Grey Imports...How to spot them?

jamesev said:
True, however avoidance is usually in the incomprehensible quantities for many (millions) which they equate to what they could do with millions whilst they are saving a few tangible hundred.
Click to expand...

Why? I'm pretty sure Amazon, Vodafone, Starbucks etc pay every penny of VAT or import duty that is expected from them.

Their clever accounting relates to company tax on their profits, as long as HMG lets clever accountants find all sorts of ways for them to reduce that tax they will avoid it as they aren't breaking the law. It would be a simple matter for the government to legislate all profit in the UK be taxed, but they haven't.

You can be pretty sure if Amazon didn't pay the required VAT the HMRC inspectors would be banging on their doors pronto...
 
Dave1 said:
You can be pretty sure if Amazon didn't pay the required VAT the HMRC inspectors would be banging on their doors pronto...
Click to expand...
And as a matter of recent tightening of enforcement they are chasing third parties who advertise on Amazon and eBay to ensure they pay VAT...
 
Eloise said:
Ludicrous?

Ludicrous they are considered cakes? Or ludicrous the HMRC were trying to argue they were biscuits?
Click to expand...

....Personally for whatever it's worth, I think that it's ludicrous that anyone should spend any time or effort arguing about whether a Jaffa is a cake or a biscuit. It is amusing though.

Is a tomato (or tomatoe) a fruit or a vegetable? And should tax be levied on it?

I'm thinking it's all very Monty Python.
 
RedRobin said:
....Personally for whatever it's worth, I think that it's ludicrous that anyone should spend any time or effort arguing about whether a Jaffa is a cake or a biscuit. It is amusing though.
Click to expand...
Not really ludicrous when 1 billion Jaffa cakes are (reportedly) produced a year (so 100 million boxes) at £1 a box so making the ruling worth £20,000,000 a year!

Tomato or vegetable is not a tax question as neither attract VAT.
 
Last edited:
HoppyUK said:
There is no compulsion for a dealer to buy from Canon UK or Nikon UK etc. They can buy from wherever they like, and in some instances do. In real cases of excessive profiteering in other markets this has happened to such an extent it's forced the official UK importers to change their tune, but this hasn't happened in the photo market despite extreme pressure on sales revenues all round that is only getting worse.

The UK importers are far from innocent in this whole grey business but the overriding reason for higher prices across Europe is VAT. If there was fat to be trimmed, we'd see prices falling but in fact they're rising across the board. Camera manufacturers are struggling and even Samsung couldn't make it work despite producing arguably the best DSLR at the time they pulled out. They will not be the last.
Click to expand...

Err - ask a Canon/Nikon pro dealer what happens if they source from third parties. I have and it is very simple - they are instantly no longer "Pro" dealers and VERY lucky if they can get anything from the official importers at all! As to the VAT? VAT only (possibly) explains a part (small part?) of the price difference - see my previous post regarding my 7D2 purchase.
 
RedRobin said:
....Personally for whatever it's worth, I think that it's ludicrous that anyone should spend any time or effort arguing about whether a Jaffa is a cake or a biscuit. It is amusing though.

Is a tomato (or tomatoe) a fruit or a vegetable? And should tax be levied on it?

I'm thinking it's all very Monty Python.
Click to expand...

It’s both - technically
 
Eloise said:
Not really ludicrous when 1 billion Jaffa cakes are (reportedly) produced a year (so 100 million boxes) at £1 a box so making the ruling worth £20,000,000 a year!

Tomato or vegetable is not a tax question as neither attract VAT.
Click to expand...

....Are you pleased about that ruling, Eloise? [a genuine question of curiosity without any inferences]

The tomato fruit or veg was only mentioned as an example of what might in theory create another ludricous case (in my opinion). However, I now learn that it's technically both < Anyone want to challenge that? :D
 
RedRobin said:
....Are you pleased about that ruling, Eloise? [a genuine question of curiosity without any inferences]

The tomato fruit or veg was only mentioned as an example of what might in theory create another ludricous case (in my opinion). However, I now learn that it's technically both < Anyone want to challenge that? :D
Click to expand...

Scientifically it’s a fruit but culinarily its a veg
 
RedRobin said:
....Are you pleased about that ruling, Eloise? [a genuine question of curiosity without any inferences]
Click to expand...
From a "common sense" point of view ... I would say that Jaffa cakes are aimed at the "biscuit" market and should be taxed the same way as other biscuits. But I guess I'm please with the ruling that its a cake as I prefer to spend £1 on a box of Jaffa cakes than £1.20. Personally I don't see that biscuits are "luxury" and cakes are "essential" food items either.

Not that "Jaffa cake: biscuit or cake?" is really related to grey imports either - it was a (attempt at a) humorous comment when someone posted the :jaffa: emoticon!
The tomato fruit or veg was only mentioned as an example of what might in theory create another ludricous case (in my opinion). However, I now learn that it's technically both < Anyone want to challenge that?
Click to expand...
Its only "both" depending who you ask - a botanist or a chef. As I commented; as far as HMRC is concerned its an irrelevant question.
 
Last edited:
jamesev said:
Scientifically it’s a fruit but culinarily its a veg
Click to expand...

....Then I guess that hypothetically speaking, a court ruling would come down on the side of science. Afterall, what do a bunch of chefs know :D
 
RedRobin said:
....Then I guess that hypothetically speaking, a court ruling would come down on the side of science. Afterall, what do a bunch of chefs know :D
Click to expand...

Depends what it’s used for. I expect consideration might be given to the industry in which its used. As the food industry have a fair monopoly on its use, now it’s socially unacceptable to put people in stocks on the village free and pelt them with tommies.
 
johnf3f said:
Err - ask a Canon/Nikon pro dealer what happens if they source from third parties. I have and it is very simple - they are instantly no longer "Pro" dealers and VERY lucky if they can get anything from the official importers at all! As to the VAT? VAT only (possibly) explains a part (small part?) of the price difference - see my previous post regarding my 7D2 purchase.
Click to expand...

If a retailer tries to both run with the fox and hunt with the hounds, then of course they'll get the cold shoulder from the official importers - if only to stop others trying it. But if everything's so much cheaper sourced direct from the Far East as you say, then why would they want supply from the official UK importer anyway?

If your 7D2 purchase at 40% off is to be taken seriously as a representative example of Canon UK ripping everybody off, then full facts and context are needed. The way you've presented it just looks like a one-off grey bargain compared against full launch RRP or something. It's certainly not typical.
 
HoppyUK said:
If a retailer tries to both run with the fox and hunt with the hounds, then of course they'll get the cold shoulder from the official importers - if only to stop others trying it. But if everything's so much cheaper sourced direct from the Far East as you say, then why would they want supply from the official UK importer anyway?
Click to expand...

Two reasons I can think of, firstly they'll want their customers to have the normal warranty process and secondly it's important for a retailer to have a reliable supply and importing it themselves is going to be more work/cost if they wanted to cover that manufacturer's full range of products.

HoppyUK said:
If your 7D2 purchase at 40% off is to be taken seriously as a representative example of Canon UK ripping everybody off, then full facts and context are needed. The way you've presented it just looks like a one-off grey bargain compared against full launch RRP or something. It's certainly not typical.
Click to expand...

For the most part I agree but we're seeing some silly prices lately, take the Sony A7 III for example, it's cheaper to import, pay all relevant taxes in full and you'll still save 10% on the UK price so the temptation for someone who isn't VAT registered is going to be pretty big as the saving is probably going to be around 30%. Yes I know they price things high over here early on but I think they're also pricing it as if it's the exchange rate was as low as last year which'll just punish local dealers for no good reason.
 
simonbarker said:
Two reasons I can think of, firstly they'll want their customers to have the normal warranty process and secondly it's important for a retailer to have a reliable supply and importing it themselves is going to be more work/cost if they wanted to cover that manufacturer's full range of products.
Click to expand...

Well yes, so it's not a like for like comparison on the same package of benefits all round. And there's a cost to all that born by Canon UK etc, passed on to the retailer and the customer in turn. But that hardly constitutes the rip-off that John is alluding to. And I'm no fan of the UK importers in general on this whole debacle.

For the most part I agree but we're seeing some silly prices lately, take the Sony A7 III for example, it's cheaper to import, pay all relevant taxes in full and you'll still save 10% on the UK price so the temptation for someone who isn't VAT registered is going to be pretty big as the saving is probably going to be around 30%. Yes I know they price things high over here early on but I think they're also pricing it as if it's the exchange rate was as low as last year which'll just punish local dealers for no good reason.
Click to expand...

There are always anomalies and one-off situations, but the grey import problem is not an anomaly. It's been persistent and predictable for many years. So long in fact that the circumstantial evidence built up over time now overwhelms all the smoke and mirrors so we know how it works. Nothing too complicated, just illegal tax evasion.

That's how it works, and it's killing/killed high street photo dealers and cost UK jobs. And FWIW, if I have a moral position on this, that's where it lies. As for the tax evasion thing, well I'm none too comfortable about that but if HMRC just can't be arsed to do anything about it then I'm not inclined to point any fingers.
 
HoppyUK said:
If a retailer tries to both run with the fox and hunt with the hounds, then of course they'll get the cold shoulder from the official importers - if only to stop others trying it. But if everything's so much cheaper sourced direct from the Far East as you say, then why would they want supply from the official UK importer anyway?

If your 7D2 purchase at 40% off is to be taken seriously as a representative example of Canon UK ripping everybody off, then full facts and context are needed. The way you've presented it just looks like a one-off grey bargain compared against full launch RRP or something. It's certainly not typical.
Click to expand...

Why wouldn't my purchase be taken seriously? Do you want me to pm you the receipt??

I live in Wales, my 7D2 was purchased in Wales - is that context? Facts were very simple - on the day of purchase WEX wanted £1199, I paid £769. True a few days later the best price on camerapricebuster went down to £1099 - still a wee bit more than I paid.

Any more facts and context needed?

Of course I could blather on about my 1DX, 24-70 F2.8 Mk2, 100-400 Mk2, Mamiya 55-110 + 45mm etc but I didn't want to bore you and others. I was just using my 7D2 to illustrate a point. If you don't get it then fine - I just buy what I can afford on my ridiculously low income - too little to qualify for income tax. Please refer to my gear list - it can be done, I have!
 
A hypothetical question to all those who say (something along the lines of) ... "grey market companies are okay to buy from because we don't know their accounting practices and don't know that they are avoiding VAT and duty": If their websites instead of saying "We keep prices low by purchasing internationally and pass the savings on to our customers" said "We keep our prices low by importing the goods in a way which enables much of them to pass through customs un-inspected and therefore avoiding British / European duty and VAT"* ... would you still buy from them?

*and yes, I know no one is likely to write such a statement on a website ... I'm talking hypothetically!
johnf3f said:
I live in Wales, my 7D2 was purchased in Wales - is that context? Facts were very simple - on the day of purchase WEX wanted £1199, I paid £769. True a few days later the best price on camerapricebuster went down to £1099 - still a wee bit more than I paid.!
Click to expand...
I don't know who you actually purchased from ... but isn't the FACTs that while you live in Wales, your 7D2 was *purchased* in HK most likely. Certainly if you use DigitalRev you are purchasing in HK; if you use Panamoz you are purchasing in HK (other companies will vary).
 
Eloise said:
A hypothetical question to all those who say (something along the lines of) ... "grey market companies are okay to buy from because we don't know their accounting practices and don't know that they are avoiding VAT and duty": If their websites instead of saying "We keep prices low by purchasing internationally and pass the savings on to our customers" said "We keep our prices low by importing the goods in a way which enables much of them to pass through customs un-inspected and therefore avoiding British / European duty and VAT"* ... would you still buy from them?

*and yes, I know no one is likely to write such a statement on a website ... I'm talking hypothetically!
Click to expand...

....Indeed, your words are very hypothetical but they have very strong inferences and reflect a pre judgement of whatever the truth is.

That's not to say that your inference is not the truth of the matter in some, or even many, cases but I think it is unjust for you to suggest it is the case throughout.

Eloise said:
I don't know who you actually purchased from ... but isn't the FACTs that while you live in Wales, your 7D2 was *purchased* in HK most likely. Certainly if you use DigitalRev you are purchasing in HK; if you use Panamoz you are purchasing in HK (other companies will vary).
Click to expand...

....Interesting that TP appears to be cool about DigitalRev promoting itself here.
 
RedRobin said:
....Indeed, your words are very hypothetical but they have very strong inferences and reflect a pre judgement of whatever the truth is.
Click to expand...
Not a pre-judgement... a judgement based on the evidence I have seen.

That's not to say that your inference is not the truth of the matter in some, or even many, cases but I think it is unjust for you to suggest it is the case throughout.
Click to expand...
I get the impression that you have bought Grey Market. Did any included customs declaration have “Camera” and the correct value (monetary cost) printed on it? As has been commented... you appear to have your head in the sand - as in you don’t see that they are avoiding tax and duty therefore don’t care that they may be.

I know you will likely disagree... but to me it’s like buying a camera from a man in a pub: even if you don’t KNOW it’s stolen, it’s very likely it is stolen and so you are culpable.
 
Last edited:
RedRobin said:
....Interesting that TP appears to be cool about DigitalRev promoting itself here.
Click to expand...

And why shouldn't they be?

The crime is committed by the importer (ie the buyer) who fails to declare and pay the correct import tax, not the HK retailer.
 
Eloise said:
I know you will likely disagree... but to me it’s like buying a camera from a man in a pub: even if you don’t KNOW it’s stolen, it’s very likely it is stolen and so you are culpable.
Click to expand...

....I would never ever buy something from some geezer in a pub. Receipts for my purchases include vat. I recall that sometimes a parcel delivered from overseas has required the courier to insist I pay duty to then receive it and sometimes not and in those cases I have never bothered to check - Afterall, when a parcel has arrived, Christmas has come early!

What really angered me a few years ago was when I used to be an unpaid pre-release tester for Adobe, they sent me an iPod (they were a new Apple product then) at Christmas as a special gift to thank me for my contribution which went "beyond the call of duty" as stated in a signed (not printed) letter from Adobe HQ in Seattle. In spite of the letter with the package it was still insisted that I had to pay UK duty - So I had to pay tax to receive a gift!! < Disgusting in my opinion.

As an aside, Adobe also invited me back then to join their team in testing something called Lightroom before it was first launched - I didn't take photos at that time (I just Art Directed professionals) and so wasn't interested. As it turns out I much prefer Capture One for RAW anyway.
 
Dave1 said:
And why shouldn't they be?

The crime is committed by the importer (ie the buyer) who fails to declare and pay the correct import tax, not the HK retailer.
Click to expand...

....I didn't say that they shouldn't be. I merely said it was "interesting" as they were mentioned in this discussion.
 
RedRobin said:
....Indeed, your words are very hypothetical but they have very strong inferences and reflect a pre judgement of whatever the truth is.
Click to expand...

No doubt you'll include a copy of the customs declaration with the original invoice with your tax return as you seem to be so certain you're in the right here.

I'm sure your accountants or HMRC will agree.
 
RedRobin said:
....I didn't say that they shouldn't be. I merely said it was "interesting" as they were mentioned in this discussion.
Click to expand...


I'm sure many others will see a slightly different inference to the way you added that in...
 
Dave1 said:
I'm sure many others will see a slightly different inference to the way you added that in...
Click to expand...

....If you or others want to judge or interpret my mention of DigitalRev as anything other than simple curiosity, then that's entirely up to you. There was no inference intended on my part as you seem to suggest.

Haven't we all something better to do than all these exchanges? I'm probably partly to blame for bothering to answer or challenge some of people's posts :D so I'll now leave you all in peace and stop playing devil's advocate. The original subject has been thoroughly discussed so far anyway.

Cheers :cool:
 
Eloise said:
A hypothetical question to all those who say (something along the lines of) ... "grey market companies are okay to buy from because we don't know their accounting practices and don't know that they are avoiding VAT and duty": If their websites instead of saying "We keep prices low by purchasing internationally and pass the savings on to our customers" said "We keep our prices low by importing the goods in a way which enables much of them to pass through customs un-inspected and therefore avoiding British / European duty and VAT"* ... would you still buy from them?

*and yes, I know no one is likely to write such a statement on a website ... I'm talking hypothetically!

I don't know who you actually purchased from ... but isn't the FACTs that while you live in Wales, your 7D2 was *purchased* in HK most likely. Certainly if you use DigitalRev you are purchasing in HK; if you use Panamoz you are purchasing in HK (other companies will vary).
Click to expand...


Over the years I have purchased a number of cameras and lenses from Digital Rev. I have also purchased rather more from high-street camera shops.
I have as much evidence about their various accounting and tax paying practices as I have about any other camera retailer. I am sure there must be some rogues out there But I have no reason to believe that I have ever bought a camera from one.

Many years ago I bought an Agfa solinette ll whilst serving in Hong Kong.. In those pre EU pre VAT days, purchase tax was around staggering 50% with import duty on top. I rather doubt any of the 1000 plus soldiers on that troop ship Paid tax on anything when they got home.....

This thread has produced no evidence at all that would stand up in court, but deluges of hear say. and a fair amount of prejudice against far Eastern traders, and even more well repeated conspiracy theories.
 
Terrywoodenpic said:
This thread has produced no evidence at all that would stand up in court, but deluges of hear say. and a fair amount of prejudice against far Eastern traders, and even more well repeated conspiracy theories.
Click to expand...
Actually you're wrong ... @Dave1 in the post https://www.talkphotography.co.uk/threads/grey-imports-how-to-spot-them.673294/page-3#post-8100348 presented exactly that: evidence, albeit hearsay as he was reporting someone else experience, where a Canon 6D was declared as having a value (cost) of £325 which is quite blatantly a lie and therefore an attempt to defraud HMRC.

The problem (when it comes to HMRC) is that the companies making the declarations are not under UK jurisdiction, and individuals are not worth going after in terms of prosecutions. All they can do is be as vigilante as their resources allow and catch as many items as possible.
 
Last edited:
Terrywoodenpic said:
I have as much evidence about their various accounting and tax paying practices as I have about any other camera retailer. I am sure there must be some rogues out there But I have no reason to believe that I have ever bought a camera from one.
Click to expand...

They're not comparable situations, as I understand it when you buy from a high street shop it's on them to properly account for tax but when you import it's on you.

Terrywoodenpic said:
This thread has produced no evidence at all that would stand up in court, but deluges of hear say. and a fair amount of prejudice against far Eastern traders, and even more well repeated conspiracy theories.
Click to expand...

As I said above, if you've got the original invoice and you've got the customs declaration you can easily see if you owe more tax or not.

If you want to evade tax that's your call but you could at least own the decision rather than pretend it's all OK because some soldiers didn't pay decades ago or whatever completely irrelevant reason.
 
Eloise said:
A hypothetical question to all those who say (something along the lines of) ... "grey market companies are okay to buy from because we don't know their accounting practices and don't know that they are avoiding VAT and duty": If their websites instead of saying "We keep prices low by purchasing internationally and pass the savings on to our customers" said "We keep our prices low by importing the goods in a way which enables much of them to pass through customs un-inspected and therefore avoiding British / European duty and VAT"* ... would you still buy from them?

<snip>
Click to expand...

Wouldn't make any difference. Money shouts louder.

Edit: And that's a comment, not a judgement ;)
 
Last edited:
Eloise said:
Actually you're wrong ... @Dave1 in the post https://www.talkphotography.co.uk/threads/grey-imports-how-to-spot-them.673294/page-3#post-8100348 presented exactly that: evidence, albeit hearsay as he was reporting someone else experience, where a Canon 6D was declared as having a value (cost) of £325 which is quite blatantly a lie and therefore an attempt to defraud HMRC.

The problem (when it comes to HMRC) is that the companies making the declarations are not under UK jurisdiction, and individuals are not worth going after in terms of prosecutions. All they can do is be as vigilante as their resources allow and catch as many items as possible.
Click to expand...

Hear say on the internet is worthless.
As far as anyone on here has been able to demonstrate HMRC Has not caught out any photographic Grey importer avoiding vat or duty.not in all the many years they have been trading.
Almost all have associated companies in the UK, so they are not out of reach. Digital Rev trades through, and claims back taxes, through the UK branch as they did for one of my purchases. They also trade on Ebay where they make clear that it is up to the purchaser to pay the duty and vat. and they only act as agents.
 
Terrywoodenpic said:
Hear say on the internet is worthless.
As far as anyone on here has been able to demonstrate HMRC Has not caught out any photographic Grey importer avoiding vat or duty.not in all the many years they have been trading.
Almost all have associated companies in the UK, so they are not out of reach. Digital Rev trades through, and claims back taxes, through the UK branch as they did for one of my purchases. They also trade on Ebay where they make clear that it is up to the purchaser to pay the duty and vat. and they only act as agents.
Click to expand...
We’re just going round in circles... if they are only agents, then it’s the end purchaser who could be prosecuted.

@simonbarker hit the nail on the head when he wrote...
simonbarker said:
If you want to evade tax that's your call but you could at least own the decision rather than pretend it's all OK [for] whatever completely irrelevant reason.
Click to expand...
 
Terrywoodenpic said:
Hear say on the internet is worthless.
As far as anyone on here has been able to demonstrate HMRC Has not caught out any photographic Grey importer avoiding vat or duty.not in all the many years they have been trading.
Almost all have associated companies in the UK, so they are not out of reach. Digital Rev trades through, and claims back taxes, through the UK branch as they did for one of my purchases. They also trade on Ebay where they make clear that it is up to the purchaser to pay the duty and vat. and they only act as agents.
Click to expand...

And here's a DigitalRev customer who found that DigitalRev valued their item at 10% of its actual value on the Declaration.

NSNO said:
Received my order last week but have just been called by TNT asking if I can provide them with proof of purchase because they believe that DigitalRev have undervalued the order. TNT sent me a copy of the documents and it appears that the value stated is only about a 10th of the true value, so it's looking like I'll be hit with a big charge from Customs.
Click to expand...

https://www.talkphotography.co.uk/t...ing-orders-on-the-customs-declaration.601784/
 
Dave1 said:
And here's a DigitalRev customer who found that DigitalRev valued their item at 10% of its actual value on the Declaration.



https://www.talkphotography.co.uk/t...ing-orders-on-the-customs-declaration.601784/
Click to expand...

New information on that case ended in the first week of september2015 noting that it was a DDP transacton. Meaning that Digital Rev have an arrangement with HMRC. Wherby they take responsibility to pay tax and duty themselves prior to shipment.
Any mistakes or errors are entirely between them and HMRC. Had they been charged with anything I am sure that it would be well publicised by now.
They must be a trusted importer to be licenced to operate in that way.
Some foreign companies in the software field like adobe are licenced to raise vat charges on their invoices to the UK.

Why TNT were trying to get involved, I have no idea, in any event their client was the sender, not the receiver.

When a well respected curry restaurant in Bradford was charged with vat evasion, the case was well covered in the national press... apart from the more than million pound fine it did them no harm as they became busier than ever.

The fact remains, we have no reason to believe that any wrong doing took place, nor that any issues were not resolved amicably.
 
Last edited:
Terrywoodenpic said:
New information on that case ended in the first week of september2015 noting that it was a DDP transacton. Meaning that Digital Rev have an arrangement with HMRC. Wherby they take responsibility to pay tax and duty themselves prior to shipment.
Click to expand...

Just like the majority of HK retailers, at a significantly undervalued rate and they hope enough parcels are undetected on arrival to keep it profitable for them.

In that DigitalRev example at 10% of the true value...
 
Last edited:
simonbarker said:
Not a fact.

If I close my eyes tight enough I can't possibly ever be breaking the law is not much of a defense.
Click to expand...

If you go and steal something in Tesco and run out really fast before security sees you we will have no reason to believe that any wrong doing took place...

:whistle:
 
Dave1 said:
Just like the majority of HK retailers, at a significantly undervalued rate and they hope enough parcels are undetected on arrival to keep it profitable for them.

In that DigitalRev example at 10% of the true value...
Click to expand...

Are you suggesting that Hong Kong retailers are all crooks?
Do you arrive at that opinion by divination or pure prejudice.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top