I'm getting quite sick of hearing how tax is not attached to some products, it's absolute garbage.

Let's see, take for example a pint of milk taxed or not?

Well I can't give an absolute breakdown of the accounts of a pint of milk, however the structure of tax life of the pint of milk can be observed.

Firstly the dairy farmer, & employees will pay tax on their profits/wages and then there are bills that are taxed in association with dairy farming such as vets bills, cattle feed, fuel etc..... some of which can be reclaimed.

Secondly the milk carton company will pay tax on their profits, wages fuel expenses etc.... some of which can be reclaimed.

Thirdly the deliver service, the driver will pay tax on their wages, profits, fuels etc.... even the person who pours the fuel into the lorry pays tax on their wages... some of which can be.....

Fourthly the shop/supermarket will have to pay profit tax (unless they're doing the offshore thing) and everyone that works at the shop that comes into contact with that pint of milk will pay tax on their wages.

Fifthly everyone who gets paid and comes into contact with the life of selling that milk pint, to disposing of the carton after use will pay tax to some degree or spend an element of their wages on other things such as fuel that is high in tax.

It appears to me that that's that, another thing to take into consideration is a bottle of beer, if I buy a bottle of beer from as shop, the shopkeeper pays VAT on that profit and so do I.
If I sell the bottle of beer to another shop, the second shop again pays VAT on the bottle of beer.
If I again buy the same bottle of beer from the second shop then the second shop keeper again pays VAT on the bottle of beer and so do I.
This means that if the same bottle of beer is bought and sold via venders the tax on that one bottle of beer could be infinite.

The same applies with vehicles the venders must pay VAT every time they buy or sell a motor vehicle thus the same vehicle can accrue tax payments on multiple occasions.

The same would apply to milk if it were sold and resold it's just that the tax will not appear on the receipt if analysed for a breakdown, it only appears in the other unseen costings such as employees wages to which they pay tax, thus when the milk is bought the money given for the milk at every stage of it's life is taxed, from dairy farm to consumer and refuging.

It's either that or I'm talking bollocks.

Which shop do you normally sell your bottles of beer to?

feather wrote:
I don't sell beer to shops, it's just that the law states that tax would need to be paid on the same bottle of beer every time it was sold or bought to or from a vender.
So a bottle of beer could amount to thousands of pounds in tax if the same bottle of beer floats around the market.
Therefore it seems like its transaction tax, not beer tax.

Cousin_Frothy wrote: On the other hand, if people are not re-selling bottles of beer to shops then the tax, (and analogy), potential dries up instantly.

i for one would be highly suspicious of someone trying to sell me a single bottle. but, i would pay cash. hush hush ok.

feather wrote:
Yes.
The point I was making is that as a scenario if two venders sold each other the same bottle of beer, back and forth, even though they have both paid tax on it already, they would have to keep paying more and more tax on the same product that they had already taxed up for.
When I would suggest once the duty has been paid for a product then that's that.
Such as when the vender buys the product from the brewery or wholesaler they pay VAT and then that is coughed up by the punter at the venders business.
But what we have is off product tax, so even if the tax has been paid, the same tax could be repaid on the same product, so what we have is VAT on transactions and not products, the product is only providing the tariff.

Cousin_Frothy wrote: No you can't. Spanner to yer plan #1
Here's an example of why you can't sort out spanner #1. You misunderstand the system. The shopkeeper collects the VAT from you, who pays it. She/He then hands it in to the Exchequer, after deducting the VAT that the business has had to pay out on purchases made in order to function that year.Mere hyperbole, with no basis in reality. And so it continues....

I have never collected VAT when I sold a vehicle. Maybe you aren't Andrew Sachs...Perhaps you're Arthur Daley?
Whoever you are, you clearly don't get VAT...

Well, I didn't wanna mention it.....


All that said, your presumption is not far off. Last time I checked, the actual purchasing power of a pound was about 30p. The remainder going to the Exchequer through all the devious method the State employs....Someone else might be arsed to check the current ratio.

knobmeup wrote:
The Vender pays VAT to the tax man not the private seller.... duh !!... every time the venders buy or sell a vehicle, when they sell it the VAT is covered by the punter.

However this could happen on multiple occasions to the same vehicle.

Beer, yes I know the shopkeeper collects the VAT from the punter, it's only in this unlikely scenario. if two venders buy & sell the same bottle of beer back and forth between each other the VAT is paid on multiple occasions.
Thus the VAT is not on the beer but on the transactions, otherwise it would only be paid once in that scenario, however it won't be paid only once as each transaction of beer accrues VAT. (when venders are included) ( if they want to remain tax legal)

Apart from that you appear to have some clue about how VAT is accrued.

I'll keep drinking my beers then instead of trying to sell it back to the shop I bought it from.

Take that VATman!

If your beer was kept in a large vessel would you also be expected to pay VAT on the vat or are vats Vat free?

Vats all Folks!

Cousin_Frothy wrote: If you sell a car, or anything, you are the vendor. Regardless of whether you are a business.....der. Your spelling of vendor speaks volumes btw If you "buy" something you aren't the vendor. Never. Ever....Maybe get a dictionary? Just because you repeat a ridiculous comment, it doesn't make it any less ridiculous
More than your good self clearly....Perhaps it's different over there?

Is VAT only something new and a Marxist conspiracy ?

It is if you read Gerald Warner. Cameron is Marxist according to that guy doncha know?

knobmeup wrote:
Perhaps I ought tohave termed them dealers not vendors but anyhow they pay VAT on multiple occasions if they were to (very unlikely I know) buy and sell the same vehicle back and forth between them, the point is not whether I gave them the wrong term or whether I'm american or not but that VAT is on transactions not items otherwise it would only ever be paid once on such items.

BTW i'm not American i'm dyslexic and that's why I edited my posts so often. sometimes I miss the corrections.

I've bought and sold cars, never once paid VAT.

oioioi wrote:
Applicable when cars are bought and sold via 'dealers'.

Basically if a person buys a new car from a dealer, they pay VAT.
If, later they sell the car to a dealer, the dealer does not pay VAT then, however when that car is resold by that dealer, either to another person or another dealer the VAT is then paid again ( to remain VAT legal)

If someone buys or sells cars as a person and not a dealer, they only need to pay VAT when buying from a dealer, not from another person.

So every time a particular car is sold by a dealer VAT is accrued, thus the VAT is on the dealer transactions and not the car, the car is only providing the tariff for the amount of VAT the person has to pay to the dealer.

Cousin_Frothy wrote: Please define tariff because I think your definition is very different from mine

Cousin_Frothy wrote: I don't think there is any perhaps about it
Let's clear this up shall we...
I am in total agreement with you that VAT and for that matter, taxes in general, are out of order. I am in total agreement with you (as I already said) that the burden on people is ridiculous and that what is happening is the government is passing on people's labour to the banksters. Ref my previous comment about the actual purchasing power of the pound.
I don't see much disagreement there tbh. What I don't get is why you are blathering on about some notional scenario that doesn't happen (because businesses run by idiots tend to fail quite quick) in the incessant way that you are here? What is the point? VAT is payable when a VAT registered business sells summat, currently at the rate of 20% of the (perceived) value of what's sold. I think we all get that anyway don't you? You don't need a ludicrous example to show us that

Forgive me but as it stands, I just don't believe you. I'd like to but I don't.