View Full Version : Beware
Rare Bird
25-01-2010, 13:08
Beware if your importing Chinese products into the uk..I've just got a loverly bill from DHL for import duty which makes the DAC i bougt a rip off..
what were the figures involved Andre?
I've bought plenty of Photography gear from Hong Kong and tbh when you buy from established sellers its a bit hit and miss when they send stuff labelled as 'gift'. Customs tend to get to know them, I guess because they're sending so much stuff through. Having said that I got most of my stuff from a friend who lives out there. He runs it as a little sideline to his main job and reckons its a piece of p*ss to get stuff through unchecked.
I used to but a lot from overseas (not hi-fi) and found that the customs charge was pretty random - sometimes you get it sometimes you don't - there does not seem to be any rhyme or reason to it - pretty much par for the course in this country these days...
Also the amount they charge - if they do charge you - also seems to be totally random and does not reflect the weight, value or anything tangible it would seem.
Indeed! I've not been hit by this with eBay items from China but, I have had the same with items imported from USA.
I think very low value items seem to "slip the net" but some bigger items don't.
It definatel something to be aware of when you consider your purchase.
What was it you purchased?
Hi Ian Was a Maverick 'D1' Pre/DAC/Headphone unit...I was always under the impression if marked *GIFT* no charge regardless if they are randomly picked out or not!
No, I've been charged on items marked 'gift' on a number of occasions. I don't think they even look at that sticker.
I used to but a lot from overseas (not hi-fi) and found that the customs charge was pretty random - sometimes you get it sometimes you don't - there does not seem to be any rhyme or reason to it - pretty much par for the course in this country these days...
Also the amount they charge - if they do charge you - also seems to be totally random and does not reflect the weight, value or anything tangible it would seem.
Yeah, it's always totally random. I think I've been quite lucky with nominal charges, but I know people who've been totally clobbered for less expensive items. Nothing much it seems can slip the net when it comes in from USA though.
Yeah, it's always totally random. I think I've been quite lucky with nominal charges, but I know people who've been totally clobbered for less expensive items. Nothing much it seems can slip the net when it comes in from USA though.
Agree about the USA - maybe they want to discourage us from buying from off the Yanks?:) - Not that Andre would ever consider it;)
Rare Bird
25-01-2010, 14:30
I buy a lotta CD from the USA but try keep it to a few at a time..If i got charged for CD's i'd die cos there overpriced anyway
Dave Cawley
25-01-2010, 14:30
There is no rip off, clearly it was not a gift and you should pay import duty, VAT and clearance charges. In fact declaring a bought item as a gift, or asking another to do it for you, could involve criminal proceedings, you got off lightly!
Dave
Rare Bird
25-01-2010, 14:33
There is no rip off, clearly it was not a gift and you should pay import duty, VAT and clearance charges. In fact declaring a bought item as a gift, or asking another to do it for you, could involve criminal proceedings, you got off lightly!
Dave
No need to be anal about it Dave.
There is no rip off, clearly it was not a gift and you should pay import duty, VAT and clearance charges. In fact declaring a bought item as a gift, or asking another to do it for you, could involve criminal proceedings, you got off lightly!
Dave
Bollox to them! They get enough of my money to squander as it is:steam:
Beware if your importing Chinese products into the uk..I've just got a loverly bill from DHL for import duty which makes the DAC i bougt a rip off, the parcel was sent as a gift but apparenly makes no difference..
Just incase anyone is thinking of doing this.
:steam:
£125.00 free shipping was the price for the item, the charge they want is near on £15.00, not a massive amount but it does render the item expensive..I shall be on the appropiate forum this afternoon where there is a big following for this unit & where the owner posts.Just to warm people.
£125 = OK, but £140 = rip off... Seems a bit extreme! :scratch:
What would the item cost if it was bought 'officially' in the UK?
Dave Cawley
25-01-2010, 14:43
You paid for it and asked it to be declared as a gift, that is dishonest, not anal!
Smuggling by any means is an offence and I'm surprised you broadcast it publicly!
Dave
Hi Dave,
Sorry to butt in here... You have email (are we still on for the Mike New bearing fitting on Thursday, as discussed)?
Mail me back and let me know :)
Marco.
You paid for it and asked it to be declared as a gift, that is dishonest, not anal!
Smuggling by any means is an offence and I'm surprised you broadcast it publicly!
Dave
Hmmm... Are you certain that Andre asked for it to marked as a gift? It sounds like you are making a pretty strong accusation there, Dave!
Many overseas ebay sellers say they'll do this in their listings. I assume as a means to tempt buyers.
Dave Cawley
25-01-2010, 14:51
Hi Marco, yes and yes!
BTW: a gift has to be from the country of origin.
Dave
twelvebears
25-01-2010, 14:52
Hi Ian Was a Maverick 'D1' Pre/DAC/Headphone unit...I was always under the impression if marked *GIFT* no charge regardless if they are randomly picked out or not!
I think you'll find that it's not whether it's marked gift so much as the value of the item stated. And obviously if they examine it, there can't be any documentation inside which doesn't tally with the stated value on the package.
Some companies will mark things as a low value gift and not include documents (invoices), but this of course means that they won't be able to use insured shipping for the right value....
Looked into this in some detail when I used to get parts shipped in from the States and HK for my RC Helicopters.
You paid for it and asked it to be declared as a gift, that is dishonest, not anal!
Smuggling by any means is an offence and I'm surprised you broadcast it publicly!
Dave
Just because it is against the law does not automatically make it 'dishonest'
Just because it is against the law does not automatically make it 'dishonest'
:doh::mental:
Hi Marco, yes and yes!
Ok cool - what time suits? For me, the earlier the better :)
Marco.
:doh::mental:
Okay - is driving at 80 MPH on the Motorway 'dishonest'?
No.
But it is against the law...
Fair point, but in this case the argument would be that fraud is being committed - which is dishonest.
Fair point, but in this case the argument would be that fraud is being committed - which is dishonest.
To me 'dishonest' implies 'immoral' and I do not think in this particular situation under discussion that the fraud is immoral. IMHO of course;)
If you can get away with not giving any more money to the Government than they have already grabbed from you then I will always say good luck and bon chance. They lost any right to moral defence years ago if indeed they ever had any to begin with which they didn't.
Dave Cawley
25-01-2010, 15:31
Hi Marco
Any time after 9:30 AM
Dave
Cool. I'll aim to get there for around midday :)
Marco.
Its hard trying to escape being ripped off where hi-fi is concerned Andre:whistle:
Rare Bird
25-01-2010, 17:56
You paid for it and asked it to be declared as a gift, that is dishonest, not anal!
Smuggling by any means is an offence and I'm surprised you broadcast it publicly!
Dave
So where did i say i asked for it to be marked *GIFT* for your information it was a gift from the wife to me, however i never asked to have it marked it just came that way.
I have smuggled nothing & don't acuse me of such.Must be great to be perfect eh Dave!
Dave Cawley
25-01-2010, 18:00
So why do you call it a "rip off" then?
Dave
Rare Bird
25-01-2010, 18:03
Appology sunshine, don't ever accuse me of being dishonest i have done nothing wrong at all, if i have to pay duty i have to pay it, all i'm saying is with the duty on it's not a good buy.
Beware if your importing Chinese products into the uk..I've just got a loverly bill from DHL for import duty which makes the DAC i bougt a rip off, the parcel was sent as a gift but apparenly makes no difference..
Just incase anyone is thinking of doing this.
:steam:
"GIFT" means nothing to the customs : it's an urban legend.
What the customs look at is the "declared price". There are no customs under a certain amount. Please check on customs website for the maximuma amount and tell the supplier to put another amount on the parcel. You take a risk in case of parcel loss : it's the amount to pay for not being a good citizen and supporting local (CEE) manufacturers. :)
This is the only way of not paying customs on new products.
Another way is mentioning that the product is "repaired item". ;)
Dave Cawley
25-01-2010, 18:22
No, you said it was a "rip off", what was that?
Also you said it was a gift, to avoid duty it has to be a genuine gift from the country of origin.
Dave
Rare Bird
25-01-2010, 18:36
No, you said it was a "rip off", what was that?
Also you said it was a gift, to avoid duty it has to be a genuine gift from the country of origin.
Dave
I SAID IT WAS MARKED GIFT.YOU ACCUSED ME OF ASKING HIM TO MARK IT AS TO AVOID DUTY.AN ACCUSATION IM GONNA ASK YOU ONCE TO TAKE THAT BACK PLEASE.
The rest is nothing to do with you.
Dave Cawley
25-01-2010, 18:47
It is everything to do with me because you posted it here. You also said you were going to another forum to "warn" people. Warn them of what? that you have to obey the law?
I do agree that I should apologise that I said you asked for it to be marked as a gift, so sorry. However reading your posts I wonder why you are even remotely upset if you did not?
Dave
Ammonite Audio
25-01-2010, 18:56
Having frequently bought stuff from outside the EU, I know that import duty is payable. Sometimes nothing is levied and that's great; however international carriers like DHL and FedEx do seem to collect the duty religiously on behalf of Customs and Excise. The import duty should be factored in when deciding to buy from abroad. Simples!
Hi Dave,
I do agree that I should apologise that I said you asked for it to be marked as a gift, so sorry.
Quite... I do know though what Andre means.
When I bought a Yaqin Chinese valve amp from Ebay direct from China over a year ago, it arrived with "gift" marked on it in big letters, without me asking for such a thing... It seems that some of the Ebay traders in China think that this practice somehow works and saves the buyer money, thus 'adding value' to the transaction :mental: :rolleyes:
Sometimes this gift marking is mentioned by the seller on the Ebay advert, and given that the item was indeed a gift to Andre from his wife from her Ebay account, he understandably felt a little aggrieved and thought it was a "rip off" when he received a bill out of the blue for duty charges. He wasn't acting dishonestly - he just innocently didn't quite understand what was going on.
Anyway, let's leave it there now please - no further 'interrogation' is necessary :)
Marco.
Spectral Morn
25-01-2010, 19:00
Having frequently bought stuff from outside the EU, I know that import duty is payable. Sometimes nothing is levied and that's great; however international carriers like DHL and FedEx do seem to collect the duty religiously on behalf of Customs and Excise. The import duty should be factored in when deciding to buy from abroad. Simples!
Agreed.
Only ever ordered anything from America once, a head de-mag for my reel to reel...no duty was asked for...however I was expecting it. I won some tapes on an American forum...tapes sent from Alaska (marked as gift as they were)..no duty asked for.
I guess I have been lucky so far.
Regards D S D L
technobear
25-01-2010, 19:02
So...
the item cost £125
duty at 5% (typical) would be £6.25
VAT at 17.5% would be £21.88 (more in fact as it applies to the duty too)
you were billed £15
This does not add up. You might like to ask DHL exactly what they have billed you for. They may just be trying it on.
The Vinyl Adventure
25-01-2010, 19:04
if you buy something from abroad that comes under the spec for having to pay tax as it enters the country... then expect to pay tax, simple!
you should always take it into account even when the seller says youwont have to pay.
if something is a bargain without tax and not one with tax and there is any chance that you are going to get tax.. then dont buy it
if you get away with not having to pay tax, then good luck to you!
Rare Bird
25-01-2010, 19:39
Hi Dave,
Quite... I do know though what Andre means.
When I bought a Yaqin Chinese valve amp from Ebay direct from China over a year ago, it arrived with "gift" marked on it in big letters, without me asking for such a thing... It seems that some of the Ebay traders in China think that this practice somehow works and saves the buyer money, thus 'adding value' to the transaction :mental: :rolleyes:
Sometimes this gift marking is mentioned by the seller on the Ebay advert, and given that the item was indeed a gift to Andre from his wife from her Ebay account, he understandably felt a little aggrieved and thought it was a "rip off" when he received a bill out of the blue for duty charges. He wasn't acting dishonestly - he just innocently didn't quite understand what was going on.
Anyway, let's leave it there now please - no further 'interrogation' is necessary :)
Marco.
Exactly thanks
some of the Ebay traders in China think that this practice somehow works and saves the buyer money, thus 'adding value' to the transaction :mental: :rolleyes:
Sometimes this gift marking is mentioned by the seller on the Ebay advert.
Indeed. I mentioned the same thing a couple of pages ago, seems Dave 'missed' it! ;)
Dave Cawley
25-01-2010, 20:16
I might have missed it, but fraud is fraud, and those that participate in any way are complicent.
Dave
Beechwoods
25-01-2010, 20:18
It's a bit severe to say that someone receiving something unsolicited is fradulently complicit; surely...
Guys, Andre has done nothing wrong; least of all is guilty of fraud, so can we please leave this now and change the subject - cheers!
Marco.
I think, Dave, you ought to address your complaint to the sender rather than the recipient? :)
Simultaneous posting... Marco, you type too fast for me! :)
The fraud is also that import taxes are not necessarily used in supporting local economy.
VAT itself is a fraud : if you spent £100 in buying -consecutively- four different services at 20%, you pay 60% of taxes total.
When the state itself frauds, what can you expect from its citizens ? :scratch:
Beechwoods
25-01-2010, 20:39
I object to paying 'Value Added' tax where no value has been added! For example VAT on rail travel, paid regardless of whether you are able to find a seat or end up squeezed into a vestibule for the duration of the journey.
Surely they could have found a better name for it by now.
It used to be called 'Purchase Tax' which was self-explanatory.
Simultaneous posting... Marco, you type too fast for me! :)
Lol! I don't mind the thread continuing, as long as the focus moves away from Andre and his apparent 'misdemeanours'. So, in that respect people, carry on :)
Marco.
It used to be called 'Purchase Tax' which was self-explanatory.
And rather more honest. If just as painful!
Beechwoods
25-01-2010, 20:46
Politicians always like to think they're 'adding value', despite the fact that the words 'politician' and 'adding value' is the definition of an oxymoron :)
Rare Bird
25-01-2010, 20:46
Lol! I don't mind the thread continuing, as long as the focus moves away from Andre and his apparent 'misdemeanours'. So, in that respect people, carry on :)
Marco.Why not just axe the topic, it's going nowhere. The morel of the story is don't be fooled by cheap prices from China.
Talking of VAT and painful.
I've lost my coax stripper :( ... http://uk.rs-online.com/web/search/searchBrowseAction.html?method=getProduct&R=1856472
And yes... there is VAT to go on top of that price!!! :steam:
And the "poll" tax was never any such thing - wasn't it a "community charge" I seem to remember? Bloody spin doctors!
Why not just axe the topic, it's going nowhere. The morel of the story is don't be fooled by cheap prices from China.
Watch in awe (or dismay) as the mighty AoS thread drift does it's stuff! :lol:
the mighty AoS thread drift does it's stuff! :lol:
And thank the Lord for that!
Beechwoods
25-01-2010, 20:56
We try our best!
Bloody Hell Guys! You're frightening me!!!
I'm not sure but I think Andre was just having a 'soap box' moment! I'd pretty much do the same if I was in his position tbh!
There's so much good value electronic stuff floating around on eBay coming out of china. I personally think 'great' if you can get it in without paying import duty! (Hardened criminal type me!). Not sure where Dave is coming from tbh. The comments are a little hard hitting. No one here ever done a job for cash!??
No one here ever done a job for cash!??
Well, there was that bank job... But my case officer said I wasn't supposed to talk about it. :eyebrows:
Guys, Andre has done nothing wrong; least of all is guilty of fraud, so can we please leave this now and change the subject - cheers!
Marco.
Yeah I know, poor guy just posted because he was a bit miffed :doh:
Some of us do get what your getting at though Andre;)
Anyway carry on with the thread drift guys, its needed!
I did some money-laundering but the water must have been too hot, because all the ink came off.
Beechwoods
25-01-2010, 21:07
Should have used a dry cleaners.
Yeah I know, poor guy just posted because he was a bit miffed :doh:
Andre, you should look on the bright side... You could have got hammered with duty, VAT, AND an administration/handling charge! :uhho:
....And then spent 3 days on hold listening to "green sleeves" in monotone whilst trying to speak to a nice but dim chap to pay up & re-arrange delivery!:stalks:
Long sentence, breathout!
Beechwoods
25-01-2010, 21:12
Andre, you should look on the bright side... You could have got hammered with duty, VAT, AND an administration/handling charge! :uhho:
Worst still, the postie could have tripped on your front path and sued you for his sickie!
Worst still, the postie could have tripped on your front path and sued you for his sickie!
...and broken the uninsured goods!
which would have retained the original value and therefore the same amount of import duty!
Well, there was that bank job... But my case officer said I wasn't supposed to talk about it :eyebrows:
I once held up a vegetarian restaurant with a gigot chop!
Marco.
which would have retained the original value and therefore the same amount of import duty!
...etc, etc, etc...
I once held up a vegetarian restaurant with a gigot chop!
Marco.
:scratch:
Ah!...
gigot [ˈʒiːgəʊ ˈdʒɪgət]
n 1. (Cookery) a leg of lamb or mutton
2. (Clothing & Fashion) a leg-of-mutton sleeve
[from Old French: leg, a small fiddle, from gigue a fiddle, of Germanic origin]
I once stood too near the fire and got a nut roast,
Beechwoods
25-01-2010, 21:26
http://www.sulmeat.com/Files/sulgigotlambchops.jpg
:scratch: x2
I once held up a vegetarian restaurant with a gigot chop!
Marco.
Was that Meataphorically speaking? :doh:
I once held up a vegetarian restaurant with a gigot chop!
Marco.
Steady on, I'm a veggie:ner:
Beechwoods
25-01-2010, 21:29
I once stood too near the fire and got a nut roast,
I do like a good bit of crackling.
You're getting the hang of the (now) famous AOS thread drift, Ian! :lol:
Marco.
At least Marco didn't hold up the restaurant with his "meat and two-veg!"
The Grand Wazoo
25-01-2010, 21:41
Reminds me of some carnivore related banter from the Jokes & Funnies thread.......
Mrs McKenzie is trying hard to stay upright as she makes her way down an icy High Street to do her shopping.
As she comes skittering into the McTavish's butchers shop she sees the owner standing with his back to the wall heater.
She points & says "Morning Mr McTavish, is that yer Ayrshire bacon"
He shivers & says "Aye, that's right, cos it's awffy cold oot there, the day Mrs McKenzie"
....................think about it.
At least Marco didn't hold up the restaurant with his "meat and two-veg!"
Well it was just a finger buffet, so there was no room for a jumbo hot dog amongst all the carrot & chick pea chipolatas! :lolsign:
Marco.
Well it was just a finger buffet, so there was no room for a jumbo hot dog amongst all the carrot & chick pea chipolatas! :lolsign:
Marco.
Aye... but once you took the bread roll off... :whistle:
And lets not mention the 'mustard'! :rolleyes:
Spectral Morn
25-01-2010, 22:24
This thread drift is very, very SILLY :lol::lol:
Regards D S D L
Reminds me of some carnivore related banter from the Jokes & Funnies thread.......
Or the sign you used to see in butchers' shops:
'Would customers please refrain from leaning on the bacon slicer, as we are getting a little behind with our orders'
When my little sister was about 6, we passed a local old-school "Family Butchers" shop, and she burst into tears - "I don't want my family to be butchered." Bless... ;)
Dave Cawley
25-01-2010, 23:07
Man walks in to a butchers and asks for a side of beef. As he waits for it to be prepared he inquires
" Wheres that young lad that usually helps you out?"
The butcher replies "I had to sack him"
" why?"
" He kept putting his dick in the bacon slicer!"
" Really?"
"Yeah"
" that couldn't be good for your bacon slicer?"
" Yeah i know, i had to sack her as well."
Dave Cawley
25-01-2010, 23:12
I rang up a fish n chip shop and asked 'do you deliver?'
The bloke replied, 'no, we do chicken, lamb and fish'.
Hehehehe.... :eyebrows:
Marco.
:lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol:
Ronnie Corbett goes into the butcher's shop, comes out shaking his head. "Didn't you buy anything?' asks his wife.
'No, the steaks were too high' he replies.
So...
the item cost £125
duty at 5% (typical) would be £6.25
VAT at 17.5% would be £21.88 (more in fact as it applies to the duty too)
you were billed £15
This does not add up. You might like to ask DHL exactly what they have billed you for. They may just be trying it on.
I wonder if DHL are pocketing or passing on the £15 to the Government? If customs haven't flagged the item, but DHL are charging you duty and pocketing it, we could (worse case scenario) be talking fraud on a massive scale by such companies. . . .
Steve Toy
26-01-2010, 19:03
I do not agree with import duty. I believe in global free trade. I also do not agree with the tax, spend and borrow policy of this government so any attempt to avoid or evade payment of such taxes is acceptable in my view.
I also do not believe that anyone acts immorally or dishonestly by breaking laws they disagree with. However, agreeing with a law and then breaking it, that's hypocrisy.
Dave you can be quite anal (and sanctimonious) at times as Andre stated.
The jokes were good though.
Horse walks into a bar
Barman says: 'Why the long face?'
.
The jokes were good though.
Not any more!;)
A Man
walks into a bar
Ouch!
It was an iron bar!
Not any more!;)
Enough already!
I also do not believe that anyone acts immorally or dishonestly by breaking laws they disagree with.
Wow!
Wow!
Yeah! This is New Jack City man! Get used to it!:lolsign:
I also do not believe that anyone acts immorally or dishonestly by breaking laws they disagree with.
Wow +1!
I'm genuinely shocked!
I also do not believe that anyone acts immorally or dishonestly by breaking laws they disagree with.
Example : Robin Hood. ;)
Steve Toy
26-01-2010, 21:07
If you don't think that a given action is morally wrong how can it become so just because it's illegal?
Think about it and apply it to the following:
Assisted suicide
80 on the motorway
Smoking weed
Playing Fuzzy Duck in the pub
Making a call from your hand-held mobile phone while parked in a lay-by with your engine running on a cold, damp winter day
Drinking a few beers before nipping out to fetch something you've forgotten from your car parked in the street
Crossing the white line at a red traffic light to make way for an ambulance
Driving a licensed taxi with your taxi driver's license ID badge pinned to the dashboard where it can be seen by your passengers
Dave Cawley
26-01-2010, 21:15
I also do not believe that anyone acts immorally or dishonestly by breaking laws they disagree with.
80 on the motorway
Smoking weed
Assisted suicide
Yes indeed, and it's not wrong?
Anal Dave ( thanks for the insult mate! A one way thing on this forum, part of the ethos? )
Yes, but surely a paedophile "disagrees with" the law, as does a serial killer, rapist, bank robber etc? I'm struggling to see where I've missed the point? :scratch:
Indeed, Dimitri, Robin Hood is a good example, but it wasn't just him that disagreed with the law!
Steve Toy
26-01-2010, 21:26
Dave if I said you were anal and sanctimonious I'd have insulted you. In fact I said the following:
Dave you can be quite anal (and sanctimonious) at times as Andre stated.
Surely you can see that I was refering to your actions or rather statements as being anal/sanctimonious not you as an individual.
Steve Toy
26-01-2010, 21:28
Alex, I think you'll find that the likes of serial killers, paedophiles and bank robbers know that what they are doing is wrong but just don't care as long as they don't get caught.
That's the difference.
Indeed, Dimitri, Robin Hood is a good example, but it wasn't just him that disagreed with the law!
Exactly !
Unfortunately, mass disagreeing is not a guarantee of the "morality" of such an action.
Common sense or common moral principles are of no help either.
This is a real philosophical subject : when is disagreeing with the law (and doing otherwise) is moral ?
I am inclined to answer that only history can give the adequate answer : what is immoral now is found later to be moral.
It's a hard subject, indeed. No obvious answers : just personal convictions and freewill. ;)
Dave Cawley
26-01-2010, 21:36
Steve, don't wriggle out of this, an apology will be accepted. Others would have been banned, but you are different, you are the owner.
Dave
Dave, everybody appreciates you immensely. It's obvious to me.
I'm sure Steve mistyped his thoughts. It's a misunderstanding, I have no doubt.
Alex, I think you'll find that the likes of serial killers, paedophiles and bank robbers know that what they are doing is wrong but just don't care as long as they don't get caught.
That's the difference.
Ah, that's the crux - the difference is between caring, and knowing.
Steve Toy
26-01-2010, 22:16
Dave you wriggled out of accusing me of plagiarism and no, being critical of actions/words of others isn't bannable. Can you see the difference between insulting the individual (ad hominem) and criticising their words/actions?
I make no apology. I believe that your stance on obeying the law regarding import duty is anal and sanctimonious.
Note I refer to the stance not you as an individual.
Now stop acting precious and please desist from playing the victim.
Alex, I think you'll find that the likes of serial killers, paedophiles and bank robbers know that what they are doing is wrong
But they often don't. Many paedophiles think that what they're doing is morally fine, but happens to be illegal. Indeed, many killers don't think what they're doing is wrong either; they are sociopaths who have a non-functioning moral compass.
Certainly many laws have only a tenuous (if any) link to moral principles, but to make a blanket statement that 'I also do not believe that anyone acts immorally or dishonestly by breaking laws they disagree with' is to fundamentally misunderstand the nature of morality; ie a set of principles, applicable to everyone, that govern how people behave.
Alex, I think you'll find that the likes of serial killers, paedophiles and bank robbers know that what they are doing is wrong but just don't care as long as they don't get caught.
That's the difference.
I'm not sure this is true. But, I don't have the evidence to counter it.
And, this doesn't quite add up. You know that when you don't pay tax you are doing something wrong, whether you agree with the taxation or not. You may not even care if you get caught. But you still know it's wrong.
Beechwoods
26-01-2010, 23:14
Picking up on Joe's comment Sociopaths are by their very definition unable to conform to the norms of society, and so the basic common law (as opposed to statutory) principles we all abide by - such as not harming others, and not taking their property - will not be accepted by them. But for everyone else these principles are given.
Citizens contract with the State by taking advantage of the services provided - health care, highway maintenance, schooling, etc - and taxation, and conformity to statutory law is the quid pro quo. An agreement to abide by the Statutes or Legislature of the State is also given by this agreement to benefit from the provision of the State.
When it comes down to it; we've little choice but to abide by both Common Law and Statutes in modern society.
Have you ever wondered what gives 'the state' the right to lock it's citizens up? What gives it that legitimacy? It's an interesting question. It becomes acute when the state loses that legitimacy - when it is corrupt and fails to keep it's side of the contract - as might be the case in Zimbabwe for example.
Steve Toy
26-01-2010, 23:43
I take it as a given that most of us have the requisite moral integrity to give at least as much to society as we take from it. As such we know what is right and wrong without having to flick through the statutes.
Equally what is permissible by the law can still be morally repugnant.
Let your conscience and not the law be your guide. That's all I need to say.
An interesting set of non-sequiters.
Why is what you give and take from society relevant to knowing what is right and wrong?
Surely an easy argument to make here is that not paying taxes results in giving less to society than has been taken.
Steve Toy
27-01-2010, 00:57
Considering give and take along with notions of right and wrong helps to establish the broader framework for possessing the requisite moral integrity and having a conscience before being in a position to exercise whether it is morally acceptable to break given laws.
I'm not talking about total tax avoidance. We do need to pay our taxes but it is worth considering whether the payment of certain taxes is:
a) just
b) actually beneficial to the treasury pot
c) worth (or not as the case may be for) putting pressure on the powers that be to seek revenue where it would either be more just or beneficial to the treasury pot.
Many due changes to unjust laws or methods of taxation are only effected following disobedience.
We have an ethos here not a set of forum laws in order that folks can at least conceptualise notions of what is acceptable or not within the spirit of this forum and why it was set up in the first place.
Once you formulate a set of rules and make them absolute not just in their application but also absolutely from a purely moral perspective you leave the gates wide open for people to claim moral superiority purely from blindly following those rules yet simultaneously manipulating them to serve their malign ends nevertheless.
Surely an easy argument to make here is that not paying taxes results in giving less to society than has been taken.
This argument is not so much easy as fatuous. As I said, we need to pay our taxes but some forms of taxation may not actually be beneficial to the overall spending power of the government. Import taxes are a form of protectionism - not good for the global economy of which we are all a part whether we like it or not.
If you believe that a certain law is unfair or actually harmful then you have a moral duty to argue for that law to be repealed. In a extreme case, you might have a moral duty to refuse to obey it and take the consequences, up to and including imprisonment. But to simply pick and choose between which laws you will ignore and which you will obey based on personal preference verges on the sociopathic.
Steve Toy
27-01-2010, 11:29
Joe, I'm talking about the kind of laws most people break without being considered criminals or sociopaths. It simply isn't a case of obeying laws or not according to arbitrary personal preferences, it's about following your conscience which does not need an equally arbitrary set of written rules to know right from wrong.
Yep - jeez... Are we all 'saints' here? I break the law all the time in minor ways (mostly driving related) for the very reasons Steve mentions. I'm afraid that the law is not always 'right', and I am also not subservient robot!
I don't think any of us here are in a position to come across rather sanctimoniously as 'whiter than white', as far as rigidly obeying the law is concerned. If you think differently, you're kidding yourselves on ;)
Marco.
I'm not suggesting that anyone can, or should, avoid breaking the law on any occasion. What I'm saying is that 'conscience*' is an unreliable guide to what is right and wrong, because some peoples' consciences are very elastic and some people have no conscience at all. And also that, if you do break the law and are caught, you should face the consequences, even if you think the law in question is wrong.
*'Conscience: that still, small inner voice that tells us that someone might be watching' H L Mencken
Steve Toy
27-01-2010, 12:17
I think conscience goes deeper than just thinking someone may be watching.
What I'm saying is that 'conscience*' is an unreliable guide to what is right and wrong, because some peoples' consciences are very elastic and some people have no conscience at all.
Ok, Joe, so what other mechanism should one use as the arbiter for one's actions when one is (justifiably in one's mind) 'not avoiding breaking the law', as you refer to here:
I'm not suggesting that anyone can, or should, avoid breaking the law on any occasion.
If it's not our conscience (or necessarily always the law) we should use to monitor our actions, what is it then, our 'common sense'?
I'm a 'free-thinker' now, regardless of any law - always have been, and always will be! :)
Marco.
Fair enough. But different people will draw the line between what is right and wrong in very different places, even leaving aside extreme cases like sociopaths. For example, some people will quite happily work and claim benefit without the slightest trouble from their conscience. Others will evade tax (thinking that's OK because the government will only waste their money anyway), thus increasing the tax burden on more honest people.
You're right - and I'm obviously completely against that, but then we're talking about things which are rather more serious than sometimes doing 80 instead of 70 M.P.H (the legal speed limit) on a motorway, when conditions dictate (through years of driving experience) that it is safe to do so.
Marco.
Fine. But Steve's original comment that anyone who broke a law that he or she disagreed with was being neither immoral nor dishonest seemed a bit OTT!
I'm not defending Steve's beliefs - only my own :)
Marco.
Powered by vBulletin® Version 4.2.3 Copyright © 2026 vBulletin Solutions, Inc. All rights reserved.