[stevelup]

Not my experience when I purchased the original ‘Echo’ and got a bill from Fedex UK for £153.60 ‘import tax’.

Assuming you bought it from amazon.co.uk, you should have disputed this. The merchant is responsible for all fees.

[flybymike]

I have purchased products from Amazon and Royal Mail has refused to deliver or release the goods until I paid additional taxes due.

[cockney steve]

I'd venture to suggest that , were this rule enforced by Amazon, the device would be withdrawn from their trading-platform. I'd guess that they have about a #200 margin to play with....carriage and taxes would wipe out all that, and a bit more......
At the risk of repetition, a great device, appears to be second-cheapest on the UK market, but at 3 times the cost of PAW, the incremental benefit does not justify the price for the people on a tight budget........The suggestion "if you can't afford it, take up gardening (or other, cheaper, hobby) " is elitist, patronising and demeaning. Arrogance has no place in this discussion. It's about a pragmatic way forward to get the maximum value for expenditure. Even the space-shuttle was not "cost no object" as several accidents attested.

[neilmurg]

Additional charges for US products
The UK laws were changed a few years ago to make the delivery co. liable to collect any additional tax, they also get to charge a £10 admin fee. I got caught out by a FedEx charge on an eBay headset.

[stevelup]

That is missing the point. Amazon's Marketplace rules forbid a situation where the end user becomes liable for any additional costs.

It is trivial to send packages anywhere in the world without the end user incurring any costs. I regularly send stuff all over the world to my end users, and all the costs are charged back to our UPS account.

[romille]

I have read all of the contributions, noting the up and down sides of the various systems. All I can conclude is that as EC is in the best interests of the airline industry, NATS and the CAA you would think that between them and the various avionics companies they could come up with a portable and affordable plug and play solution so that light aircraft could see and be seen, perhaps the CAA could negotiate a VAT free deal like they did for 8.33. I am not suggesting that the device is made mandatory but I imagine that there would be a substantial uptake by light aircraft owners.

[patowalker]

Hi Steve,

Not my experience when I purchased the original ‘Echo’ and got a bill from Fedex UK for £153.60 ‘import tax’. I know others who also got similar bills from Fedex, which is why I raised the point.

There is 0% import duty on parts for aircraft. What tariff did they apply? I have had to get Fedex to understand there is no duty payable on Vans RV parts, even though the shipment was clearly marked with the applicable commodity code.

[romille]

Any aircraft parts that I have imported from the USA have never attracted duty only VAT has been charged, plus the clearance agents fee, which is Zero rated, so £153.60 on a £600 item does seem about £20 too much.

[Shoestring Flyer]

I wonder if the difference is because it was possibly bought from amazon.com and not amazon.co.uk
But as others say there is no import tax on aircraft parts, just vat which if bought from amazon.co.uk would normally be vat inclusive.

[exfirepro]

Hi Steve,

Not my experience when I purchased the original ‘Echo’ and got a bill from Fedex UK for £153.60 ‘import tax’. I know others who also got similar bills from Fedex, which is why I raised the point.

There is 0% import duty on parts for aircraft. What tariff did they apply? I have had to get Fedex to understand there is no duty payable on Vans RV parts, even though the shipment was clearly marked with the applicable commodity code.

patowalker /Steve/shoestring

My original unit was bought via the Amazon UK Marketplace. Despite having emailed uAvionix twice in advance of placing the order to check if all charges were included, I was charged VAT + collection fee by Fedex UK, which was why I was trying to warn people, though after a couple of email exchanges it was refunded by uAvionix, though I wasn’t sure if that was the norm. Remember, this was one of the very first of the original ‘Echo’ units, so the company may not have been aware of the Amazon rules and this situation may well have changed,

Although I now have one of the new SkyEcho units, I didn’t actually pay for it (long story - but thank you uAvionix), so am definitely not ‘dissing’ the company, which is why I would appreciate clarification from any recent purchasers to clear this point up.

Regards

Peter

[Flyin'Dutch']

There are 2 Amazon reviews on amazon.co.uk and neither complain about being sent a bill for £150 odd quid, I suspect they might have if they would have been charged.

[Tim Dawson]

The £600 price tag of a SkyEcho includes VAT.

This tax discussion is somewhat distracting from the general discussion about Electronic Conspicuity.

[Sooty25]

The £600 price tag of a SkyEcho includes VAT.

if it is shipped from the USA it can't have a VAT invoice, so the end user will get charged.
SkyEcho website doesn't mention VAT inclusive pricing but does offer GBP pricing.
What do you expect if you buy through Amazon, the company that makes its profits by avoiding the UK taxation system.

This tax discussion is somewhat distracting from the general discussion about Electronic Conspicuity.

I agree!

[Flyin'Dutch']

This tax discussion is somewhat distracting from the general discussion about Electronic Conspicuity.

It has indeed.

Although it is fair to say that price-point does have a bearing on acceptability of new technology - in particular people are sensitive to perceived cost/benefit ratios.

Fervent supporters of PAW are keen to point out the cost of other EC solutions whilst promoting the cheapness of PAW.

When all is said and done the price delta between PAW and Skyecho is not as large as made out by them and the question then is whether having something not transmit on what is an international standard is the way forward for your own and co-airspace users is the way forward.

It may save £300 to the individual but not transmitting your position whilst using the information others do, and will have had to make an investment in doing so, is maybe materially not different from flying around with a serviceable transponder turned off, but I would only write that if I was a bit braver.

[stevelup]

I agree!

If you agree, why bother posting!

Anyway, without wishing to continue this on ad-infinitum, this has nothing at all to do with Amazon or their tax position, and you're wrong that the end user has to pay.

As I already stated above, Amazon's policy is that non-UK sellers selling on the UK Amazon site need to ensure that the recipient is not charged any unexpected fees or taxes. It is the vendors responsibility to deal with this.

The way this is solved is for the sender to have their shipping company (whether it be UPS, FedEx, DHL, whatever) bill the costs back to them. It's one tick box when shipping.

Amazon aren't 'stealing from the taxpayer' - the shipping company pays the tax to the UK government, and then instead of passing that charge on to the end user, the shipper pays it. Amazon are not even involved with any of this!