|
 |
| | | Author: | KACL  | | Posted: | Aug 12, 2023 16:20 | | Subject: | Learned my lesson | | Viewed: | 299 times | | Topic: | Selling | |
|
| About a month ago or so, I had my first sale. What I didn’t know at the time
was that the buyer circumvented the correct buying process. Thanks to so many
of you, I learned what to look for and what to lookout for. Today I got notified
that I had been paid for an order. I checked PayPal and lo and behold, there
was no partner fee. I emailed the buyer explaining what had to be done and refunded
them so they could correct the issue. A month ago, I was totally clueless but
you are all so nice about helping the newbies out. I just wanted to say thank
you!
Karen
|
|
| | | | | |
| | | | | Author: | Brickman4you | | Posted: | Aug 12, 2023 16:31 | | Subject: | (Cancelled) | | Viewed: | 83 times | | Topic: | Selling | |
|
| | (Cancelled) |
|
| | | | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | Author: | SylvainLS | | Posted: | Aug 12, 2023 16:52 | | Subject: | Re: Learned my lesson | | Viewed: | 90 times | | Topic: | Selling | |
|
| In Selling, Brickman4you writes:
| | […]
Bricklink has addressed and fixed this issue with Instant Checkout. Maybe you
should look into adding it to your store.
|
The problem isn’t not having Instant Checkout, it’s having buyers who bypass
Onsite. See pic.
I don’t remember if it’s KACL’s fault. Maybe there’s something wrong in her
invoices? (PayPal e-mail address?)
|
|
|
| | | | | | | | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | | | Author: | KACL | | Posted: | Aug 12, 2023 17:38 | | Subject: | Re: Learned my lesson | | Viewed: | 67 times | | Topic: | Selling | |
|
| In Selling, SylvainLS writes:
| | In Selling, Brickman4you writes:
| | […]
Bricklink has addressed and fixed this issue with Instant Checkout. Maybe you
should look into adding it to your store.
|
The problem isn’t not having Instant Checkout, it’s having buyers who bypass
Onsite. See pic.
I don’t remember if it’s KACL’s fault. Maybe there’s something wrong in her
invoices? (PayPal e-mail address?)
|
I have a different email for PayPal. I tried Instant Checkout but it was really
miscalculating the shipping cost so it’s gone until my scale comes in.
|
|
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | | | | | Author: | SylvainLS | | Posted: | Aug 12, 2023 18:11 | | Subject: | Re: Learned my lesson | | Viewed: | 67 times | | Topic: | Selling | |
|
| In Selling, KACL writes:
| | […]
I have a different email for PayPal.
|
So you must be giving it to your buyers? Otherwise how they know how to pay
you offsite?
You shouldn’t need to give them your PayPal e-mail. Just tell them to use the
Pay button and they will have to.
No more misunderstandings 
| | I tried Instant Checkout but it was really
miscalculating the shipping cost so it’s gone until my scale comes in.
|
As the pic shows: you can perfectly continue without auto-invoice, provided you
have Onsite (IC = auto-invoice + Onsite).
|
|
| | | | | | | | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | | | Author: | ghyde | | Posted: | Aug 12, 2023 19:17 | | Subject: | Re: Learned my lesson | | Viewed: | 68 times | | Topic: | Selling | |
|
| In Selling, SylvainLS writes:
| | In Selling, Brickman4you writes:
| | […]
Bricklink has addressed and fixed this issue with Instant Checkout. Maybe you
should look into adding it to your store.
|
The problem isn’t not having Instant Checkout, it’s having buyers who bypass
Onsite. See pic.
I don’t remember if it’s KACL’s fault. Maybe there’s something wrong in her
invoices? (PayPal e-mail address?)
|
The phrase you wrote above, in your first sentence is not properly written: "isn't
not" translates to "is not not" meaning it's a double negative.
The not's cancel each other out, Which means what you wrote is just "is".
Therefore the sentence you wrote reads as follows:
"The problem is having instant checkout", which is not what you intended
to say.
Always remember to check for and eliminate unnecessary double negatives.
This concludes your grammar lesson for today.
 
Cheers ...
ghyde
|
|
|
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | | | | | Author: | KACL | | Posted: | Aug 12, 2023 19:42 | | Subject: | Re: Learned my lesson | | Viewed: | 65 times | | Topic: | Selling | |
|
| In Selling, ghyde writes:
| | In Selling, SylvainLS writes:
| | In Selling, Brickman4you writes:
| | […]
Bricklink has addressed and fixed this issue with Instant Checkout. Maybe you
should look into adding it to your store.
|
The problem isn’t not having Instant Checkout, it’s having buyers who bypass
Onsite. See pic.
I don’t remember if it’s KACL’s fault. Maybe there’s something wrong in her
invoices? (PayPal e-mail address?)
|
The phrase you wrote above, in your first sentence is not properly written: "isn't
not" translates to "is not not" meaning it's a double negative.
The not's cancel each other out, Which means what you wrote is just "is".
Therefore the sentence you wrote reads as follows:
"The problem is having instant checkout", which is not what you intended
to say.
Always remember to check for and eliminate unnecessary double negatives.
This concludes your grammar lesson for today.
Cheers ...
ghyde
|
You two never fail to give me a chuckle. 🙂
|
|
|
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | | | | | Author: | SylvainLS | | Posted: | Aug 13, 2023 07:55 | | Subject: | Re: Learned my lesson | | Viewed: | 65 times | | Topic: | Selling | |
|
| In Selling, ghyde writes:
| | […]
The phrase you wrote above, in your first sentence is not properly written: "isn't
not" translates to "is not not" meaning it's a double negative.
The not's cancel each other out, Which means what you wrote is just "is".
Therefore the sentence you wrote reads as follows:
"The problem is having instant checkout", which is not what you intended
to say.
Always remember to check for and eliminate unnecessary double negatives.
This concludes your grammar lesson for today.
|
Nope. “Not having” here is a noun (negative gerund), not a verb.
Maybe confusing but totally correct grammatically 
|
|
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | | | | | | | Author: | 1001bricks | | Posted: | Aug 13, 2023 09:54 | | Subject: | Re: Learned my lesson | | Viewed: | 47 times | | Topic: | Selling | |
|
| In Selling, SylvainLS writes:
| | In Selling, ghyde writes:
| | […]
The phrase you wrote above, in your first sentence is not properly written: "isn't
not" translates to "is not not" meaning it's a double negative.
The not's cancel each other out, Which means what you wrote is just "is".
Therefore the sentence you wrote reads as follows:
"The problem is having instant checkout", which is not what you intended
to say.
Always remember to check for and eliminate unnecessary double negatives.
This concludes your grammar lesson for today.
|
Nope. “Not having” here is a noun (negative gerund), not a verb.
Maybe confusing but totally correct grammatically
|
Aren't you not not nuts?
|
|
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | Author: | wildchicken13 | | Posted: | Aug 13, 2023 09:56 | | Subject: | Re: Learned my lesson | | Viewed: | 45 times | | Topic: | Selling | |
|
| In Selling, 1001bricks writes:
I'm not
|
|
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | Author: | SylvainLS | | Posted: | Aug 13, 2023 10:15 | | Subject: | Re: Learned my lesson | | Viewed: | 44 times | | Topic: | Selling | |
|
| In Selling, 1001bricks writes:
| | […]
| | Nope. “Not having” here is a noun (negative gerund), not a verb.
Maybe confusing but totally correct grammatically
|
Aren't you not not nuts?
|
This isn’t a case of faulty double negative.
If I had remembered the word “lacking” (positive gerund which means the opposite
of “having,” and so is the same thing as “not having”), I’d have written
The problem isn’t lacking IC.
There, you’ve two ways to analyse the sentence:
1. The verb is “to lack.”
(The problem)subject (isn’t lacking)verb (IC)object
That would be the negation of
(The problem)s (is lacking)v (IC)o
That’s semantically unsound: a problem doesn’t “lack” or “have” IC.
2. The verb is “to be.”
(The problem)s (isn’t)v (lacking IC)attribute
That would be the negation of
(The problem)s (is)v (lacking IC)a
(lacking IC) is a noun phrase. It’s the action that something/someone is doing
when they lack IC. Like “walking” in the sentence “Walking is good for your
health.”¹
It could be replaced by “the lack of IC,” “the absence of IC.”
So (2) is the only possibility that’s semantically sound.
Replace “lacking” with the synonymous “not having” and you get the analysis of
my original sentence.
You can also move the components around:
Not having IC isn’t the problem.
That makes another semantically and grammatically correct sentence (not Yoda
talk).
There’s also sometimes a misconception / confusion with gerunds: the use of possessives.
Alice is swimming. Bob is impressed by Alice’s swimming.
Alice and Bob are swimming. Charlie is impressed by their swimming.
“Their” is correct: “’s” and “their” are possessives, not present continuous.
Add a few words and the grammar changes:
Bob is impressed by the way Alice’s swimming.
Charlie is impressed by the fact they’re swimming.
Grammar is fun.
Yep, I’m trying. Very trying
———
¹ This is not to be analysed as a faulty inverted writting of the present progessive
of to walk
|
|
|
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | Author: | 1001bricks | | Posted: | Aug 13, 2023 10:30 | | Subject: | Re: Learned my lesson | | Viewed: | 40 times | | Topic: | Selling | |
|
| In Selling, SylvainLS writes:
| | In Selling, 1001bricks writes:
| | […]
| | Nope. “Not having” here is a noun (negative gerund), not a verb.
Maybe confusing but totally correct grammatically
|
Aren't you not not nuts?
|
This isn’t a case of faulty double negative.
|
I didn't say it not on purpose!
| | If I had remembered the word “lacking” (positive gerund which means the opposite
of “having,” and so is the same thing as “not having”), I’d have written
The problem isn’t lacking IC.
There, you’ve two ways to analyse the sentence:
1. The verb is “to lack.”
(The problem)subject (isn’t lacking)verb (IC)object
That would be the negation of
(The problem)s (is lacking)v (IC)o
That’s semantically unsound: a problem doesn’t “lack” or “have” IC.
2. The verb is “to be.”
(The problem)s (isn’t)v (lacking IC)attribute
That would be the negation of
(The problem)s (is)v (lacking IC)a
(lacking IC) is a noun phrase. It’s the action that something/someone is doing
when they lack IC. Like “walking” in the sentence “Walking is good for your
health.”¹
It could be replaced by “the lack of IC,” “the absence of IC.”
So (2) is the only possibility that’s semantically sound.
Replace “lacking” with the synonymous “not having” and you get the analysis of
my original sentence.
You can also move the components around:
Not having IC isn’t the problem.
That makes another semantically and grammatically correct sentence (not Yoda
talk).
There’s also sometimes a misconception / confusion with gerunds: the use of possessives.
Alice is swimming. Bob is impressed by Alice’s swimming.
Alice and Bob are swimming. Charlie is impressed by their swimming.
“Their” is correct: “’s” and “their” are possessives, not present continuous.
Add a few words and the grammar changes:
Bob is impressed by the way Alice’s swimming.
Charlie is impressed by the fact they’re swimming.
Grammar is fun.
|
Yep, thanks Doctor, but I think I knew all this
|
|
|
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | Author: | SylvainLS | | Posted: | Aug 13, 2023 10:39 | | Subject: | Re: Learned my lesson | | Viewed: | 49 times | | Topic: | Selling | |
|
| In Selling, 1001bricks writes:
| | […]
Yep, thanks Doctor, but I think I knew all this
|
I wasn’t only talking to you. I was expanding on my previous answer to ghyde:
“No, I’m right” isn’t a good answer. “No, I’m right because…” is better
|
|
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | | | | | Author: | Poncke | | Posted: | Aug 13, 2023 09:15 | | Subject: | Re: Learned my lesson | | Viewed: | 76 times | | Topic: | Selling | |
|
| In Selling, ghyde writes:
| | In Selling, SylvainLS writes:
| | In Selling, Brickman4you writes:
| | […]
Bricklink has addressed and fixed this issue with Instant Checkout. Maybe you
should look into adding it to your store.
|
The problem isn’t not having Instant Checkout, it’s having buyers who bypass
Onsite. See pic.
I don’t remember if it’s KACL’s fault. Maybe there’s something wrong in her
invoices? (PayPal e-mail address?)
|
The phrase you wrote above, in your first sentence is not properly written: "isn't
not" translates to "is not not" meaning it's a double negative.
The not's cancel each other out, Which means what you wrote is just "is".
Therefore the sentence you wrote reads as follows:
"The problem is having instant checkout", which is not what you intended
to say.
Always remember to check for and eliminate unnecessary double negatives.
This concludes your grammar lesson for today.
Cheers ...
ghyde
|
Well, I am no native English speak, but you are totally wrong here.
"The problem is not not having instant checkout" is perfectly clear.
The problem is not "not having instant checkout" is how you must read
it, it is not a double negative in this case.
I need blue and red balls, but there are only red balls, so the problem is not
not having red balls.
|
|
|
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | | | | | | | Author: | wildchicken13 | | Posted: | Aug 13, 2023 09:58 | | Subject: | Re: Learned my lesson | | Viewed: | 45 times | | Topic: | Selling | |
|
| In Selling, Poncke writes:
| | I need blue and red balls, but there are only red balls, so the problem is not
not having red balls.
|
Trust me, having blue balls is more of a problem than having red balls.
|
|
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | Author: | Poncke | | Posted: | Aug 13, 2023 17:28 | | Subject: | Re: Learned my lesson | | Viewed: | 57 times | | Topic: | Selling | |
|
| In Selling, wildchicken13 writes:
| | In Selling, Poncke writes:
| | I need blue and red balls, but there are only red balls, so the problem is not
not having red balls.
|
Trust me, having blue balls is more of a problem than having red balls.
|
I knew when writing about blue balls someone would point this out to me
|
|
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | | | | | Author: | yorbrick | | Posted: | Aug 13, 2023 14:14 | | Subject: | Re: Learned my lesson | | Viewed: | 54 times | | Topic: | Selling | |
|
| In Selling, ghyde writes:
| | In Selling, SylvainLS writes:
| | In Selling, Brickman4you writes:
| | […]
Bricklink has addressed and fixed this issue with Instant Checkout. Maybe you
should look into adding it to your store.
|
The problem isn’t not having Instant Checkout, it’s having buyers who bypass
Onsite. See pic.
I don’t remember if it’s KACL’s fault. Maybe there’s something wrong in her
invoices? (PayPal e-mail address?)
|
The phrase you wrote above, in your first sentence is not properly written: "isn't
not" translates to "is not not" meaning it's a double negative.
The not's cancel each other out, Which means what you wrote is just "is".
Therefore the sentence you wrote reads as follows:
"The problem is having instant checkout", which is not what you intended
to say.
Always remember to check for and eliminate unnecessary double negatives.
This concludes your grammar lesson for today.
|
I'm a native English speaker and Sylvain's sentence makes perfect sense
to me. I'm often surprised at how good some non-native speakers are at English,
especially compared to some native ones.
|
|
|
| | | | | |
| | | | | Author: | Debstarcrazy | | Posted: | Sep 3, 2023 17:24 | | Subject: | Re: Learned my lesson | | Viewed: | 82 times | | Topic: | Selling | |
|
| In Selling, KACL writes:
| | About a month ago or so, I had my first sale. What I didn’t know at the time
was that the buyer circumvented the correct buying process. Thanks to so many
of you, I learned what to look for and what to lookout for. Today I got notified
that I had been paid for an order. I checked PayPal and lo and behold, there
was no partner fee. I emailed the buyer explaining what had to be done and refunded
them so they could correct the issue. A month ago, I was totally clueless but
you are all so nice about helping the newbies out. I just wanted to say thank
you!
Karen
|
Just seen your message and as a new seller I'm not sure what you are all
talking about. Can someone please explain to me what I need to be looking for?
Thank you in advance!
Debbie
|
|
|
| | | | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | Author: | SylvainLS | | Posted: | Sep 3, 2023 17:55 | | Subject: | Re: Learned my lesson | | Viewed: | 59 times | | Topic: | Selling | |
|
| In Selling, Debstarcrazy writes:
| | […]
Just seen your message and as a new seller I'm not sure what you are all
talking about. Can someone please explain to me what I need to be looking for?
Thank you in advance!
Debbie
|
Hi,
There’s “new” (applied from 2020) laws that make marketplaces (BrickLink) responsible
for the collection of some taxes¹.
In order to do that, the payment must be made through BrickLink, with one of
the “Onsite” payment methods (PayPayl Onsite or Stripe).
(“PayPal Onsite” is not the same method as “PayPal.”)
Some buyers, intentionally or not, pay directly to the seller, instead of using
the Pay button on their invoice or in their Orders placed page.
That means they log in PayPal on their own, enter the e-mail address of the seller
on their own, enter the value on their own, and proceed with the payment. (The
“PayPal” method.)
When they do that, BrickLink isn’t involved, doesn’t and can’t collect the tax,
and the order’s status can’t be set to “Paid.”
The seller is getting tax money while they have no right to it and can’t remitt
it to the authorities.
The buyer and the seller are committing tax fraud ( https://www.bricklink.com/message.asp?ID=1401495
).
When the payment is correctly made Onsite / through BrickLink, the tax appears
on the PayPal transaction as a “Partner fee.”
(It’s “tax” or “VAT” in the “addition” that leads to the grand total the buyer
paid but it’s “removed” as “Partner fee,” along with PayPal’s fee.)
Some sellers still don’t know about these new obligations and only realize the
problem after they have shipped the order because they can’t change the status
to “shipped” (because, for BrickLink, the order wasn’t paid!).
KACL got burnt the first time it happened. The second time, KACL immediately
understood the buyer didn’t pay correctly (because the “Partner fee” was absent)
and could act before it got complicated.
The only way to correct the situation is to refund the wrong payment and ask
the buyer to pay with the Pay button on BrickLink.
No, there’s no way to give BrickLink the tax money only.
Hope that’s clear
————
¹ Taxes paid by the buyer in:
USA: sales tax on all orders in most states
UK: import VAT for orders below £135 when the seller is not in UK.
EU: import VAT for orders below €150 when the seller is not in EU.
AU(stralia): import GST for orders below AUD 1,000 when the seller is not in
AU.
And soon Norway & New-Zealand….
|
|
|
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | | | Author: | 1001bricks | | Posted: | Sep 3, 2023 18:38 | | Subject: | Re: Learned my lesson | | Viewed: | 42 times | | Topic: | Selling | |
|
| | | There’s “new” (applied from 2020) laws that make marketplaces (BrickLink) responsible
for the collection of some taxes¹.
Some sellers still don’t know about these new obligations and only realize the
problem after they have shipped the order because they can’t change the status
to “shipped” (because, for BrickLink, the order wasn’t paid!).
|
Yes many sellers aren't aware, even 3 years after a change.
On the other side (and of course as they don't / never have) read Help, this
is a BrickLink communication problem:
* I don't receive announcements and news for couple of years (ticket opened),
* There is no pop up or redirection page "Please read this" and a check
box "I agree I've read" (otherwise it'll pop up again) - when
you're a Seller,
* The change log page is either not updated, or contains details few care - so,
there no Help page "What's new and important" or such.
In short, it's very normal in this context people come and say "Hey,
but what's this partner fee I just had on my PayPal account, is that new????"
|
|
|
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | | | | | Author: | SylvainLS | | Posted: | Sep 3, 2023 18:51 | | Subject: | Re: Learned my lesson | | Viewed: | 34 times | | Topic: | Selling | |
|
| In Selling, 1001bricks writes:
| | […]
In short, it's very normal in this context people come and say "Hey,
but what's this partner fee I just had on my PayPal account, is that new????"
|
Yep, understandable… not necessarily excusable. Ignorance is no defence.
|
|
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | | | | | | | Author: | 1001bricks | | Posted: | Sep 3, 2023 19:09 | | Subject: | Re: Learned my lesson | | Viewed: | 67 times | | Topic: | Selling | |
|
| In Selling, SylvainLS writes:
| | In Selling, 1001bricks writes:
| | […]
In short, it's very normal in this context people come and say "Hey,
but what's this partner fee I just had on my PayPal account, is that new????"
|
Yep, understandable… not necessarily excusable. Ignorance is no defence.
|
Agreed, but then there are sources like "Journal Officiel", news, mail,
etc.
If someone doesn't receive an e-mail and doesn't read ALL BrickLink Help
pages, one by one, or read Forum posts for weeks, tell me how he can be aware
of important recent changes - sincerely?
|
|
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | Author: | SylvainLS | | Posted: | Sep 4, 2023 05:15 | | Subject: | Re: Learned my lesson | | Viewed: | 36 times | | Topic: | Selling | |
|
| In Selling, 1001bricks writes:
| | […]
Agreed, but then there are sources like "Journal Officiel", news, mail,
etc.
If someone doesn't receive an e-mail and doesn't read ALL BrickLink Help
pages, one by one, or read Forum posts for weeks, tell me how he can be aware
of important recent changes - sincerely?
|
Well, everybody had to accept the ToS, when they registered (new sellers) or
when the ToS were changed (older sellers).
And lo and behold:
General ToS:
”4. General Statements Regarding Fees and Taxes:
Simply becoming a registered user on the Site is free and BrickLink does not
charge you any fees for simply being a registered user.
Of course, as a Buyer of an item from a Seller, you must pay the Seller for the
item you purchase from the Seller.
In addition, certain countries and regions require marketplaces such as BrickLink
to collect and remit transaction taxes (e.g. sales tax, VAT, GST, etc.) directly
from the Buyer. If the shipping address for an order is in one of these countries
or regions, transaction tax may be applied to the order. Due to technical complexity
and the need for accurate recordkeeping, BrickLink may restrict the type of payment
methods available for all such orders.
Sellers are subject to pricing and payment terms in the Seller Terms (as defined
below).
Designers are subject to pricing and payment terms in the Designer Terms (as
defined below).”
Sellers terms:
”1.4 Tax Obligations: In addition to paying taxes on BrickLink fees, you are
responsible for handling all applicable taxes on sales from your store. However,
for orders shipping to an address in certain countries or regions where BrickLink
is subject to marketplace legislation, BrickLink will collect and remit transaction
taxes (e.g. sales tax, VAT, GST, etc.) directly from the Buyer.“
It’s not exactly in the bottom of a locked filing cabinet stuck in a disused
lavatory with a sign on the door saying ‘Beware of the Leopard,‘ down a lightless
and stairless basement.
Also:
1. If you read that and don’t understand, you can search the help pages and ask
on the forums. If you don’t that, it’s on you.
2. I know, people accept ToS without reading them, without even skimming them.
But then, when you chant “lalala” with your hands on your ears, you can’t complain
you weren’t told.
Bad communication is BL’s trademark but due diligence is still required.
|
|
|
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | Author: | yorbrick | | Posted: | Sep 4, 2023 05:27 | | Subject: | Re: Learned my lesson | | Viewed: | 40 times | | Topic: | Selling | |
|
| | | Bad communication is BL’s trademark but due diligence is still required.
|
That should be the basis of the BL tag line.
BRICKLINK, where good communication is [undefined]*.
|
|
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | Author: | SylvainLS | | Posted: | Sep 4, 2023 06:10 | | Subject: | Re: Learned my lesson | | Viewed: | 54 times | | Topic: | Selling | |
|
| In Selling, yorbrick writes:
| | | | Bad communication is BL’s trademark but due diligence is still required.
|
That should be the basis of the BL tag line.
BRICKLINK, where good communication is [undefined]*.
|
Can’t do: that would be good communication
|
|
| | | | | | | | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | | | Author: | Debstarcrazy | | Posted: | Sep 14, 2023 02:40 | | Subject: | Re: Learned my lesson | | Viewed: | 73 times | | Topic: | Selling | |
|
| In Selling, SylvainLS writes:
| | In Selling, Debstarcrazy writes:
| | […]
Just seen your message and as a new seller I'm not sure what you are all
talking about. Can someone please explain to me what I need to be looking for?
Thank you in advance!
Debbie
|
Hi,
There’s “new” (applied from 2020) laws that make marketplaces (BrickLink) responsible
for the collection of some taxes¹.
In order to do that, the payment must be made through BrickLink, with one of
the “Onsite” payment methods (PayPayl Onsite or Stripe).
(“PayPal Onsite” is not the same method as “PayPal.”)
Some buyers, intentionally or not, pay directly to the seller, instead of using
the Pay button on their invoice or in their Orders placed page.
That means they log in PayPal on their own, enter the e-mail address of the seller
on their own, enter the value on their own, and proceed with the payment. (The
“PayPal” method.)
When they do that, BrickLink isn’t involved, doesn’t and can’t collect the tax,
and the order’s status can’t be set to “Paid.”
The seller is getting tax money while they have no right to it and can’t remitt
it to the authorities.
The buyer and the seller are committing tax fraud ( https://www.bricklink.com/message.asp?ID=1401495
).
When the payment is correctly made Onsite / through BrickLink, the tax appears
on the PayPal transaction as a “Partner fee.”
(It’s “tax” or “VAT” in the “addition” that leads to the grand total the buyer
paid but it’s “removed” as “Partner fee,” along with PayPal’s fee.)
Some sellers still don’t know about these new obligations and only realize the
problem after they have shipped the order because they can’t change the status
to “shipped” (because, for BrickLink, the order wasn’t paid!).
KACL got burnt the first time it happened. The second time, KACL immediately
understood the buyer didn’t pay correctly (because the “Partner fee” was absent)
and could act before it got complicated.
The only way to correct the situation is to refund the wrong payment and ask
the buyer to pay with the Pay button on BrickLink.
No, there’s no way to give BrickLink the tax money only.
Hope that’s clear
————
¹ Taxes paid by the buyer in:
USA: sales tax on all orders in most states
UK: import VAT for orders below £135 when the seller is not in UK.
EU: import VAT for orders below €150 when the seller is not in EU.
AU(stralia): import GST for orders below AUD 1,000 when the seller is not in
AU.
And soon Norway & New-Zealand….
|
Ah! That does really help, thank you so much.
Now I just need to work out why such a small 'business' dealing with
such small amounts is eligible for paying VAT at all! That's a headscratcher!
Thanks for your help though, I get it now.
|
|
|
|
|
|
USA, Connecticut
France, Nouvelle-Aquitaine
Australia, Queensland
Ireland, Meath
United Kingdom, England