# Items over €175, coming back from NY - penalty?



## Bluebean (15 Nov 2007)

hi everyone, 

I'm in New York, and am very pleased with the value of clothes, shoes, jewelry etc. over here.

Just wanted to know what are the rules around bringing items back to Ireland through Dublin airport?

I know there is a limit of something like 175 euro, and that I should take tags off everything I buy etc.  
But what actually happens if they say I've bought x00 amount of items?  Do I just pay tax on the items, or what?

thanks in advance


----------



## ang1170 (15 Nov 2007)

*Re: Items over 175euro, coming back from NY - penalty?*

Lets just say that despite rumours of a crack down, thousands of people go through the green channel in your situation without any problems.

You should of course declare any items above the limit and pay any relevant VAT and duty.


----------



## Guest103 (15 Nov 2007)

*Re: Items over 175euro, coming back from NY - penalty?*

ang1170

Can you declare an item after you have passed through the green channel?


----------



## Bronte (16 Nov 2007)

*Re: Items over 175euro, coming back from NY - penalty?*

Take off all price tags, packaging, shopping bags etc.  Wear the shoes a couple of times now, put the jewellery on you.  Wear the new fur coat when arriving from NY and cut off the label.  I've never done this but I guess it would work.


----------



## tallpaul (16 Nov 2007)

*Re: Items over 175euro, coming back from NY - penalty?*

If you think about it, there are four or five flights a day from the US with some 300 people on each flight. You probably have about a one in a thousand chance of getting stopped by Customs. As long as you don't look like a pack mule for Macy's you should be OK...


----------



## Statler (16 Nov 2007)

*Re: Items over 175euro, coming back from NY - penalty?*



tallpaul said:


> If you think about it, there are four or five flights a day from the US with some 300 people on each flight. You probably have about a one in a thousand chance of getting stopped by Customs.



I would disagree with this based on recent experience. When I was coming through Dublin airport from NY last week there were c. 10 customs officers in the green channel (until some moved to the blue re-directing those passengers from the same flight that did not like the look of the green and then opening their bags). Given there was only 1 flight arriving from the US at that time, a large proportion of Irish passengers at least had a short chat with customs/ their bag put through the x-ray machine.

Passing through Dublin airport this week, at a time when no flights were arriving from the US, I could see only one customs official in evidence. They really do seem to be targeting US shopping trips and people that have passed through Shannon recently say it is similar there. 

I am not sure to what extent they go through luggage or what action they can/ do take, but I have it in the back of my mind somewhere that they can confiscate anything that is taxable and has not been declared. Perhaps this is more likely on a high value item that has obviously been bought on the trip rather than items of clothing that have tags removed etc.


----------



## John Rambo (16 Nov 2007)

All relevant taxes and duties should be paid.I have heard that they are requesting weights for luggage going out and comparing them to weights coming back. The thing to do therefore is clear out your wardrobe before you go and bring the stuff you are binning. Give it to charity in the US and fill your suitcases with the new stuff. Remove all tags and throw away all recipts. Wear any jewellery, use any phones/IPods.And if stopped remember there is no proof, just deny everything, say it's all your own. They'll try and trick you into admitting you've done something wrong. Just grin and bare it.I must re-emphasise all duties and taxes should be paid and that this site does not condone tax evasion of any kind.


----------



## Buckshee (16 Nov 2007)

John Rambo said:


> .I have heard that they are requesting weights for luggage going out and comparing them to weights coming back.


 
I can confirm with absolute certainty that whatever else customs officials may be doing they are not doing this....absolutely not !!


----------



## Bluebean (17 Nov 2007)

thanks for all the replies everyone. To be honest, its not like I'm planning on bringing back a huge amount of shopping, I'm not shopping like its an olympic sport or anything!
I'm going to leave the tags on any gifts, as something like children's clothes, well its fairly obvious that I didn't bring that with me (not travelling with any children). 

VAT is 21%, but how much is duty or does it depend on the item?

I'm just going to hope for the best I think, fingers crossed! 

thanks again.


----------



## SidTheDweeb (17 Nov 2007)

Buckshee said:


> I can confirm with absolute certainty that whatever else customs officials may be doing they are not doing this....absolutely not !!



It made me laugh too!


----------



## John Rambo (17 Nov 2007)

SidTheDweeb said:


> It made me laugh too!


 
I agree it sounds ridiculous, and personally I haven't done it , but someone in AL did tell me it was the case (no pun intended!)


----------



## orka (17 Nov 2007)

Bluebean said:


> VAT is 21%, but how much is duty or does it depend on the item?


 
Duty does depend on the item.  For example, clothes from outside the EU have a duty rate of 12% plus there's an extra duty of 15% if the clothes are coming from the US - so 27% in total. The VAT and duty are applied multiplicatively so the total add-on ends up being just under 54%.


----------



## chum (17 Nov 2007)

*Re: Items over €175, coming back from NY - penalty?*

is the 175 limit is per person ,can a family of six could bring in 1,050.00 duty free?


----------



## orka (17 Nov 2007)

chum said:


> is the 175 limit is per person ,can a family of six could bring in 1,050.00 duty free?


 
It's per person aged 15 and over - the limit is 90 for someone under 15.  The amounts can't be pooled - so two people would not be allowed to bring back a single item worth 350 but could bring back 350 between them if the items can be split into bits that add up to 175 each.


----------



## Madilla (17 Nov 2007)

I just came back from NY today.I would think in excess of 90% of the passengers on the flight had been on shopping trips with most with the red heavy tags on their bags.We had two bags which were 31 kgs each along with two smaller bags. There were only two customs officers visible to me (5.30 this morn) both in the green channel and didnt pull anyone over that I saw.


----------



## RainyDay (18 Nov 2007)

John Rambo said:


> All relevant taxes and duties should be paid.I have heard that they are requesting weights for luggage going out and comparing them to weights coming back. The thing to do therefore is clear out your wardrobe before you go and bring the stuff you are binning. Give it to charity in the US and fill your suitcases with the new stuff. Remove all tags and throw away all recipts. Wear any jewellery, use any phones/IPods.And if stopped remember there is no proof, just deny everything, say it's all your own. They'll try and trick you into admitting you've done something wrong. Just grin and bare it.I must re-emphasise all duties and taxes should be paid and that this site does not condone tax evasion of any kind.



I'm not sure that it is all that smart to take advise which seems to be based on the assumption that Customs Officers are plain thick and have never considered the possibility that travellers will try to evade tax.

It reminds of those TV licence ads which just might make people realise that childish excuses don't work.


----------



## ang1170 (18 Nov 2007)

Madilla said:


> I just came back from NY today.I would think in excess of 90% of the passengers on the flight had been on shopping trips with most with the red heavy tags on their bags.We had two bags which were 31 kgs each along with two smaller bags. There were only two customs officers visible to me (5.30 this morn) both in the green channel and didnt pull anyone over that I saw.


 
That's pretty much my experience as well.

It's a fairly safe assumption that customs are not so dim as to realise what people are doing.

I guess you can draw your own conclusions.


----------



## MB05 (18 Nov 2007)

I heard someone in work talking about this.  She was talking about someone who was stopped by customs and they were going through the stuff she bought.  They could tell the shoes were new as they hadn't been worn (so wear them a bit over there) and they were going through clothes she had to see what if any duty/tax she had to pay.  One of the points she made was that there is no vat on childrens clothes so they shouldn't count. Sounds logical.  I didn't hear the rest of the conversation so I don't know if it worked but its worth a try if you get stopped.


----------



## DublinTexas (18 Nov 2007)

Wow, what an interesting post. Public tips on how best commit an criminal offence: *SMUGGLING*

When I came home last week from JFK-LHR-DUB I passed through the green channel, got asked by a customs offical (there were at least 12 on duty) why I did not use the blue channel (coming from the UK). I told him I started in JFK and hence must use the green channel. He was surprised about my honesty and because I was under the value needing declartion I went off.

Other people behind and in front of me were not so lucky. People were trying to go through the blue channel but the bag tag clearly showed they started in the US so they had the pleasure to get their bags controlled and some of them had long chats with customs.

I suggest you read this: [broken link removed] It gives you all the info about allowance and what to do.


----------



## Bluebean (18 Nov 2007)

thanks for all replies everyone.  Taking in to account that children's clothes will not be charged duty, it turns out that I will not have more than 175 euro worth of items bought after all, so I will not be smuggling or trying to evade tax.
Phew!


----------



## zag (18 Nov 2007)

Coming back from Amsterdam recently, there was a guy on the plane with a PS3 box for his carry on luggage.

I remember thinking . . . "Surely he's not going to try walking past the customs guys with that box under his arm ?"

Sure enough, on the way through customs in Dublin there he was having an in depth conversation with a customs officer while another customs officer was having an in depth check of his luggage.

Whatever about the rights and wrongs of this type of thing, the very least you should do is *not flaunt the stuff* in front of the customs guys.

z


----------



## MugsGame (19 Nov 2007)

*Re: Items over €175, coming back from NY - penalty?*

While not disagreeing with your sentiment, there is no duty for personal imports between EU countries, so he didn't have anything to hide, provided he bought the PS3 within the EU. The customs guys may have been checking his point of origin, or whatever else he was importing from Amsterdam


----------



## orka (19 Nov 2007)

Bluebean said:


> thanks for all replies everyone. Taking in to account that children's clothes will not be charged duty, it turns out that I will not have more than 175 euro worth of items bought after all, so I will not be smuggling or trying to evade tax.
> Phew!


 
There may be no VAT on children's clothes but I think duty IS payable at the same rate as adult clothes - so 27%.


----------



## mell61 (19 Nov 2007)

I read a piece recently from the UK customs and excise saying basically that they were happy to depend on peoples honesty in terms of what they brought into the UK from outside the EU, as their resourses were best used to try and catch more serious criminal offenses, like drugs, illegal immigration, etc....
seems like a pretty sensible arguement to me for deploying resources.


----------



## John Rambo (20 Nov 2007)

RainyDay said:


> I'm not sure that it is all that smart to take advise which seems to be based on the assumption that Customs Officers are plain thick and have never considered the possibility that travellers will try to evade tax.
> 
> It reminds of those TV licence ads which just might make people realise that childish excuses don't work.


 
I don't think you're comparing like with like. If someone were to do this and removes all tags receipts etc it's impossible to prove. The Customs people can give you grief and sweat you down but cannot prove anything. The key is not to snap.Again, people ahould pay all relevant duties.


----------



## foxylady (20 Nov 2007)

If customs go mad and start taking all peoples purchases off them when returning from shopping trips to the states, then surely this will put people off going and hence bad business for aer lingus


----------



## John Rambo (20 Nov 2007)

foxylady said:


> If customs go mad and start taking all peoples purchases off them when returning from shopping trips to the states, then surely this will put people off going and hence bad business for aer lingus


 
Customs have nothing to do with Aer Lingus or the DAA. They're a government agency.


----------



## MB05 (20 Nov 2007)

Maybe if the limit was more realistic people would observe it.  I am not a big shopper so I doubt I am ever over it but €175 isn't realistic in modern terms.  It's like stamp duty a few years ago for first time buyers.  When I bought my house the 0% rate was under €190k for a second hand house.  You couldn't buy a house in Dublin for that so the exemption was useless.  I think if they raised the limit to €500 most people would declare what they bought.


----------



## RainyDay (20 Nov 2007)

John Rambo said:


> I don't think you're comparing like with like. If someone were to do this and removes all tags receipts etc it's impossible to prove. The Customs people can give you grief and sweat you down but cannot prove anything. The key is not to snap.Again, people ahould pay all relevant duties.



I understand that technically, they don't have to prove anything. You have to prove that you paid all appropriate duties regardless of where you bought the products, so it is up to you to produce reciepts or other proof of purchase in Ireland. Assuming that you are smarter than them is just a bit silly.


----------



## rob30 (20 Nov 2007)

I find it hilarious that you can only bring home 175 euro worth of stuff from the US before you have to declare it, when you consider just how much we are spending on hotels, entertainment and food over there. 
Think again, how much money people would spend on having cosmetic surgery done in the US, to avoid the stigma of being found out at home. I would love to see customs challenge someone with pert lips and a well defined nose as to its origins! 
This " big time" spending on dinners out, hotels, helicopter trips etc is a much bigger drain on the nations coffers than the derisory amount of VAT forgone on clothing! This low personal limits surely is a hangover from the times of exchange control when we were close to being bankrupted in the 1980s, and needs reforming.


----------



## John Rambo (20 Nov 2007)

RainyDay said:


> I understand that technically, they don't have to prove anything. You have to prove that you paid all appropriate duties regardless of where you bought the products, so it is up to you to produce reciepts or other proof of purchase in Ireland. Assuming that you are smarter than them is just a bit silly.


 
I don't agree...nobody is claiming to be smarter than them so that's not particularly relevant. My point is that when they pull people aside invariably they come clean. If on the other hand, an impasse is reached where they are suggesting items were purchased outside the EU while the traveller is insisting the items were not, the only conclusion can be no sanction. We're talking about something that cannot be proven. What are they going to use, carbon dating?


----------



## RainyDay (20 Nov 2007)

John Rambo said:


> If on the other hand, an impasse is reached where they are suggesting items were purchased outside the EU while the traveller is insisting the items were not, the only conclusion can be no sanction. We're talking about something that cannot be proven. What are they going to use, carbon dating?


I guess you didn't read my last post, so I'll try it again.

I understand that technically, they don't have to prove anything. You have to prove that you paid all appropriate duties regardless of where you bought the products, so it is up to you to produce reciepts or other proof of purchase in Ireland.

Assuming that you get away with breaking the law using a facile excuse is just silly. You're in 'dog eat my homework' territory.


----------



## kellysayers (21 Nov 2007)

So just say I did buy a pair of Levi jeans back home two years ago and wear them to the states and pack them in my bags coming back, the customs come across them in the bag and its up to me to prove that I bought them two years ago back home with proof of a receipt........come on. Only a compulsive obsessive keeps receipts for that long.


----------



## John Rambo (21 Nov 2007)

RainyDay said:


> I guess you didn't read my last post, so I'll try it againAssuming that you get away with breaking the law using a facile excuse is just silly. You're in 'dog eat my homework' territory.


 
Don't be patronising...it's "dog ate my homework territory", merely common sense. As Kellysayers has said, what are they going to do? Demand to see receipts? I travel over to New York every year and buy clothes which are similar to the ones I wear anyway. We're talking about the reality of the situation but you seem to wish to have some kind of lofty discussion about "silly excuses". If you've a jumper folded in your suitcase with no tags on it how does the discussion go with the Customs official? Your comparison with TV licences is ridiculous as there are technical issues there. "Where and when did you get this jumper?" "In Arnotts a couple of months ago""Can you prove this?" "Not really, and I'm not being funny but could you?""OK, move along"On the other hand if someone starts splutering and blushing and saying "Mmmm, ehhhh" then I'm sure they get hit.Of course people should pay the relevant duties etc but the reality at the moment is millions of Euro are being lost to the Exchequer.


----------



## DublinTexas (21 Nov 2007)

I don’t think that customs is too much concerned with your 1 or 2 Levis jeans but more with people which spend for example 2000$ in the US on new clothes (which even if you remove tags and get them washed still will have the nice new look).

On that 2000 $ the revenue looses 27% import duties and 21 % Vat on top, so we are talking 1073.4$ that they would have otherwise got, if you declared it or to a smaller extend if it got imported to a shop in Ireland. 

So bringing it in the country without declaring you just defrauded the Irish tax payer of 1073.40$.
_Money we urgently need to pay for ministerial salaries or to keep the health service alive (Sarcasm applied)._

In any case, especially on some better quality clothes for example there are manufactures’ “anti fraud” labels that give information as to in which country this item is for sale (Boss for example does that or Zenga and some other “higher” brand items), so your I purchased it at Arnotts might not work.

My personal experience is that if you go to the red channel and tell the customs officer that you have to declare personal shopping s/he usually asks you for the value and then tells you to go off without any charges.


----------



## ubiquitous (21 Nov 2007)

rob30 said:


> This low personal limits surely is a hangover from the times of exchange control when we were close to being bankrupted in the 1980s, and needs reforming.





MB05 said:


> Maybe if the limit was more realistic people would observe it.





mell61 said:


> I read a piece recently from the UK customs and excise saying basically that they were happy to depend on peoples honesty in terms of what they brought into the UK from outside the EU, as their resourses were best used to try and catch more serious criminal offenses, like drugs, illegal immigration, etc....
> seems like a pretty sensible arguement to me for deploying resources.



These three points sum up the entire debacle in a nutshell. Of course, given the prevalence and vehemence of the "all tax evaders should go to jail, no matter what" philosophy in this country, it seems that no-one in authority is brave enough to shout "stop" and admit that the law in this regard is an ass.


----------



## ubiquitous (21 Nov 2007)

DublinTexas said:


> So bringing it in the country without declaring you just defrauded the Irish tax payer of 1073.40$.]



So, if I go up North to Newry or Enniskillen and buy €1,000 worth of goods, I have defrauded the Irish taxpayer of the VAT I would have paid had I bought the goods south of the border


----------



## orka (21 Nov 2007)

ubiquitous said:


> So, if I go up North to Newry or Enniskillen and buy €1,000 worth of goods, I have defrauded the Irish taxpayer of the VAT I would have paid had I bought the goods south of the border


You won't have defrauded the taxpayer because what you have done is perfectly legal and no extra vat/duties are payable. Whereas coming back from the US, anything over $175 should have duties/VAT paid on them. 

I agree with previous posters that the current limit is too low and just encourages evasion. I wouldn't consider myself the smuggling type but coming back from NY a few weeks ago, we had toyed with the idea of declaring anything over $175, more to save the stress of 'what if we're stopped' but then, having asked here for experiences of the red channel and gotten a deafening silence (plus some 'are you serious, why bother, take the tags off'? etc), we decided not to be the only muppets to pay duties. And that's how I rationalise it - I pay lots of tax and wouldnt dream of trying to evade that, partly I suppose because it's the right thing to do and everyone pays their fair share etc. But as far as I can see, very very very few people declare stuff coming back from the US, so I think I would be paying much more than a 'fair share' if I did declare and pay.


----------



## ubiquitous (21 Nov 2007)

In the 1980s and up until the EU Single Market came into being in 1992, a great fuss was made at Border postings about people shopping in Enniskillen, Derry, Armagh, Newry etc and bringing their shopping (alcohol, groceries, clothes) back  home across the border. 

Every little border town or village had its own, well-staffed customs post and according to stories it was not uncommon for cross-border shoppers to be stopped and forced to pay a few quid in duty on their purchases. 20 years later, this sounds all very quaint until you consider that the Revenue as a whole was grossly understaffed at the time and that billions were being evaded in income tax, VAT etc while the customs guys were collecting pennies on the side of the road.

These days people are worrying about bringing back a few hundred euro worth of jeans from the US and are being labelled as spongers and evaders if they don't pay the duty. At the same time, drug traffickers are importing unprecedented volumes of illegal narcotics. Plus ca change...


----------



## kellysayers (21 Nov 2007)

If the retailers and the taxman (a double act) in Ireland were not so greedy this problem would not exist. How can the likes of Tommy Hilfilger justify charging €100.00 for a polo shirt that I can get in the US for $35.00. I know costs are higher in Ireland but they are not that higher.

A reform of the tax system and a change of attitude by greedy retailers is what is needed, then everyone will benefit.....the taxman, retailer and customer.


----------



## RainyDay (21 Nov 2007)

John Rambo said:


> As Kellysayers has said, what are they going to do? Demand to see receipts? I travel over to New York every year and buy clothes which are similar to the ones I wear anyway. We're talking about the reality of the situation but you seem to wish to have some kind of lofty discussion about "silly excuses". If you've a jumper folded in your suitcase with no tags on it how does the discussion go with the Customs official? Your comparison with TV licences is ridiculous as there are technical issues there. "Where and when did you get this jumper?" "In Arnotts a couple of months ago""Can you prove this?" "Not really, and I'm not being funny but could you?""OK, move along"On the other hand if someone starts splutering and blushing and saying "Mmmm, ehhhh" then I'm sure they get hit.



OK then, you win. These professional Customs officers (who on a bad day will be dealing with drug dealers and professional cigarette smugglers) are going to get all flummoxed and intimidated when the shopper asks them to prove their position. Apologies for my obvious error.

I guess the Customs guys are far too dumb to have worked out that Abercrombie & Fitch isn't sold in Ireland at all (given that any shopper who has a teenage in their extended family is likely to have have their case full of A&F overpriced tat).


----------



## John Rambo (22 Nov 2007)

RainyDay said:


> OK then, you win. These professional Customs officers (who on a bad day will be dealing with drug dealers and professional cigarette smugglers) are going to get all flummoxed and intimidated when the shopper asks them to prove their position. Apologies for my obvious error.
> 
> I guess the Customs guys are far too dumb to have worked out that Abercrombie & Fitch isn't sold in Ireland at all (given that any shopper who has a teenage in their extended family is likely to have have their case full of A&F overpriced tat).


 
To be honest I find your posts on this topic quite offensive...they add little to the subject.You can buy Abercrombie & Fitch in Ireland-there's a small place in the Powerscourt Centre which stocks a limited quantity. Plus, it could have been bought on a previous trip. What do you think will happen, that the customs officers will sniff the clothing to detect washing powder?And just for good measure, you throw in a jibe about A&F being overpriced tat. You're in the minority there. As a moderator I thought you'd have read the posting guidelines but evidently you haven't. You've added nothing to this discussion except attempts to cause confrontation with me. I suggest you examine the scenario being discussed from something other than a detached and theoretical viewpoint...do some travelling and talk to the customs officials and see how they behave.


----------



## ubiquitous (22 Nov 2007)

RainyDay said:


> OK then, you win. These professional Customs officers (who on a bad day will be dealing with drug dealers and professional cigarette smugglers) are going to get all flummoxed and intimidated when the shopper asks them to prove their position.



The guy from the Revenue (who incidentally could not in any way be described as dumb) admitted as much on Morning Ireland about 20 minutes ago. I am probably misquoting him slightly but he said 

- that it is impossible to verify whether all travellers are complying with the law,

- that it would not be acceptable for them to subject all travellers to indepth investigation on arrival.

- the Revenue experience is that the average traveller does not break the duty limits and they are happy at this

- because of this they are concentrating their efforts on people whom they suspect of bringing volumes of items home for resale.



RainyDay said:


> I guess the Customs guys are far too dumb to have worked out that Abercrombie & Fitch isn't sold in Ireland at all.



Is this stuff available elsewhere in the EU? Can it be purchased online and delivered to Ireland duty-paid?


----------



## DublinTexas (22 Nov 2007)

So in summary the majority of posters here are saying because Revenue has no resources and it's "impossible to verify whether all travellers are complying with the law" that's it’s okay for us to commit a crime and smuggle!

The discussion about how and if Revenue is able to proof where one purchased the stuff is nice but beside the point:

*S/he who is not declaring when bringing in goods from the US is breaking the law and cheating the revenue out of massive amounts of money (see earlier calculation of duty/vat due)!*

The Last time I checked Ireland is part of the EU not the 53rd state of the USA and hence special rules apply for imports from the US!

How two faced is this. If I start declaring less income and use every loophole there is to pay less income tax everyone would call me a tax cheat and wants me to be trown in jail but going shopping in the USA without declaring imports is okay?

I get a lot of stuff send from the US via fedex and I always declare it and happyly pay my duty/vat because even with that cost it is usualy way cheaper than purchasing it here. Sure, that itself is crazy but it’s the fact. If I import thing than I made the decision to purchse it there because I still save money on it even with freight, duty and VAT. If that would not be the case I would buy it here.


----------



## ubiquitous (22 Nov 2007)

DublinTexas said:


> You are breaking the law and cheating the revenue out of massive amounts of money (see earlier calculation of duty/vat due)!
> ...
> 
> How two faced is this.



I take exception to these comments.

I am neither "breaking the law" nor am I "cheating the revenue out of massive amounts of money". Nor am I being "two faced". 

I am simply telling you what the Revenue guy said on the radio.

If you have a gripe with this, take your complaint up with the Revenue or your TD. Don't blame me. 

For the record, I haven't been in the US or anywhere else outside the EU in several years so your accusations are totally wrong...no matter how many exclamation marks you use to emphasise your point!


----------



## DublinTexas (22 Nov 2007)

ubiquitous said:


> I take exception to these comments.
> 
> I am neither "breaking the law" nor am I "cheating the revenue out of massive amounts of money". Nor am I being "two faced".
> 
> ...


 
*Ubiquitous**,* I do appoligize if the previous posting might have been construed as to me accusing you of anything. I have edited the post to clarify this.

I quoted your statement followed by my opion which included references to the revenue statement and should have made a clearer break betwen my critism for the revenue statement you were kind enough to relay to us and the my personal opion about people bringing in thausends of $ worth of goods without declaring.

Never the less, I stick with my personal opinion about tax cheaters.


----------



## Bronte (22 Nov 2007)

I heard on the news today that if you are stupid enough to say bring 100 iphones in you will in all likelyhood get caught.  The implication being that if you brought just one for personal use (with no tags/receipts/packing) the customs are not going to waste their time with that.  The revenue guy, whom I did not hear, is not going to spell it out like that but I guess that's the way it works.  They have bigger fish to fly then a few holiday makers bringing some clothes/gadgets to Ireland from the US.  PS: I am making no comment on legality or illegality.


----------



## orka (22 Nov 2007)

*Re: Items over €175, coming back from NY - penalty?*




DublinTexas said:


> I get a lot of stuff send from the US via fedex and I always declare it and happyly pay my duty/vat


You’re making yourself out to be a paragon of virtue here but I’m curious - how do you ‘declare’ it?  Fedex automatically (see numerous threads) add the duties, taxes and a service fee so there appears to be no saintly way of ‘declaring’ stuff – just as there is no way of avoiding it – unless the stuff is below a very low threshold value.  




DublinTexas said:


> My personal experience is that if you go to the red channel and tell the customs officer that you have to declare personal shopping s/he usually asks you for the value and then tells you to go off without any charges.


Now, if this is true, how is this a fair system that whether you pay or not depends on the subjective decision of one customs official?  Is the customs official aiding and abetting you in defrauding the revenue?  You should have insisted that he let you pay what was due.  It didn’t suddenly become ‘not due’ did it?  The reality is that you did not pay tax that you admit was due to the revenue due to the ‘loophole’ of being fortunate enough to find a lenient/lax customs official.  You should send the revenue a cheque today.



DublinTexas said:


> How two faced is this. If I start declaring less income and use every loophole there is to pay less income tax everyone would call me a tax cheat and wants me to be trown in jail but going shopping in the USA without declaring imports is okay?



So smiling sweetly at the customs official to ‘evade’ tax is okay but using a (technically legal) loophole is not?  Going back to a point I made earlier, while yes you are technically correct that it is cheating the revenue of some income, there has to be a fairness aspect to any taxation system.  I don’t mind paying the large amounts of income tax I pay because everyone (pretty much) pays their fair share relative to income.  But with this, it appears to me that hardly anyone pays it (including DublinTexas by his/her own admission!).  No-one apart from DublinTexas has come up with first-hand stories of ‘what happened when I went through the red channel and declared stuff’ or even ‘what happened when I went through the green channel with extra stuff and got pulled over’.


----------



## John Rambo (22 Nov 2007)

DublinTexas said:


> How two faced is this. If I start declaring less income and use every loophole there is to pay less income tax everyone would call me a tax cheat and wants me to be trown in jail


 
As that is not illegal in any way they would be wrong to say those things.


----------



## Bronte (22 Nov 2007)

Very good last point John Rambo.   I too want to know all the loopholes as I wish to avoid paying any taxes I don't have to just like the top 10 (20?) earners in Ireland who pay zero (or next to nothing ) tax.


----------



## ubiquitous (22 Nov 2007)

Bronte said:


> I too want to know all the loopholes as I wish to avoid paying any taxes





_Tax-incentive schemes: What’s available? _[broken link removed] 

Personally I would prefer to pay up to 41% tax & prsi on my earnings than to invest much of my money in the sort of "opportunties" listed in this link. It doesn't bother me that there are a few people out there with more money than sense who seem to be quite willing to buy large numbers of tax incentive properties that no-one else wants, just so that they can cut their tax bills to zero.


----------



## Bronte (22 Nov 2007)

I didn't mean things like that Ubi, in most of those schemes the tax value is negated by the cost of getting in.  It's like those investment properties with a guaranted rental for the first 2 years.  I mean legitimate ways of reducing one's tax bill.


----------



## ubiquitous (22 Nov 2007)

*Re: Items over €175, coming back from NY - penalty?*

Like it or not (and we're going way off-topic here) these are the schemes that high-rollers are using to reduce their tax bills to near zero. The other incentives such as pension provision, film investments etc (where, arguably, the tax value is also negated by the cost of getting in, as you put it) are generally well known. There is no great mystery about all this.


----------



## Buckshee (22 Nov 2007)

Ray Darcy had a revenue guy on his show this morning ( possibly the same one that was on Morning Ireland but I don't know). Far as I remember his name was Buckley and he was very high up in Revenue South East Division. He seemed to have a very sensible attitude to the whole thing which could best be summarised as follows.

They are not out to get the normal person who has spent a wad of cash on clothing for personal use and had a bit of a jolly up in New York / Boston into the bargain.

They are most certainly out to get the lone person with 9 suitcases walking through the green channel or the person who has 48 handbags ( they caught such a person ) or similar quantities of the new apple ifone ( Ditto) and which are quite obviously for resale and not personal use.

Also, just for the record he said the combined total charge for vat and duty for items over your personal limit was 30%. I know the 21% vat and 27% duty figure has been posted on here but thats what he said guys, 30%.

So essentially if I spend $1000 on clothing for myself when it is converted to euro at 1.42 approx less my allowance of €175 then i'll be paying approx €158 in taxes on my purchases. I think I could live with that just long as it doesn't take 2 hours to declare it and have ir processed.


----------



## ubiquitous (22 Nov 2007)

Buckshee said:


> Also, just for the record he said the combined total charge for vat and duty for items over your personal limit was 30%. I know the 21% vat and 27% duty figure has been posted on here but thats what he said guys, 30%.
> 
> So essentially if I spend $1000 on clothing for myself when it is converted to euro at 1.42 approx less my allowance of €175 then i'll be paying approx €158 in taxes on my purchases. I think I could live with that just long as it doesn't take 2 hours to declare it and have ir processed.



Very interesting. So much fuss over so little - less indeed than many people will be paying in the Aer Rianta Car Park on their return...


----------



## aircobra19 (22 Nov 2007)

*Re: Items over €175, coming back from NY - penalty?*

I caught something on the radio about them catching someone with 300 or 400 iPhones or something.


----------



## MrKeane (22 Nov 2007)

*Re: Items over €175, coming back from NY - penalty?*

I saw a clip on the TV news about this. So how many ordinary Joes go through all this with the intention of making a bottomline profit? Using ballpark figures its flights €400, hotel for 3/4 nights €300 and €300 for sundries - food and drink, airport parking etc. etc. Lets say €1000

I guess the Aer Lingus baggage allowance is about 40kgs (not a lot of clothes really)

If people want an ipod etc. its probably cheaper to bring it in via Ebay and pay the duty and tax.

It strikes me that most people do these trips for the novelty / craic / holiday / ****up etc. - not to make a bottom line profit. Most people will lose on this if they were in it for profit.

The cheap prices merely partly subsidise a pre christmas break IMO and the money paid to Aer Lingus and Airport staff offsets any loss in duty and excise.


----------



## RainyDay (22 Nov 2007)

John Rambo said:


> To be honest I find your posts on this topic quite offensive...they add little to the subject.You can buy Abercrombie & Fitch in Ireland-there's a small place in the Powerscourt Centre which stocks a limited quantity. Plus, it could have been bought on a previous trip. What do you think will happen, that the customs officers will sniff the clothing to detect washing powder?And just for good measure, you throw in a jibe about A&F being overpriced tat. You're in the minority there. As a moderator I thought you'd have read the posting guidelines but evidently you haven't. You've added nothing to this discussion except attempts to cause confrontation with me. I suggest you examine the scenario being discussed from something other than a detached and theoretical viewpoint...do some travelling and talk to the customs officials and see how they behave.



If you have a problem with any of my posts, just click the red 'report post' triangle on the top right of any post, and it will be dealt with by the other moderators. 

I'd suggest you read my posts, rather than putting words in my mouth. I never suggested that Customs Officers would be sniffing for Daz. I did suggest that assuming that you can brazen your way through customs with silly excuses could be a dangerous assumption. You and other posters are free to take my advice or leave it.

And you might like be sure of your facts before you buy more A&F tat in Powerscourt.


----------



## MrKeane (22 Nov 2007)

RainyDay said:


> It reminds of those TV licence ads which just might make people realise that childish excuses don't work.


 
What makes you think childish excuses to evade paying the TV licence don't work - have you actually tried to use them?

The whole point of the ads is to scare people into thinking that they might get into big trouble for not paying their licence. From what I have seen in the media the biggest fine a court will hand out is probably €150, so if you get away with it for a year then you are quids in.

Once you have the right excuse you will get away with it when dealing with Gardai, customs, TV licence etc - you just have to have the neck to chance it.

I got a letter from the TV licence crowd recently, which "pretended" that they had called to the house a few days earlier. They had the date kind of scribbled out so I could not be sure when they had called and they had also ticked a box which said they had observed TV receiving equipment on the roof. Pity my aerial is indoors then and the satellite dish well hidden around the back.

So they are reduced to childish threats. It also said they will be back within 10 days - still no sign of them and it was around 2 weeks ago now.


----------



## RainyDay (22 Nov 2007)

Your day will come.


----------



## wheels (22 Nov 2007)

*Re: Items over €175, coming back from NY - penalty?*

Countless posts are saying that people think the customs guys are idiots. Of course they are not idiots but if you bring a few pairs of shirts, a new iPod and a couple of pairs of jeans that you bought home but don't have receipts how can they proove you didn't buy them in Ireland? I've a mate who buys trainers before he goes away so if he were to pack them on the way back they wouldn't be well worn, if he doens't have a receipt they cannot prove he is breaking any law.


----------



## ClubMan (22 Nov 2007)

MrKeane said:


> I got a letter from the TV licence crowd recently, which "pretended" that they had called to the house a few days earlier. They had the date kind of scribbled out so I could not be sure when they had called and they had also ticked a box which said they had observed TV receiving equipment on the roof. Pity my aerial is indoors then and the satellite dish well hidden around the back.


Maybe they looked in your window and saw your _TV_?


----------



## ClubMan (23 Nov 2007)

RainyDay said:


> I guess the Customs guys are far too dumb to have worked out that Abercrombie & Fitch isn't sold in Ireland at all


Is it not? I could have sworn that I saw it somewhere on sale in _Dublin _but maybe I'm wrong...


----------



## wheels (23 Nov 2007)

ClubMan said:


> Is it not? I could have sworn that I saw it somewhere on sale in _Dublin _but maybe I'm wrong...



It's sold in a boutique shop in the Powercourt shopping centre along with the Ohsaka brand. It has also popped up in various club denim/d2 style stores appearently due to shipping errors.


----------



## polaris (23 Nov 2007)

RainyDay said:


> I understand that technically, they don't have to prove anything. You have to prove that you paid all appropriate duties regardless of where you bought the products, so it is up to you to produce reciepts or other proof of purchase in Ireland. Assuming that you are smarter than them is just a bit silly.


 

Is this definite? It seems unlikely that the onus would be on the traveller to prove that he/she purchased the goods in the EU rather than the US. 

In other situations, it is up to the State to prove that an individual charged with a crime is guilty rather than that person having to prove his/her innocence.


----------



## foxylady (23 Nov 2007)

RainyDay said:


> OK then, you win. These professional Customs officers (who on a bad day will be dealing with drug dealers and professional cigarette smugglers) are going to get all flummoxed and intimidated when the shopper asks them to prove their position. Apologies for my obvious error.
> 
> I guess the Customs guys are far too dumb to have worked out that Abercrombie & Fitch isn't sold in Ireland at all (given that any shopper who has a teenage in their extended family is likely to have have their case full of A&F overpriced tat).


 
A & F is now sold in Ireland albeit one or two shops


----------



## rabbit (23 Nov 2007)

John Rambo said:


> I must re-emphasise all duties and taxes should be paid and that this site does not condone tax evasion of any kind.


 
Sometimes the customs do catch people out and rightfully take appropriate action.   If everyone paid the correct tax in this country the vat rate would not be so high.


----------



## MrKeane (24 Nov 2007)

rabbit said:


> Sometimes the customs do catch people out and rightfully take appropriate action. If everyone paid the correct tax in this country the vat rate would not be so high.


 
Or if the VAT rate was lower people might not be bothered about evading it.


----------

