at a competitive disadvantage for exporting...-

Maybe your Chancellor of the Exchequer should read this:

Other forms of taxation, such as sales taxes, are generally considered to be less equitable and often described as “regressive” taxes in that they represent a greater relative burden to lower-income persons, as most if not all of their income or resources are generally used to buy basic supplies such as food, shelter, transportation, etc (i.e. “non-discretionary” expenses). By contrast, individuals with a higher income would generally tend to use a smaller proportion of their entire income for non-discretionary expenses. The greater the income, the greater the proportion available for discretionary expenses, such as vacations, luxury items, savings/investments.

Warspite1

Yep - maybe he should [;)]. My earlier post was never meant to be political, but was simply trying to answer ilovestrategy's question and putting wodin right on an incorrect comment.

[NefariousKoel]

ORIGINAL: Josh

How did this thread become political within five posts? LOL

Unfortunately because many feel that the VAT tax is wrong. I certainly think it's robbery, and I live in the US. God help whichever politician pushes a VAT through, here, as they've been murmuring about for awhile.

[2ndACR]

ORIGINAL: Obsolete



Well, IMHO the vat is just another excuse to take the people's money like you said.... so they can donate their $9+ billion (no exaggeration here) dollars away to tyranical nations like Israel, and the like, not to mention the secret budget bonuses that are gifted away to these governments against humanity.

Boy, can you even answer a question or make a statement without sniping from the safety of the Mosque. Your worse than Terminus. His comments are just short little shots, you post crap like this.

How about you go to some forum where you will have to defend that crap.