Retail relief: GST plan to hit online shoppers.   :(

    by: Malcolm Farr, National Political Editor
    From: news.com.au
    April 23


ONLINE customers of overseas suppliers would have to pay the GST for the first time under preliminary options handed to the Government today.   :(

They would be taxed as if the goods had been bought from an Australian shop.

The most favoured option was for the tax to be paid by off-shore suppliers of goods and services sold to Australian customers.

“Information provided by debit and credit card issuers or intermediaries would be an extremely convincing voluntary compliance tool and it is considered that large companies would be more likely to comply than not,'' said the interim report.

The practice already exists overseas where big online retailers such as Amazon have to pay a variety of indirect taxes across several jurisdictions.

“Amazon complies with many VAT and US taxation requirements, so why does it comply with some indirect tax laws and not others?'' asked the GST Distribution Review preliminary report released today.


''The answer, quite simply, is that those countries' tax laws say it has to.''

The inquiry panel has made no firm recommendation to the Government and will not issue a final report until towards the end of the year.   :-?

Major retailers have complained they have to compete with overseas suppliers who don't have to pay the same taxes on sales.

Last August the Productivity Commission said the GST-free threshold value for online goods bought from overseas be lowered from the current $1000.

But the commission questioned whether the move would be cost effective as the cost of compliance could be greater than the amount of tax raised.   ;)

The GST review said today the option “most likely to be successful'' was for “offshore suppliers have liabilities under the existing law of which they are unaware''.

This would involve simple GST registration, lodgement and compliances processes with “certainty and clarity'' in the system.

This would involve “the identification of, and communication with, the major suppliers to Australian customers to ensure their voluntary compliance with an increased scope of the Australian GST''.





Comments on this story


    Yeah right Posted at 3:42 PM April 24, 2012

        GST is a liberal tax that most liberals like to forget. The tax we get slugged at every turn.   :(

    GMW of Perth Posted at 3:19 PM April 24, 2012

        I also appreciate options available when purchasing online because Australian retailers do not offer sufficient choice and I am fed up with seeing the same clothing brands in department stores with little or no inspiration or selection of colour in their new seasons lines.   :(

well heres one liberal that doesnt want to forget... I was in the grocery wholesale business for 15 years partly when wholesale tax was in and then GST .. believe me people who write this crap have no idea what wholesale tax was and what the States could do with it..

this way if you dont want to pay GST dont buy the bloody thing in OZ..

if you dont want overseas business to pay the TAX a home grown business has to pay..10% aint going to make that much difference and at least the govt is getting it..

then write to your local member and tell them what will happen to your vote next time round.

I think I understand what the retailers really want.

The slight additional cost to consumers 10% would have no beneficial impact on retailers in Australia who typically up mark prices by over 100%. The GST rate would be absolutely no disincentive to buyers.

The real benefit they would get comes from the OS sellers choosing to not sell into Australia because of the administrative Burdon.

The reality is that Australian sellers refuse to move to a more competitive model and are desperate to find a way which allows then to continue ripping off their customers.

The GST might be a Coalition Tax but Labor in Govt since 2007 and now with control of the Senate has made NO attempt to "roll it back".

Labor said the GST was unfair and would destroy the economy etc etc etc, campaigned viciously against it in 1993 and again in 1998 yet they now have the power to get rid of it and have done effall.

The truth is that just about every country with the issue of an aging population has a GST or VAT type tax.  Why? because the percentage of taxpayers as a proportion of the population is declining.  The tax base needs broadening.

Hewson's fightback was all about it.  Keating knew it as well but argued against it so he could win the 'unwinable' election of 1993.

The GST should be increased IMO.  Increase it by 5% to where Doc Hewson wanted it.  Remove the exemptions and plough the extra revenues into hospitals and education.

I have no issue with the recommendation that O/S online purchases attract the tax.

Swagman wrote on Apr 25^th, 2012 at 10:15am:

The GST might be a Coalition Tax but Labor in Govt since 2007 and now with control of the Senate has made NO attempt to "roll it back". Labor said the GST was unfair and would destroy the economy etc etc etc, campaigned viciously against it in 1993 and again in 1998 yet they now have the power to get rid of it and have done effall. The truth is that just about every country with the issue of an aging population has a GST or VAT type tax.  Why? because the percentage of taxpayers as a proportion of the population is declining.  The tax base needs broadening. Hewson's fightback was all about it.  Keating knew it as well but argued against it so he could win the 'unwinable' election of 1993. The GST should be increased IMO.  Increase it by 5% to where Doc Hewson wanted it.  Remove the exemptions and plough the extra revenues into hospitals and education. I have no issue with the recommendation that O/S online purchases attract the tax.

Your kidding, we are told that liberals are so partisan, meaning labor are so bi-partisan. Go figure lol but we all know the truth dont we.

My major objection to charging GST on overseas purchases is that it is the classic govt policy that misses its target by a wide margin. People dont buy overseas because products are <10% cheaper. as a rule they buy because they are a great deal cehaper or cannot be bought here at all. So on that basis alone, the policy is doomed to fail. But the real nail in the coffin is that the report also states that it would cost more to collect the GST than would be actually received. So in this regard it is the perfect labor policy. Has no hope of succeeding but will cost us money to do so.

Swagman wrote on Apr 25^th, 2012 at 10:15am:

The GST might be a Coalition Tax but Labor in Govt since 2007 and now with control of the Senate has made NO attempt to "roll it back". Labor said the GST was unfair and would destroy the economy etc etc etc, campaigned viciously against it in 1993 and again in 1998 yet they now have the power to get rid of it and have done effall. The truth is that just about every country with the issue of an aging population has a GST or VAT type tax.  Why? because the percentage of taxpayers as a proportion of the population is declining.  The tax base needs broadening. Hewson's fightback was all about it.  Keating knew it as well but argued against it so he could win the 'unwinable' election of 1993. The GST should be increased IMO.  Increase it by 5% to where Doc Hewson wanted it.  Remove the exemptions and plough the extra revenues into hospitals and education. I have no issue with the recommendation that O/S online purchases attract the tax.

The Libs said the same thing when Keating considered a similar GST..we have moved on since then and admitted that it was just cheap easy politics from both sides.

longweekend58 wrote on Apr 25^th, 2012 at 1:19pm:

My major objection to charging GST on overseas purchases is that it is the classic govt policy that misses its target by a wide margin. People dont buy overseas because products are <10% cheaper. as a rule they buy because they are a great deal cehaper or cannot be bought here at all. So on that basis alone, the policy is doomed to fail. But the real nail in the coffin is that the report also states that it would cost more to collect the GST than would be actually received. So in this regard it is the perfect labor policy. Has no hope of succeeding but will cost us money to do so.

we all know that longy but I would rather the govt have the 10% just the same...

I am sure China and India where a lot of these things are made by USING CHEAP LABOR..LOL>. something else I am sure most of those that buy are horrified by yet it doesnt stop them buying a bargain...hypocrites...

I am sure these countries are over the moon..

longweekend58 wrote on Apr 25^th, 2012 at 1:19pm:

My major objection to charging GST on overseas purchases is that it is the classic govt policy that misses its target by a wide margin. People dont buy overseas because products are <10% cheaper. as a rule they buy because they are a great deal cehaper or cannot be bought here at all. So on that basis alone, the policy is doomed to fail. But the real nail in the coffin is that the report also states that it would cost more to collect the GST than would be actually received. So in this regard it is the perfect labor policy. Has no hope of succeeding but will cost us money to do so.

How so? basically the GST is collected by the retailer, say EBay. It would be their responsibility to collect and the point is not to save Gerry Harvey's ass though i am sure the liberal party are desperate to help their friend, the point is to collect the tax owed the country. I agree the prices are so much lower that the 10% GST sure ain't going to make a difference.

cods wrote on Apr 25^th, 2012 at 2:49pm:

longweekend58 wrote on Apr 25th, 2012 at 1:19pm: My major objection to charging GST on overseas purchases is that it is the classic govt policy that misses its target by a wide margin. People dont buy overseas because products are <10% cheaper. as a rule they buy because they are a great deal cehaper or cannot be bought here at all. So on that basis alone, the policy is doomed to fail. But the real nail in the coffin is that the report also states that it would cost more to collect the GST than would be actually received. So in this regard it is the perfect labor policy. Has no hope of succeeding but will cost us money to do so. we all know that longy but I would rather the govt have the 10% just the same... I am sure China and India where a lot of these things are made by USING CHEAP LABOR..LOL>. something else I am sure most of those that buy are horrified by yet it doesnt stop them buying a bargain...hypocrites... I am sure these countries are over the moon..

but they WONT get the 10% Cods. That was the point. it will cost 12% of imports to charge the 10% GST. That means the govt will LOSE money all to implement a policy that wont change online shopping one iota.

nairbe wrote on Apr 25^th, 2012 at 3:04pm:

longweekend58 wrote on Apr 25th, 2012 at 1:19pm: My major objection to charging GST on overseas purchases is that it is the classic govt policy that misses its target by a wide margin. People dont buy overseas because products are <10% cheaper. as a rule they buy because they are a great deal cehaper or cannot be bought here at all. So on that basis alone, the policy is doomed to fail. But the real nail in the coffin is that the report also states that it would cost more to collect the GST than would be actually received. So in this regard it is the perfect labor policy. Has no hope of succeeding but will cost us money to do so. How so? basically the GST is collected by the retailer, say EBay. It would be their responsibility to collect and the point is not to save Gerry Harvey's ass though i am sure the liberal party are desperate to help their friend, the point is to collect the tax owed the country. I agree the prices are so much lower that the 10% GST sure ain't going to make a difference.

the GST can only be collected by customs which of course means you ahve to pay to get your parcel either at aust post or customs itself. this all costs money - losts of it. And how do you propose getting ebay sellers to collect 10% australia GST on everythign they sell? Quite simply, they wont, nor will ebay itself. you cant get amazon to collect GSt and even if you could what do you do about the 100,000 other sellers? they will do nothing. What if we were all required here to collect UK VAT or califormian sales tax or any one of a myriad other such charges? we eont.

the ONLY option is customs doing it which will slow everythign down, cost more to colelct than is actually received and be utterly ineffective in reducing online sales anyhow.

Dnarever wrote on Apr 25^th, 2012 at 9:45am:

I think I understand what the retailers really want. The slight additional cost to consumers 10% would have no beneficial impact on retailers in Australia who typically up mark prices by over 100%. The GST rate would be absolutely no disincentive to buyers. The real benefit they would get comes from the OS sellers choosing to not sell into Australia because of the administrative Burdon. The reality is that Australian sellers refuse to move to a more competitive model and are desperate to find a way which allows then to continue ripping off their customers.

100% lolol

You obviously have no idea about retailing do you.