Actually no, it isn't. It does goes to your country.
Comment has been collapsed.
no madjoki is right.
for example playblink is charging 21% VAT but Germany only has 19% VAT.
This clearly shows they are charging the VAT from Holland.
also if you sell something to someone from a different country in the EU you dont have to charge VAT. (because the buyer needs to pay import tax to compensate which equals to VAT from his country)
They would just be fine selling it without VAT (--> tax-free intra-Community supply) and only charge for people from their own country, though you need to get a signed paper which states that this goods were going to another country which would be a lot of paper work, so instead they charging it for all from EU so they can skipp this signed paper.
Comment has been collapsed.
Comment has been collapsed.
If it's correct that PlayBlink charges the 21% to every European distant-buyer is because they don't know what they are doing. It doesn't matter if it's a digital product or not: "Under the distance-selling regulations, the supplying entrepreneur is required to charge the VAT rate effective in the country where the goods are to be shipped (the EU Member State of destination)" (your source).
Comment has been collapsed.
Your document still states that the rate must be that applicable in the customer's EU Member state, although it states that the VAT is due to the EU Member state where the EU company is registered. I'm not totally convinced about where the VAT goes eventually, it's very strange such distinction between non-EU and EU companies. Maybe it is just talking about how to pay and to who.
Edit: At least, what I said here on SteamGifts about VAT and Europeans who buy from Amazon US Digital Delivery using a fake address is totally correct.
Comment has been collapsed.
Quoting again the handy source you provided:
"Case study example
A Luxembourg mail-order firm specialising in home furniture sells a new three-piece
leather suite to a Dutch couple and ships it to The Netherlands. Regardless of the fact
that the general rule applicable to sales to private individuals requires that VAT is
levied in the country where the goods are purchased, the mail order firm – falling
under distance-selling regulations – must charge 21% Dutch VAT on the supply. The
mail-order firm is subsequently required to report and pay the Dutch VAT to the
Dutch tax authority. If the Dutch mail-order firm has not already done so, it must
register for VAT purposes in the Netherlands."
Comment has been collapsed.
Congrats to Jaline for the most stupid answer ever :)
Comment has been collapsed.
You (and only you) are going to be charged $1 every time you put your light on for no other reason but to make someone richer ? Still fine with only $1 ?
Comment has been collapsed.
we are in EU so that money will sooner or later come back to you Yeah, of course it will, this made my day. ;)
Comment has been collapsed.
Hmm... in real life I would probably try to convince you that you are wrong... but it is internet "discussion" or rather now it is my “monologue” as I don’t find you competent enough to be my partner for talking on this particular matter...
So yeah... I am talking to myself... that's not the first or the last time.
You can try and come back after learning law and economy… but even if you will… I will probably just ignore this fact as I’m not the person who believes other people on internet. So yeah it is kinda pointless.
Oh look at me... I'm crazy enough to be talking to myself...
Comment has been collapsed.
Pls dont accuse ppl who are not your opinion indirect as stupid, referring to law and economy, not that i need to defend my position in that particular case, but i actually study economy at university. But yeah, live on your dream that the money will come to you, sooner or later. ;)
Comment has been collapsed.
lol some people are just so gullible.
"we are in EU so that money will sooner or later come back to you"
Haha classic :)
"You can try and come back after learning law and economy… but even if you will… I will probably just ignore this fact as I’m not the person who believes other people on internet. So yeah it is kinda pointless."
Makes it even better. Look you are saying if you believe a set amount of principles layed down on paper run by people who are not corrupt then theoretically it should come back to you. Then you wake up and live in the real world ;)
Comment has been collapsed.
Yes! Come on, UE officials need to change their old limousines! They need something faster, like choppers or jet planes!
Comment has been collapsed.
Yes... its wrong not to pay tax to these criminal organisations aka governments. We wouldn't want them to stop making all those bombs to drop on people or stop funding their citizen spy programs or sucking us dry of all our cash whilst they dine in expensive restaurants, drive luxurious cars and generally live extravagant lifestyles. How many times have we heard "we (the Gov) fucked up, so you, the hard working people have to make up for it by paying more taxes".
Besides all that in the UK it is actually optional but they don't tell you that, it would ruin the surprise that you've been living as a self efficient slave all your life.
There is no Law (Common Law, which UK is still ruled under) that says you must pay tax, it is an Act & Statute which require the consent of the governed to be given the force of law. This can be given easier than most would think, just by giving them "your" birth certificate name is enough to give consent as that name is owned by the Crown. You can look at any UK birth certificate and it will say "Crown Copyright"... clearly it does not belong to you. When you register something you are actually passing over ownership of it.
The birth certificate name is a legal personality (aka a person) and not considered to have the full rights of a Human being, by using it you agree to all they bullshit.
UNITED KINGDOM CORPORATION LTD.... The UK itself is a company, and what is the interest of any company? To make profit. Even the Magistrates Courts, the Police, The Government, Prime Minister's, etc are all registered corporations and are merely their trading names.
http://www.mediafire.com/?zj6tfwqr6ar2k43
...so please take your Government educated mind elsewhere, preferably the trash can. Maybe you should be ashamed for funding illegal wars with your precious taxes.
Comment has been collapsed.
Do you have a better system to propose, or are you just whining? Anarchist society is a joke that wouldn't work. I'm not saying that the UK is any good, or that my own US government is that good, but obviously there's nothing better that we've come up with that would actually work.
Humans are just idiots in general. All of us. Doesn't automatically mean that those not involved with government are better than those who are.
Comment has been collapsed.
Watch "Inequality For All". There is a better system but while the rich are getting richer and they have a hold on that power what would make you think that these corrupt muppets would listen to or want to change ?
Because something has not been changed does not mean there is not a better system. It means there is not a better system for the corrupt that are in power. Again, don't be so gullible.
Most not involved with the government are not corrupt and robbing the poor to give to the rich. In my eyes that makes them a hell of a lot better than most in Government (Of course there are exceptions) ;)
Comment has been collapsed.
See. I just went and watched the film you suggested. Apart from a few things the film could have addressed, but didn't. It's overall message essentially was that the system in the United States does work, just that it isn't currently working in the way that is healthiest for the system and those involved. The film did not suggest any sort of complete overhaul in the form of remove the entire governmental structure that we have and replace it with something else. It states that there are problems within the system currently that need to be changed, but not in the sense that everything has to be taken away and replaced by an entirely new system.
My post that you responded to wasn't about changing one or two little things here and there within the system, like increasing the tax rate on those with the highest income, or overturning the allowing of those with money to pour unlimited amounts of their funds into politics. It was about the fact that the entire foundation of the system works, and removing it all and replacing it with nothing (an anarchist society as example) doesn't work, and removing it all and replacing it with something else, may work, but not as well.
I pretty much do agree with the general sense of what the film presented. Though it's not like it presented something that says that we shouldn't pay taxes, or that the entire system needs to come down.
If anything, I find it funny that this thread mirrors the loopholes and ways that those that make the highest incomes manage to avoid paying much in taxes.
As a personal note; I'm not a high income earner, but I'm fine with paying the taxes I pay. I try to keep it at my expected amount. By that I mean, like, for example, tax time at the moment, I barely get shit in "return" for my taxes at this time of year, while others who I know get a few thousand or so because they look for every little way that they can get something in their return. To be fair, they need it most of the time. Though it is that whole idea that is used the same way by those with the highest income to get every penny that they can, of course there are far more ways for them, and their amounts are larger.
All the above said, I certainly don't discount all the extremely useful things that taxes pay for, and I think there should be more, such as healthcare, Obama's plan did jack shit imo, needs to go further than what Romney put into place here in my state years beforehand. Then again, the people I vote for are "Socialists!!!" "Communists!!!" and so on, ya'know because they're not one of the two major parties, and of course anybody who isn't a Rep or Dem is a socialist or communist, (I feel like I have to note here that was sarcasm.) which.. of course is another part of the system that really could be "fixed" by voters...
In the end, personally, for when it comes to how much money gets thrown at Rep/Dem candidates.. If people were to look beyond having to vote for one or the other, and actually voted in those "Ind" categories, it wouldn't matter how much money was being thrown at Rep/Dem.
Comment has been collapsed.
You make some fair points although saying another system will not work as well doesn't really cut it. Until all those "other" systems are tried and tested it will never be known. Tax as an idea on paper would work well. What they don't mention is with the corrupt and inadequate running that show it doesn't work as it should. The people in power are never going to admit they are either corrupt or inadequate or really there was a better system for the people they just didn't choose. So we get stuck with how things are.
It is a good documentary though isnt it with some very good points on how the system should be run ?
Comment has been collapsed.
It doesn't really propose any real changes to how the system should be run, so that is hard to say. It was a fine documentary, much better than I went into it expecting it to be, I expected it to be some shit similar to "Loose Change" which is a horrible film.
If it had said something about removing or changing the tax system, then sure, but it doesn't really, all it really says is that the economy does better when tax rates on those who make the absolutely most amount of money is higher, and why that actually works, while explaining all the flaws to a low tax on those who make the most.
Although I do in a way agree that we are kind of stuck how things are, it won't change simply by people voting for Dem or Rep, those parties are mirrors of each other now, it's really just who is less of a burden to us. In addition, people "feel" as if their third party votes would be wasted, but that's not even really so. If people would look back just at 1992 for example, Ross Perot made a HUGE impact in that election, and then much less so in 1996. Now why is that? Well, for one, Clinton was good, I'll give him that. However, these days it's been terrible for anybody to get much for votes as a third party, unless you count the "Tea Bags" as more than simply pissed off Republicans, which, I don't.
People know that their own views are mirrored best by certain candidates that are not Rep or Dem, yet they still believe they are forced to vote Dem if they're slightly liberal, and Rep if they're even remotely conservative. Because if they didn't, then their candidate wouldn't get enough votes to beat the other guy! That however, is extremely flawed, and it is exactly what the two parties want, they both know that if a third party comes in it'll break up their shit.
Now speaking along my lines above, I'll recommend to you; Check out "An Unreasonable Man" made about Ralph Nader's life and career.
Comment has been collapsed.
I think that is right. Voting or doing anything at all wont change the system. It was made that way. So the average people can't change it. The only way of changing it is revolution and that is highly unlikely. You basically have a vote for two evils. Each once in power doing the same thing and not different enough to change anything. Sure they come up with the different nonsense and juggle things about. That just masks that really nothing has been changed just moved.
Now i have to go seek out "An Unreasonable Man" :)
Comment has been collapsed.
Simple solution, dont buy from them. First i dont trust them, that they pay the tax to authority and second i see no sense paying tax for a digital product, at least when others (outside EU) dont have to pay it.
Comment has been collapsed.
It's the same story for everywhere really... Any companies that are localized in a specific state in the United States, a company has to charge tax to any customers from that state, and everywhere else in the world gets it tax-free. Blinkbundle is centralized in Europe, due to EU law, they need to collect and pay a tax based upon EU customers, but not the rest of the world. Makes perfect sense honestly.
Comment has been collapsed.
http://www.sba.gov/content/collecting-sales-tax-over-internet At least for the US. It's based upon a supreme court ruling. Essentially, business is not forced to collect tax for another state if they don't own a physical nexus in that state, yet they are required to collect tax for any state that they do have a physical location in. Most US States that have a sales tax, either follow this similarly for digital goods, or have made their own rulings applying to digital goods.
Steam btw, if you live in Washington state, you do get charged sales tax. Valve is run in Washington State. Get it?
Comment has been collapsed.
Quite right... Now can we please drop taxes from US stores that's charged to EU citizens as well? Steam, Amazon and other digital US retailers charge EU citizens tax because of a US<>EU agreement, while vice versa US citizens do not havbe to pay tax on EU digital products. IMO things are not right here.
So I agree with OP that he doesn't want to pay tax while other (non EU) citizens do not have to pay it....
Comment has been collapsed.
use of paypal credit to pay and usa VPN do the trick
Comment has been collapsed.
Thanks for the suggestions, but it seems there is no good solution (@Jaline: I want to stay in germany :P).
I don't want to risk my "real" paypal account with using proxies/vpn and using a second paypal account (or someone I trust) has the problem that for sending $5 via paypal, I have to pay around $0.50 paypal fees... And these savings of $0.50 are not worth the hazzle. Thanks anyway!
Comment has been collapsed.
UK has 20% so they have to charge that.
Europe has very high VAT 20%-27% and we pay that on everything.
Doesn't matter if digital or not, or if you order from other country (including US).
This is why everyone uses Amazon with fake US address to avoid taxes :D
Comment has been collapsed.
I'm in EU but for some reason they don't tax my purchases shrugs
Comment has been collapsed.
Luckily that the Switzerland in the middle of EU isn't part of the EU! (:
Comment has been collapsed.
40 Comments - Last post 4 minutes ago by PARKWONJIN
3 Comments - Last post 1 hour ago by Foxhack
54 Comments - Last post 2 hours ago by macgamer
12 Comments - Last post 2 hours ago by FranckCastle
93 Comments - Last post 3 hours ago by adambiser
21 Comments - Last post 3 hours ago by Beer4myself
35 Comments - Last post 4 hours ago by TinTG
823 Comments - Last post 1 minute ago by Fenchurch
15 Comments - Last post 5 minutes ago by ThatDave
94 Comments - Last post 7 minutes ago by drstem
116 Comments - Last post 19 minutes ago by Faloperito
350 Comments - Last post 23 minutes ago by Willans
28 Comments - Last post 26 minutes ago by Sooth
19 Comments - Last post 38 minutes ago by Fluffster
Hey there!
Has somebody a working solution to buy from Bundlestars or Playblink as a european (german to be precise) without paying the tax?
I know I can use a proxy or VPN to get the US price (in the sense of being displayed), but I cannot pay!
The two options are google wallet and paypal for both sites.
A) Google Wallet
As far as I know google makes identy checks, so this seems rather complicated.
B) Paypal
I have a german credit card and I have an US-Borderlinx adress. However, when choosing paypal and then "Pay with credit card", I always get an error that the billing information does not match the credit card. I have asked my credit institute and they say. that it does not matter to them what billing address I use, so unfortunatly this is a problem with paypal :/
Any ideas?
Comment has been collapsed.