eBay and Others, Aus Government Pushing Ahead with 10% GST on Imported Goods

bwatt72 on 18/04/2017 - 21:25

Anyone see news tonight am i right that government is pushing ahead with the 10% gst.
I thought it was forgotten about?
On what i thought it said after 1st just they are trying to force ebay.com,amazon.com all big retailers your all familiar with.
Ebay has or is protesting against it by not allowing to buy from overseas.

And other companies may follow suit. So does this mean if ebay and others do this we will not be able to buy from other ebay sites or amazon or other various retailers online.

I hate the fact paying extra 10% on stuff ordered but to stop us buying internationlly will be crap.
I often buy from overseas ebay sites and amazon sites and most items i buy are cheaper or are a better version than found here.
If retailers had the same choice of items and same prices then great but they don't.

What's your thoughts on this.

General Discussion

Related Stores

eBay Australia
eBay Australia
Marketplace

Comments

  • Fiximol on 18/04/2017 - 21:36
    +3

    I was pretty sure the administrative cost to collect gst was going to be greater than the tax collected so they gave it a lower limit. Guess they either re did the simulation or just using the centerlink debt collection system to make sure they get them all, and then some.

    I don't mind paying the tax but it does seem onerous.

    • [Deactivated] on 23/04/2017 - 18:52
      +4

      You're right, it was costed as more expensive to administer but Malcolm is pushing ahead anyway.

      • raging on 23/04/2017 - 22:20
        +7

        Yeah but think of the jobs they are going to create to save Malcolm's job!!!

    • Japius on 24/04/2017 - 06:33
      +3

      I thought the plan for customs to collect it was too onerous so they reworked it so it only applied to big sites like ebay amazon etc and those sites have to collect it, which made it less onerous on the government. Unfortunately ebay decided it was too much hassle for them, and given we are a tiny country $$ wise they probably factored what sales they might lose vs what it would cost to collect GST and decided simply blocking international purchases was easier.

  • Kill Joy on 18/04/2017 - 21:43
    +8

    They are definitely pushing ahead and very quickly with a delivery date in June. The whole thing is unrealistic in that time frame regardless - but in the end the ones who lose out will be the consumer. Though being devils advocate, local retailers will likely see some minor benefit thought not near what they are all hoping.

    • RedHab on 24/04/2017 - 08:57
      +10

      Harvey Norman donated lots of money to the politicians in order to get this law passed.

      This country is not run for the benefit of consumers.

      • PAPower on 24/04/2017 - 13:22
        +2

        That is quite correct. I don't think there is any capitalism country for benefit of consumers?

      • smartazz104 on 24/04/2017 - 22:05
        -2

        I'd like to know exactly what sales he thinks he is losing when someone buys on eBay; no one's buying a TV or a fridge on eBay.

        • duchy on 26/04/2017 - 05:53

          I did. 😀

        • CacheHunter on 28/04/2017 - 23:06
          +1

          @duchy: I've bought a heap of large electrical appliances off ebay, but all from small Australian retailers that included GST.

          Harvey Norman don't like the fact that the internet means that I'm no longer restricted to shopping from stores from within a short drive, but can now purchase from a small interstate retailer who might be willing to sell online at low margins because its better to make the sale and only make a few dollars than not make the sale at all, especially because so many of the small independent retailer's costs are fixed costs. However, instead of acknowledging this reality, HN is blaming the GST.

      • Providence on 25/04/2017 - 22:15
        +2

        Harvey Norman donated lots of money to the politicians in order to get this law passed.

        This country is not run for the benefit of consumers.

        Nor is it democratic when the rich make the rules.

  • Diji1 on 18/04/2017 - 22:25
    +26

    Don't forget: at the same time the Liberal gummints is making the braindead idiots voters that voted them pay more GST it's also lowering taxes on business in Australia as it continues to operate for the benefit of a small number of very wealthy people and certainly not most of the braindead idiots voters that voted them in.

    • Wystri Warrick on 23/04/2017 - 17:46
      +2

      I need to learn to speak Norwegian.

      • Psy1 on 25/04/2017 - 08:04

        Trust me, it's even worse over there.

    • Alpacino299 on 24/04/2017 - 11:26
      +3

      It's amazing when you hear of true working class citizens voting liberal it just blows my mind.
      It's as if they have no clue as to what the party stands for (inequality, class segregation, exporting jobs, cutting public services and privitsation). ie everything that will degrade a blue collar workers living standards.
      Yet we hear the liberal rhetoric "better economic managers" doubling debt? Shit all jobs and growth? Or maybe the jobs and growth was just for parliament…..

      • noshopping on 24/04/2017 - 15:40
        -1

        Labor might support the working class, however they generally tend to rack up more debt, which we ultimately pay for via increase in taxes, the average working citizen pays about $12,000 on taxes each year, I am sure they are reminded of this every time they receive their annual tax assessment. Its like the kid who gives you all sorts of freebies in front of your face, only to rob you from behind.

        • arcticmonkey on 24/04/2017 - 17:16
          +8

          It's the Liberal party that have tripled the deficit since 2013. We are now at $37b debt compared to $10b in 2013 and the Liberals still want to give billion dollar banks a tax cut.

          The Liberals continue to sell public assets off (three more hospitals have just been sold to the Chinese).

          People may not see it but the decisions the Liberals are making are potentially going to really really hurt us down the track. Medicare is becoming weaker each year with services removed since the Liberals took over.

          It will only hit you when you or your older family members need to use these services. The bargains you save here could pale in comparison to expensive medical bills.

          http://www.theaustralian.com.au/news/latest-news/chinese-ope…

          http://mobile.abc.net.au/news/2014-01-06/maccallum-the-end-o…

        • Alpacino299 on 24/04/2017 - 18:55
          +5

          Liberals 'austerity' solution results in the lower and middle class paying for the mistakes of the wealthy, subsequently public services "must be cut" and of course as the wealthy aren't as reliant on them as the poor, all must be well.

      • TRENT86 on 24/04/2017 - 19:39
        -5

        Problem is Labor are no better, remember Rudd/Gillard years? We went backwards!

        • smartazz104 on 24/04/2017 - 22:07
          +3

          How exactly did we go backwards though?

        • 2ndeffort on 03/05/2017 - 12:11
          -3

          @gokhanh: The industry I work in went backwards, they gutted the defence industry to try and balance the budget. I along with loads of others were made redundant as they delayed planned programs and cut budgets. I spent 6 months unemployed for the 1st time in my life worrying, living off my savings and applying for jobs in a depressed market. I never signed up for centrelink though, just burned through my family savings. Despite being the grandson of a union official and labor party politician and despite growing up on a regular indoctrination of the usual class divide rhetoric I will never vote for that party again!

      • GregMonarch on 25/04/2017 - 14:27
        +1

        Both labor & liberal are useless. It's time to stop voting for either of them - removing their 50% chance of winning the election lottery.

        • 2ndeffort on 03/05/2017 - 12:12

          Better to waste your vote on a fringe party?

        • GregMonarch on 04/05/2017 - 02:35
          -1

          @2ndeffort: The problem with this kind of thinking is it relegates everyone but liberal & labor to 'fringe'. We have to stop thinking this way. The only reason those two aren't 'fringe' is because we don't vote them into fringe status. Vote for the next party down in popularity you can stand, that's not labor or liberal. Or even if you can't stand them - to send a message. Aren't people sick of them both yet? All liberal knows to do is tax, tax, tax everything, defund, close things down, etc. and everything runs down. Labor then returns the funding, runs out of money, and starts selling off public assets.

          Both of them know one will get in - at least that's the way it has been. But why do us fools keep doing it! I looked up their pay difference once. i.e. What it changes to when they're voted into opposition. It's not a huge pay cut.

          I'll be voting P Hanson from now on, after seeing terrorist attacks worldwide (many of which get hidden or obfuscated with false info); learning where (at least some of) chobani yogurt proceeds go; and various other things such as that big-mouthed nutter with her ANZAC day agenda.

          Anyway… What's needed is to vote against both labor & liberal, so at least one is not automatically placed into opposition, where they laugh at us, get a slight pay cut, but get a working holiday for the few years. Vote for a third and one will be completely OUT - replaced by the third.

          Then they might get the message they work for us, not we work to make $ for them to waste. Look at how they rubbished Hanson, but then she won seats they said she wouldn't. That's the kind of change we need. Even if people don't agree someone like that - for goodness sake, pick one - any one other than liberal and labor. And put the lot on notice we're sick of their corruption, dishonesty, etc. If number 3 does it, vote them out next time - and continue until these slugs finally get the idea.

  • Azif on 18/04/2017 - 22:38
    +1

    Wonder if it means you have to pay the $80 processing fee for $1 ebay purchases etc

  • Melburnian on 19/04/2017 - 00:43
    +4

    EBay have said flat out that they will ban Australians from making international purchases rather than collect GST on the government's behalf.

    • mini2 on 19/04/2017 - 13:44
      +2

      They already do though (or Pitney Bowes perhaps?) as part of the global shipping program….

      • hopper on 25/04/2017 - 05:58
        +1

        Exactly…. Bought a watch from US eBay seller and then on my credit card i seen this charge. Shame that it was never mentioned at payment screen (only small letters saying u agree with terms). Will be thinking twice before i purchase from US next time 😔

  • isidore12 on 19/04/2017 - 01:19
    +56

    Wait and see, it seems difficult to implement, and people are going to upset. They may want to reconsider.

    Personally, I feel smashed by the economical decision by the politics:

    1) NSW real-estate bubble created to sustain the economy at the end of the mining boom: first home buyers left on the side of the road.

    2) Low rate from the RBA smashed the exchange rate between AUD and USD: any (electronic) imported good is 40% more expensive compare to 5 years ago.

    3) Jobs sent offshore in IT (I am a programmer): salaries in my profession have decreased by 20% to 30%.

    4) Growth of the population without the infrastructure to sustain it: my pregnant wife can't get a seat in the train.

    Sorry, I drifted a bit, but it has been on my heart for a while.

    • havebeerbelywillsumo on 19/04/2017 - 03:12
      +8

      Don't be sorry, it needed saying anyway. To me it seems no party is catering for the electorate with caring intelligent policy.

      • stargalaxy on 19/04/2017 - 12:54
        +9

        Problem is the politicians, Liberal and Labour are all only concerned about their own jobs instead of the good of the nation.

        • chubbychicken on 24/04/2017 - 12:57
          +2

          I would add their own jobs & their mates… who sponsor them via donations.

    • Ahbal on 23/04/2017 - 21:43
      +1

      I notice the horrible issues with trains (western sydney). At peak hours, trains are so packed, Literally people squashed in front of the doors as if they are in a tuna can! Not sure about the rest of Aus, or even the rest of sydney, but the worst I'Ve seen from my use of trains is between Penrith-Parramatta. The trains to penrith and blacktown get so packed its horrible, and they are considering REDUCING services!!

      Honestly at this point I'm convinced politicians live in a bunker/basement with their every need catered to them through tax payers money, they are so out of touch.

    • Windows7forever on 24/04/2017 - 02:28
      +1

      The world is changing too quickly…

      • chubbychicken on 24/04/2017 - 13:00
        +1

        Changing for the worse.. Yes.. This is why Brexit, Trump and soon to be France are moving away from globalisation (in theory).

    • callum9999 on 24/04/2017 - 15:11
      -4

      How on earth is it difficult to implement? Amazon,through their logistics firm, has tax collection systems in place, they literally just need to add in an extra category for GST. Simply adding 10% to the bill for mailing addresses in Australia for the rest of them is not particularly difficult for major tech firms to work out either. Its amusing how so many people are standing up for the rights of the some of the biggest capitalist entities on the planet in the name of protesting against the capitalist government…

      As for the rest, you do realise you're whining about jobs going overseas while also whining about measures that are partly aimed at stopping jobs going overseas (or do you only care about your profession)? You seem to want only the benefits of globalisation without the downsides, which is impossible.

      As for your pregnant wife not being able to get a seat on the train, I don't believe it (unless she isn't visibly pregnant and won't ask anyone to move?) but regardless, that would be down to the selfish people in your area, not politicians.

      • kipps on 25/04/2017 - 14:36

        This comment is so hopelessly ignorant it is amazing. So they "add a line" and add 10% to the purchase price. How does the ATO know they will remit? There are very very few mutual tax collection treaties, so then they are left hoping that the overseas supplier will both report and remit, with no consequences for non-compliance.

        • callum9999 on 25/04/2017 - 15:14

          If there are no consequences for non-compliance, why exactly would they block Australian buyers? Talk about hopelessly ignorant… (A comment I'm always happy to accept if it's explained WHY - I sure use it enough when describing others!)

      • lostn on 25/04/2017 - 22:01

        As for your pregnant wife not being able to get a seat on the train, I don't believe it (unless she isn't visibly pregnant and won't ask anyone to move?) but regardless, that would be down to the selfish people in your area, not politicians.

        She shouldn't have to. He is saying that trains are so crowded now because they can't keep up with the population growth. But you are correct that many people are inconsiderate, especially kids. Small kids with their parents who each occupy their own seat.

        • callum9999 on 26/04/2017 - 17:57

          I have no idea why so many people have such ridiculous expectations of trains. Can you name a single metro system on the planet that doesn't fill up at peak times?

        • lostn on 27/04/2017 - 00:18

          @callum9999: It's not just that. The trains are crap, run late a lot, and there are long gaps between trains. In other first class cities like Tokyo, yes it's still packed, but they don't run late, and they have one every few minutes. It's worth noting they are the biggest city in the world, so being packed is to be expected. Melbourne, the most "livable" city in the world, doesn't have that excuse. They aren't getting more trains during peak hours as they should.

        • callum9999 on 27/04/2017 - 06:55

          @lostn: If you think you can just add more trains in peak time, your expectations are far too high as I said before - rail networks don't work like that. You'll find that would most likely require extensive, disruptive and expensive signalling upgrades to allow greater frequencies - do you want to pay for that?

          And give me Melbourne's metro over Tokyos mesh of private lines all charging different (and comparatively expensive) fares any day!

        • lostn on 29/04/2017 - 09:16

          @callum9999: It would require better planning than the country or state put in years ago. Same with the road infrastructure.

          The criticism isn't that they're not spending money on upgrades. It's that they screwed up the planning too long ago and lacked the foresight to build the infrastructure we'd some day need, and then allowed population growth to spiral beyond what the infrastructure is capable of handling.

          In other words, too much population growth.

    • noshopping on 24/04/2017 - 15:43
      +2

      The general public have absorbed the increase living costs and wage freezes in recent times because most households have a huge buffer due to easy lending standards (a.k.a interest only loans). This is now a thing of the past as ARPA has cracked down hard and will continue to do so. I foresee lots of money related stress issues for many households in the near future when they come to renew their IO loans and find the situation "tricky".

    • Alpacino299 on 24/04/2017 - 19:00
      +4

      Pretty much nailed it, I mean there's no reason why a city like Melbourne shouldn't have a trainline to it's airport.

      • smartazz104 on 24/04/2017 - 22:08

        The taxi industry wouldn't like it.

      • drdoug on 25/04/2017 - 00:28
        +2

        The infrastructure cost is prohibitive, especially as it would be for holiday makers, who can get the Airport Bus. Business people wouldn't use it, they think it is beneath them.

        Also don't forget it will not be a normal price ticket. Look at Sydney it costs much more to take the train to the Airport than to Mascot and they are next to each other. It will cost the same as the Airport bus plus the fare to the city if you aren't there already.

        Don't bother saying what you think it should be, this is how it would be, plus the massive cost to other projects that it would replace.

  • Halo375 on 19/04/2017 - 09:32
    +5

    If this did go ahead and eBay did ban Australians from buying internationally…. do you really think that would stop Chinese suppliers from selling to Australia? Wouldn't it be as simple as creating a new store account for Australia, listing the goods as in Australia but then fulfilling the order from China secretly?

    • iridiumstem on 19/04/2017 - 09:34
      +13

      Aliexpress probably will get some boost in sales.

      • Silvertonguedmenace on 23/04/2017 - 16:03

        Not if they follow suit, which they've indicated is the most likely scenario. Pretty much any online marketplace we use, will bar us, because our $ is not worth the inconvenience on a global scale!

        • iridiumstem on 23/04/2017 - 16:36

          Eh, I don't know. I wasn't certain whether Aliexpress will join in, or more likely, whether people on Aliexpress will follow the law, not circumvent in some other ways.

          Anyways, just adding GST wouldn't be too hard, would it? I am sure other countries have GST or something similar on their imported goods. Is it because Australian government wants those companies to collect it on their behalf? Amazon does that to countries that collect taxes if I remember correctly. What would be so difficult?

        • Silvertonguedmenace on 23/04/2017 - 16:51
          +1

          @Oversimplified: The issue right now is that eBay does not actually ever handle any of the monetary transactions, the moneys paid by the end user go directly to the seller. The seller being one of many thousands of different retailers. Amazon can effectively do this because their business model is vastly different wherein payments are handled through amazon and payment thereafter is handed to the seller. They control the monetary transaction. eBay and AlliExpress do not, as they are marketplaces not standalone retailers.

          A total overhaul of payment systems across their global pages would be necessary to even come close to what's needed to implement GST. Which would cost the business more money and open them up to more global GST requests than the Australian export market is worth. In any case, I have a feeling Aliexpress will follow eBay in their determination, to the detriment of the end user. The tax garnered from this measure is negligible (especially after the cost of enforcement is factored in), the loss of competitiveness to the consumer is priceless. As usual the consumers get shafted, the big retail conglomorates that control Australian Markets win.

        • iridiumstem on 23/04/2017 - 17:14

          @Silvertonguedmenace: I see, I see. I'd assume other countries tax them by taxing the consumer instead then (thus negating the needs for the companies to collect money).

        • smartazz104 on 24/04/2017 - 22:10

          Someone help me follow: if you buy on Aliexpress, the sale is made overseas is it not? How can GST be charged on a sale that occurs overseas?

        • drdoug on 25/04/2017 - 00:50
          +1

          @gokhanh:
          As long as you don't bring the item into Oz it wont be, but GST is applied to all imports $1000 and above at the moment and the mechanism is in place to collect it already, try buying something over $1000 and see how GST is added. Any business selling an item overseas cannot ship it here without the GST being paid if it is due.

          If they do it wont get past customs. You may not realise it, but everything arriving from overseas goes via customs and if it arrives without GST being paid it will be held until someone pays it or it is auctioned to recover the GST. In the case of Ebay sales, the government will say they are the importing agent and will hold them liable for collecting the GST if the seller doesn't.

          Since the import duty system was dismantled it has only GST that has been collected (also excise on some items like tobacco) It was deemed that it would not be cost effective to bother with sales under $1000, but if they do lower it to zero it will just be more hold ups in customs and possibly a good time to go to the customs auctions.

          BTW: currently it is not items $1000 and above, it is the total of the package being imported, so if you import two items of $500+ each in one purchase you pay GST on them.

          If Ebay cut off imports then they may be cutting their own throats, especially if local sellers put their prices up and I bet they will.

    • ezarc on 24/04/2017 - 11:16
      +7

      They already do this although not to avoid fees.

      I had a eBay store and was importing electronics and tools, it was a little more expensive to buy from me due to a small profit and local shipping costing about $8.50. People would buy something they needed faster from me and I was only making a few dollars here and there as a hobby.

      Where as the Chinese government subsidises postage for economic growth and its dirt cheap from there, what I noticed was a lot of items I was selling started being sold from "Darwin, NT" with free postage even for about the same price I was buying for in the first place. I found that all those items and many more from multiple sellers were all being sent from China but listed as they are in Australia just to get more sales from people that thought they would get their item sooner or wanted to support Australians.

      I reported it to eBay many times and just got a automated generic reply every time, I have also reported sellers for having multiple stores selling the same items which isn't allowed and they don't do anything about that either because they will lose money if they close down a store and assume they don't care about breaking the terms of service if eBay are profiting from it.

      Anyway more to the point, listing something as in Australia and then getting sent from overseas isn't only bad for Australian sellers but also bad for the buyers that were expecting to get what they paid for in a couple of days rather than in a month or more.

      I see this becoming more of a problem if they use it to dodge the 10% tax or international shipping ban.

  • chumbucket on 23/04/2017 - 07:55
    Merged from GST Threshold to Be Lowered to Zero on Imports Via eBay, Amazon, Alibaba etc. Australia may be Geoblocked from eBay.

    This has appeared previously, but with the deadline looming thought it may be time to bring this back.

    As title suggests, proposed changes will make any purchase outside of Australia subject to GST if send to Aus.

    …the new laws, which require all offshore retailers with a GST turnover of $75,000 or more who sell anything to an Australian to register and remit the tax to the Australian Taxation Office.

    It is set to start from July 1, but from what I've read, its easier for eBay, Amazon and AliBaba to just IP block Australians, than actually implement the tax into their purchase system in such a short time frame.

    See Articles:
    Online giants eBay, Amazon, Alibaba and Etsy lash out over tax

    'Amazon' tax faces Senate inquiry
    and the most concerning:
    eBay threatens to block Australian customers in response to 'Amazon' tax

    If Australia becomes Geoblocked from Giant offshore retailers (where a large number of OzBargains are found), what happens then?
    Pay more for the outstanding service that local retail giants are well known for?

    My biggest concern is that it may drive consumers to shop at smaller/riskier online stores to save, then by effect lose their buyer protection offered by eBay and Alibaba.

    • singingwolf on 23/04/2017 - 09:13
      +21

      I will continue to buy from O/S using my US address and have stuff forwarded here. I ain't paying no GST! Ridiculous idea. I hope Amazon come here and smash Harvey Norman for his sins.

      • derek324 on 23/04/2017 - 10:09

        I agree, the idea is ridiculous, however depending on how it is implemented, your solution won't work either. Goods will not be released to you unless you pay GST. This approach requires considerable increase of manual handling, more people, more bureaucracy, more time… my guess is that only more expensive goods will be checked (laptops, etc.). Amazon is coming very soon (see recent announcements), but of course all goods sold by Amazon Australia will have GST added by Amazon Aus.

      • Mika1234 on 23/04/2017 - 11:28
        -5

        Say what you will about HN, but they employ thousands of australians and pay significant australian taxes. Not sure why any australian would will them to failure. If you dont like their prices dont shop there, I sure dont.

        • derek324 on 23/04/2017 - 13:19
          +4

          This is absolutely correct, but so is Aldi which Gery Harvey attacked many times using plain silly arguments. When Amazon comes to Aus (very soon) they will also employ many local people.

        • cwongtech on 23/04/2017 - 14:46
          +6

          they employ thousands of australians and pay significant australian taxes.

          If the taxes were used responsibly and for the Australian public's benefit I would agree.
          However, I don't think $5000 helicopter rides are justified as "responsible".

          Also paying more to "buy local" for the same product made in the same factory overseas, just to "support" substandard staff is stupid. You're paying money to keep useless people to stay being useless.

        • Mika1234 on 23/04/2017 - 19:00

          @cwongtech:

          Youll end up paying more if theyre unemployed.

          Not sure how the way taxes are spent is HNs fault either…

        • Mika1234 on 23/04/2017 - 19:11
          -1

          @derek324:

          True. There are just so many people here seem to be frothing at the mouth at seeing an australian retailer go under. I dont get it.

        • cwongtech on 23/04/2017 - 19:53

          @Mika1234:

          Youll end up paying more if theyre unemployed

          They can go be employed at something they're more efficient at, with that level of customer service. Maybe sanitary services?
          We already pay more for $5000 helicopter rides.

          There are just so many people here seem to be frothing at the mouth at seeing an australian retailer go under. I dont get it.

          I think its only the ones with a bad reputation of bad practices.
          Would you like to see United Airlines be rewarded for their actions?

          Not sure how the way taxes are spent is HNs fault either…

          The point is this: I don't think anyone minds paying tax as long as its being used in the correct way. When things like the helicopter rides happen, then we lose trust.

        • smartazz104 on 24/04/2017 - 22:14
          +2

          @Mika1234: People didn't care when we have lost actual manufactures; car manufactures (granted who's parent companies are overseas) who employed people to actually build something here have stopped and hardly anyone bats an eyelid because now that they can buy an imported Korean/Japanese/whatever car for the same price(!) as before; why should we care if HN goes under and suddenly they can't flog us an imported TV? What can people buy from eBay that impacts Gerry Harvey so much?

        • Mika1234 on 25/04/2017 - 10:13

          @gokhanh:

          Because the car manufacturing industry was hugely subsidised by the australian government. People knew it wasnt sustainable.

          And obviously they did care because of those years (decades) of subsidies.

          All this does is level the playing field for Australian businesses against importers.

          I agree the threshold of $0 and the timing are moronic.

        • Mika1234 on 25/04/2017 - 10:16
          -2

          @cwongtech:

          Again, zero to do with harvey norman. Your taxes contributed to that helicopter ride too.

        • smartazz104 on 25/04/2017 - 11:17

          @Mika1234: I wonder what the comparison is between car manufacturer subsidies (which most countries provide for their car manufacturers, yet apparently we are too special) vs. welfare payments for those unable to move into other industries.

        • 2ndeffort on 03/05/2017 - 12:47

          Because protectionism or using our laws and taxes to prop up a non competitive business just because they employ a few locals is madness. When Gerry Harvey was importing cheap overseas whitegoods to undercut the local manufacturers he didnt give a stuff about local jobs, now he has run the locals out of town and he is the biggest local retailer he suddenly develops a conscience? Give me a spell! Same with the car manufacturers. Our taxes were being handed straight to the multinationals so they could use a 'management fee' to justify sending their annual profits off to Tokyo or Detroit. All under the banner of being a 'local manufacturer'. As soon as the subsidies were dropped they…not the government but the companies decided to shut up shop. As soon as the free government money dried up and the free cheques stopped arriving the car barons pulled up stumps. The sorts of businesses that the government should be supporting are those that will create internationally competitive jobs in industries that will eventually be profitable enough not to need any help from the government. it is one thing to give a kickstart to a local industry, another to prop up a failing system using everyone else's $$.

          Propping up something non competitive because it protects a few locals is never a good idea. All you are doing is delaying the inevitable.

      • EightImmortals on 23/04/2017 - 11:49
        +1

        What is the cost/reward price for that to be economical?
        Freight from the U.S. would be much higher than GST for most of the stuff I buy.

    • hell0 on 23/04/2017 - 09:16
      +1

      It will be annoying to not be able to be walled off but there are work-arounds…

      However, with the amount of imports it wouldn't be bad to get some revenue otherwise we will pay the price in the future.

      Also, Gery Harvey has no credibility after I saw his sales assistant push a lady into using Flexi-rent for a $1000 video game console package deal. They are no better than Radio-Rentals/Cash Converters.

      • Diji1 on 23/04/2017 - 09:27
        +16

        with the amount of imports it wouldn't be bad to get some revenue otherwise we will pay the price in the future.

        Australia's top 500 businesses by market cap pay an average of 2% tax with the top 300 making up almost none of that 2%. The Australian gummints continues to lower taxes on businesses while making up horseshit about how we're running out of tax dollars and so much poorer individuals must pay GST on trivial items.

        Aren't you sick of paying tax while Australia's wealthiest continue to pay almost none?

        • [Deactivated] on 23/04/2017 - 11:37
          -2

          Lower tax for Australian Run business I am all for
          Our tax dollars are being wasted on welfare + immigration + hand outs
          The real truth is, we shouldn't be throwing millions away in handouts and actually keeping the money in our country not offloading 100+ milion to other countries which gets used by the dodgy goverments and their people never see it anyway

          My own business should be getting a tax cut, I work hard running my own business, I should be able to pay less in tax
          I do agree that Apple + Microsoft should pay more in tax and absolutely think its bullsh!t that they get away with it

          • try2bhelpful on 23/04/2017 - 14:58
            +3

            @[Deactivated]: People work hard in the jobs all over the place, but they aren't getting a tax cut, so why should you? I'm sick of businesses, particularly large ones like Amazon, doing all sorts of dodgies so they can minimise their tax. These guys brought this on themselves - why should they be allowed to not pay tax when onshore companies have to. Especially when onshore companies employ onshore people.

          • Silvertonguedmenace on 23/04/2017 - 15:19
            +1

            @[Deactivated]: @try2bhelpful: This is exactly the rhetoric that will dig our graves regarding the free market. The monopoly that the retail giants already command here was the reason for the exorbitant pricing on all our goods prior to the age of Ebay and others. Be thankful for the wholesalers in other countries who were able to supply their goods to us at near to cost price, it gave many small businesses a chance to flourish.

            I personally know 4 businesses in the electrical repair, small goods retailers and clothing businesses that will be forced out of business (along with their 50+ AUSTRALIAN employees) as a direct result of this change if it gets implemented. It is imperative to not just sweep everyone into the same bucket, because Gerry Harvey and our shambles of economic government say so.

            Thought I should clarify, forced out of business as it will be unprofitable to remain competitive in this environment

          • try2bhelpful on 23/04/2017 - 17:11
            +1

            @[Deactivated]: @Silvertonguedmenace: You still haven't explained to me why people who provide goods shipped from overseas shouldn't be subject to the same taxes as the people who provide the goods onshore. Surely there are more people employed by onshore providers than offshore ones. Are these companies only profitable because they aren't paying the taxes they should be?

          • [Deactivated] on 23/04/2017 - 20:13

            @[Deactivated]: @try2bhelpful:

            Really…?

            Enjoy your overpriced goods when this bullshit tax gets implemented
            Ill ensure I pass ALL my costs on to you, why should I get slugged trying to make a life for myself

            On shore companies have sacked all but a few of the minority, most companies employ 457 VISA employees, pay below average wages and cut corners, plenty of evidence of this too, but you know "on shore" companies employ "on shore" aussies, good one.

            My prices go up, the costs get passed onto the customer, I am in a niche market and can assure you now you have no bloody idea about running a business by your comments which are not only insulting but really rude.

            Big companies should pay Tax, but LOCAL COMPANIES like ME should not be getting SLUGGED and tarnished with the same brush.

          • try2bhelpful on 24/04/2017 - 10:31

            @[Deactivated]: @shawncro 222: All companies should be paying their tax. It sounds like you are currently using a loophole that they are considering closing and this seems to be your business model. I'm sorry you find that insulting, but I'm insulted when people don't pay their taxes and my wage fills the gap. The 457 Visa rort also needs to be closed as well. It should only be used so that onshore people can be trained up to do the jobs, not as a way of bringing down the wages of people already here. Companies using these Visas should be put through the hoops to prove the offshore people are absolutely necessary and also prove they are using these people to improve the knowledge onshore.

      • chumbucket on 23/04/2017 - 10:02
        +2

        Gerry still has some push upstairs. He is pretty much the reason this is happening.
        Even with GST, most OS sellers are still going to under cut his ridiculous mark ups.

        • WT on 23/04/2017 - 10:28
          +1

          too bad it wont make a difference to his bottom line.

    • poboy on 23/04/2017 - 09:41
      +3

      We're currently in the posturing phase of negotiation.

    • holdenmg on 23/04/2017 - 09:48
      +28

      Can't OzB form a Co-op, Register as a Exempt Non-Profit or form a Religion?

      (All Hail, Scotty). lol

      • chumbucket on 23/04/2017 - 10:03
        +5

        '+' This

      • johnn on 23/04/2017 - 14:11
        +10

        bows head

        In the name of the Scotty, and of the tightarse, and of the eBay coupon.

        Bar-gain

        • jenkemjunkie on 24/04/2017 - 09:42
          +2

          We wear an eneloop as a charm on a micro USB cable fashioned as a necklace

        • BartholemewH on 24/04/2017 - 18:01
          +1

          @jenkemjunkie:
          Unlike other religions, we don't hide the idolisation of the ENE.

    • holdenmg on 23/04/2017 - 09:51
      +9

      There won't be boats coming in across Ashmore Reef with Boat People anymore, they will be loaded with Eneloops.

    • petry on 23/04/2017 - 10:07
      +1

      There won't be a liberal government anymore if labor runs with doing away this return to protectionism.

      However they probably wont. Easy way to save money regardless cuz I just wont buy much for a few years.

      • derek324 on 23/04/2017 - 10:14

        I am yet to see a new government (in any country, actually) which after removing old taxes / adding new taxes on the balance collects less ;)

      • chumbucket on 23/04/2017 - 10:16

        This is being pushed by the liberals… First announced by Joe Hockey a few years back.
        Labour actually wants to push the start date to 2018 so they can legislate and implement it correctly.

        • petry on 23/04/2017 - 10:19
          +3

          So labor supports it too.

          Usual meaningless election then since both parties now offer nothing to Australians but war taxes and environmental destruction.

          • EightImmortals on 23/04/2017 - 11:52
            +5

            @petry: Don't forget that the GST itself was touted/opposed by both parties (depending who was power at the time) until Howard finally got it pushed through. Labour and Liberal are merely two heads on the same snake.

      • gromit on 24/04/2017 - 12:52
        +2

        Labor are far more likely to increase protectionism rather than reduce it.

    • fruit on 23/04/2017 - 11:06

      lol no we won't be blocked

    • stargalaxy on 23/04/2017 - 11:14
      +1

      I don't mind paying for the GST as it is still much cheaper to buy overseas. Don't foresee much change in my buying behaviour.

      • EightImmortals on 23/04/2017 - 11:55
        +1

        What about the principle of the thing?
        Why should the Australian Government (pty/ltd)be able to collect tax on goods bought from another country, a lot of which you can't buy here in the first place? It's just another sign of how broke and desperate they getting IMO. To add some facts to their spite it's been proven that when governments REDUCE taxes they actually receive more in tax receipts but I wouldn't expect any of those idiots in Canberra to know a whole bunch about stuff.

        • try2bhelpful on 23/04/2017 - 15:03
          +2

          The goods are coming into the country - why shouldn't they be able to tax them? You really think that people like Amazon are actually paying their fair share of tax dollars? Can you please show me the links that show how reducing taxes increases revenue to the government; I really would be interested in seeing that?

        • Silvertonguedmenace on 23/04/2017 - 15:30

          @try2bhelpful: The issue here is whether or not it is the responsibility of eBay to collect the tax on behalf of the Australian Government at the retail end, when eBay has 0 control over the actual monetary transactions? The problem is people don't understand that difference. The best would be for Australia to manually add that tax to internal customs/freight. But for this government to actually be proactive and do something about the collection of tax, would be completely unheard of in Liberal history.

Login or Join to leave a comment
Login Join