Thread: Did anyone hear on the radio today about importing goods?

Yes, Elisabeth heard it on the morning news on TV. The admin costs of implementing it would negate any financial benefit to the government.

The assistant treasurer said "No"...would cost upwards of $40 million to set up the collection process .... even then it would not necessarily stop the big shift to online shopping... we live in interesting times... as has been said in other posts on this matter...those who bleat the loudest are those who have failed to restructure their 'business model' to meet new challenges...

FWIW, I notice that a couple of well known local auto parts suppliers seem to have reduced their markups from "extortionate" to "exxy" , indeed one lot even gave me a quote the other day which was just $50 above the landed price for a several hundred dollar order from a fav. UK supplier I might just take up the local quote given the ever present risks of a duff order list...

The threshold may be lowered, and one figure I heard was $19. However, there are two points to note. Firstly, it is unlikely to be lowered by any considerable amount, simply because the cost of collection begins to exceed the revenue collected at some point - and that point is almost certainly not too far below $1000, which is where the number came from anyway. Any revenue gain has to be weighed against electoral cost.

And secondly, even if you do have to pay GST (and possibly import duty) on your overseas mail order, this will have little effect - the reason you buy overseas is not going to be affected by it being 20% more expensive than it is now - after all, you are buying it overseas because it is not available locally, is quicker to get from overseas, or costs a third of the price. Rarely will 20% lower cost see you buying it from overseas rather than from the shop down the road.

John

I think it said all you people importing goods to save a few dollars are detrimental to the very survival of local businesses and industries. You know , your friends , your neighbours....if not yours then somebody elses breadwinner.

Originally Posted by ramblingboy42

I think it said all you people importing goods to save a few dollars are detrimental to the very survival of local businesses and industries. You know , your friends , your neighbours....if not yours then somebody elses breadwinner.

Only the ones who priced themselves into redundancy - the ones on here who say to charge whatever they can get rather than the ones who price reasonably and competitively, the later ones who will will continue to trade for reasons discussed above.

Stop tourists spending money overseas. Don't import foreign cars in case our money leaves the country and stop overseas companies investing in Australia because their profits will go off shore. I don't think so.

Is it kite flying on part of the government, orchestrated so they can say, they will not reduce the threshold, to be done to make the government popular when it suits them best for their next round of vote catching?
.

Originally Posted by Slunnie

Only the ones who priced themselves into redundancy - the ones on here who say to charge whatever they can get rather than the ones who price reasonably and competitively, the later ones who will will continue to trade for reasons discussed above.

From experience, they can price so they can make a profit and nobody buys so they go broke, or they price so they can sell it but don't make a profit and they go broke. Which way would you prefer they go broke? That's the reality buddy.

Originally Posted by mikehzz

From experience, they can price so they can make a profit and nobody buys so they go broke, or they price so they can sell it but don't make a profit and they go broke. Which way would you prefer they go broke? That's the reality buddy.

RUBBISH!