Dave Noble

I don't see the issue tbh. Under the new scheme an allowance of $900 and 2.25L is permitted otherwise it is liable for duty.

The article says that they collected $600,000 in the 4 months since it was introduced. How much did they collect under the old scheme? ( it doesn't say that they have collected $600,000 more than under the old scheme in the same 4 months last year)

Dave

Globaliser

I don't agree. There's something fundamentally unfair about a system which will allow you to bring in 2.25 litres without any charge as it's your "allowance", but then charges you for the whole of 2.3 litres should you bring that in. The concept of an "allowance" suggests that only the excess over the allowance should be charged for. I can't readily think of any other quantitative allowances that work like this.

Dave Noble

UK Duty Free has some similar concepts. If you were to bring in, say, a laptop computer worth GBP1000, you would be charged VAT on the whole GBP1000 rather than the excess over the GBP450 (iirc) allowance since you cannot claim allowance on any item which in itself exceeds the allowance.

Admittedly, if you bring in 3 litres of spirits into the UK, you would only be charged for 2 litres duty over the 1 litre allowance rather than the whole amount.

Dave

Aus_Mal

This article is more detailed:
http://www.theage.com.au/news/Nation...347631723.html

"Customs officials collected $710,423 in taxes in the March quarter compared with $116,185 for the same period last year."

Globaliser

Though I'd bet that there aren't very many 3 litre bottles of alcoholic drink brought through Customs.

NM

Example: Bring in $1000 worth of goods.

Old system: $400 allowance, so GST on $600 = $60

New system: $900 allowance, but GST on full $1000 = $100

Extra revenue under the new system = $40.

serfty

Considering this $710K March ¼ figure is for 1 month under the old system (Jan) & 2 months (Feb & Mar) under the new it gives an average monthly revenue increase for those two months of $297K per month or ~$3.6Million per year.

serfty

The issue for me is that the Duty Free concession benefits I was recieving have been reduced with these changes.

Without using the general concession, I was receiving savings of up to $80 per trip; this has halved since the changes thereby costing me over $200 since then. Please note, I have not paid customs one cent extra; I have just brought back less "duty free".

What griped me was the original article in the Melbourne Herald Sun entitled: "Duty Free Bonanza at Last". The spin in this article implied that travellers were about to get a great benefit from the changes. This was utter B*ulldust. I could see it then and my fears are now being realised.

It basically has been customs (read Govenment) who have benefited from this "Bonanza" at expense of travellers .

The ONLY travellers who might have benefited from the changes are those who have managed to use their full $900 general exemption and imported their full concessional quota of Alocohol without going over either limit.

Yes I do have a personal interest! And yes, one day I'll calm down and get off my soap box !