eekhorn1 wrote:

Still not the slightest evidence that a seller has ever been prosecuted purely for the value placed on a CN22 though, is there? Or even the slightest evidence that a seller has had as much as a stern talking to.

 

Certainly not on these boards in 11 years, not on this thread in six years, and despite five Months of posting here daily for those five Months in an effort to scare us all witless, nothing from you either.

Plenty from me, backtrack 2 posts to see some of it.

Not the slightest evidence that US exports made with a CN22 are somehow exempt from US laws which apply to any export (18 USC 554) and any material false entry (18 USC 1001).

Not in 11 years on these boards, not in six years on this thread, not in 5 months of trying to ignore the facts.

Lets review:

A major figure at US CBP says that UPU mail is subject to all US import and export laws.

18 USC 554 is a US export law.

AOTC plead guilty to one count of Smuggling from the United States, which is 18 USC 554.

AOTC had knowingly entered false particulars on US customs declarations. (value and country of origin) for the purpose of helping their customers avoid tax and duty.

18 USC 554 applies to any export, so it does not matter that AOTCs exports were made with SEDs instead of CN22s.

Therefore, the AOTC case is a relevant example of an internet seller getting into trouble for making a practice of entering false particulars on US customs declarations.

AOTCs trouble occurred, even though no US revenue was at stake.

Here is a portion of the article whose link is several posts ago.

"Phil Warker explains ‘CBP recognises that true UPU mail is unique-it is subject to all US import and export laws but the international postal supply chain and enforcement process for mail items needs to be enhanced by receiving electronic data in advance on individual items, beginning with competitive products.' "

Phil Warker is the Chief of Manifest and Conveyance, Cargo Conveyance and Security at US Customs and Border Protection.

So here is a major CBP official flatly stating that UPU mail is subject to all US import and export law.

18 USC 554 is a US export law.

Why don't you come back when you have visited the courthouse, because an actual case is going to be a great deal more interesting than you repeatedly stretching the bounds of credibility with your lame excuses as to why you, or anybody else on this six year long thread, cannot find any evidence of a prosecution purely for the value on a CN22, but telling us we should all still be very afraid?

Repeatedly telling us "enforcement is low" when you cannot find any, repeatedly showing us a court case that is not a case of a seller prosecuted for value on a CN22, and the idea that absolutely nothing has been found online in six years is because an actual case has not been published is just plain ridiculous. Of course there would be some evidence to be found online if this was something a seller should worry about!

For Gods sake man, you have had five months. Either show us some evidence or stop with the lame explanations for your failure. Put up or shut up is I believe the right expression, though you will, predictably, continue to do neither.

What ever are you afraid of now?

Just more meaningless diversionary discussions about laws you claim apply.

Correction: Laws that I know apply.

All that actually matters is what happens in practise,

Good point, up to a point. The AOTC case happened.

The electronic processing of CN22s will change the customs clearance practice for postal items.

and what happens in practise is the reason you cannot provide the one thing you would dearly love to provide,

Here you are simply mistaken. I don't care enough to subscibe to a legal search service, or even to drive to the nearest (Los Angeles) federal courthouse.

and that is evidence of sellers in trouble with their domestic authorities for the value they place on a CN22.

A distinction which does not matter the US, where 18 USC 554 clearly applies to any export. 

You can't do it, nobody ever has, and this thread is coming up to be six years old in August.

Nobody posting here (including me) has searched the body of US cases not freely available online. So we do not know what other relevant cases are there.

Clearly, you would like to limit the discussion to your one favorite aspect, but it is not going to happen.

eekhorn1 wrote:

I feared that would happen, Mr M giving random the chance to continue playing barrack room Lawyers. A mistake I feel, just allows him to continue to divert from the bottom line.

 

What ever are you afraid of now?

Mr M may actually make the discussion interesting.

The bottom line is that it is actually illegal to knowingly enter false low values on the US postal customs declarations, when exporting from the US.

It also clearly violates eBay policy on sales made through this venue.

The level of enforcement does not change this.

On a practical level, the level of risk for sellers is equivalent to the level of enforcement.

So those who wish to "get away with this", probably can.

I feared that would happen, Mr M giving random the chance to continue playing barrack room Lawyers. A mistake I feel, just allows him to continue to divert from the bottom line.

What randon cannot do and is still trying to divert from the this unfortunate fact, is provide any, and I do mean ANY evidence of sellers in trouble for the value they choose to place on a CN22.

And that despite what must now be absolute desperation to do do so, despite what must be over five Months devoted this, despite mails to government offices around the World, despite personal visits to government office, despite God knows how much googling.

Not one single shred of evidence in SIX YEARS, not a thing.

Random may well not tell us that his court case is evidence of sellers getting in trouble for the value on a CN22 when it is clearly no such thing, or that we can't find any evidence because "enforcement is low" when despite 5 months of searching, he has found none.

Random has explanations for all of this and insists sellers should be very afraid and indeed he knows it all, except he does not know when to give up.

lvlr.lvlonicker wrote:

.

Another visit to this thread after some time, and I see that the

mudslinging is still going on.

 

random, will you ever learn? To cut this short, will you please

repeat after me:

 

"I, randomstore, acknowledge the rules of the World Customs

Organization (WCO), their treaties with the governments of

the member states of the United Nations, and their agreements

with the Universal Postal Union.

 

In witness thereof, I, randomstore, certify that when I fill in a

customs declaration form in compliance with the WCO rules,

I always do so in the name of my customer, and I confirm the

fact that I sign the form only on his behalf, albeit with my own

name.

 

I, randomstore, recognize that the customs form that I sign is

the property of the Customs Administration at destination, as

per the WCO agreements, because it is an import declaration.

 

I, randomstore, affirm that by the rules of the World Customs

Organization my buyer is the only person allowed to make an

import declaration, and I accept that any import declaration can

only be made by the importer and at the place and moment of importation.

 

I, randomstore, avouch that the importer is the only person

liable for the contents of any import document, and that, by the

rules of the World Customs Organization, the exporter and/or

cargo agent only act on behalf of the importer in their function

as the importer's agents.  

 

I, randomstore, pledge to always provide the best of customer

service and commit myself to follow my buyer's instructions on

how to fill in his customs declaration."

 

 

hahahah very good ! but randome is not interested in customer service, look at his feedback

Mr.Monicker

-

i am not a racist,i hate all politicians equally !!

Absent some proof that exports made with a CN22 are exempt from 18 USC 554; the AOTC case is ONE.

No it is NOT.

When OH WHEN will you stop doing this? Nobody is interested in your barrack room Lawyer games! We want proof of a seller prosecuted purely for the value they placed on a CN22 and your unqualified theorizing using a court case that was NOT a case of a seller prosecuted purely for the value placed on a CN22 is not it!

Just yet one more of your three straws you continue clutch to, and no matter how many times you say it, it is NOT an example of a seller in trouble purely for the value placed on a CN22.

Your latest straw you grasped is also just yet another sign of your desperation. To suggest the new announcement made by eBay shows they care about the value placed on a CN22 is disingenuous at best and downright dishonest at worst.

You have now been at this in excess of five months and despite some pretty desperate efforts to find your evidence, you still try to divert from a COMPLETE AND UTTER FAILURE to find ONE SINGLE SHRED of evidence of sellers getting in trouble for the value they place on a CN22.

Five Months of online research, mailing governments around the World, visiting government offices in person, and you are reduced to repeatedly posting a court case that is not a case of a seller prosecuted for the value placed on a CN22 and claiming that the new announcement made by ebay to protect sellers from angry buyers is about making sure sellers accurately complete CN22's, which you know full well to be untrue.

Determination and stubbornness can be attributes in some cases, but you have gone well beyond that. All the evidence suggests nobody other than the receiving country has any reason to be interested in the values placed on a CN22, and your determination to prove otherwise is starting to make you look slightly insane.

Incidentally, if I sell a visitor from another state or nation something in my shop, I still have to charge them sales tax unless I ship it to them.

The available evidence indicates a low level of enforcement.

Yet AGAIN you come out with this nonsense! This is one of the three straws that you continue to clutch to, but you again fail to mention that you have found ZERO EVIDENCE of ANY enforcement when it comes to the value placed on a CN22.

Be HONEST, you have found NO evidence of any enforcement!!!!

The fact you keep claiming that "enforcement is low" when you can find NONE is on a par with your last post claiming that measures taken by eBay to protect sellers from buyers hit with unexpected taxes are about sellers filling in forms with full sale value. Really, that post does not cover you in glory. You know full well what that was about but tried to use it gain points. Silly.

It is not just a question of can you?

It is also a question of character.

I suppose that I would have to agree with, but then it is easy for you to take the moral highground with tax exemption limits of hundreds when some have one of 20 Dollars.

And your motives on this thread?

The reason you continue to try and scare sellers in to compliance (with blatant nonsense in several posts) when you and the USA have nothing to gain.?

Don't give me the hogwash about enforcement being mutually beneficial, it's yet more nonsense and you know it.

Why, random, does it bother you in the USA that I might evade a few Euro in tax?

The eBay announcement shows that eBay does care about customs matters.

No, they care about profit.

The eBay announcement shows that they finally listened to the very valid complaints of sellers hit by negative feedback from buyers taxed by their own Country, taxes buyers were often not expecting. This DAMAGED eBay SALES and PROFITS and REPUTATION.

THAT is why they are doing what they have done.

You know this full well but tried to twist it in to meaning that eBay care about the values placed on a CN22.  MORE DESPERATION from you! They DO have to be seen to care, hence the announcement at the head of this thread, but if you think they really care then you know nothing of how businesses like this operate.

Only somebody with a bizarre agenda such as yours could have twisted that announcement the way you did.

But it's all you can do, grasp at straws as you flounder in your complete and utter failure to provide evidence of any seller, anywhere, in the slightest trouble at all for the value they see fit to put on a CN22. Despite mails to Government departments around the World, despite personal visits to government offices, despite God only knows how much web searching, despite daily posts here for the last five months, absolutely ZERO evidence of a seller in trouble for the value placed on a CN22.

You seem to think you know everything, but the one thing you certainly don't know is when to give up, because your latest clutching at straws is starting to look beyond desperate and a little dishonest, or at the least shows how disingenuous some people are prepared to be to prove a point, or "win" an argument. You don't come out of that post covered on glory, random, because it makes you look desperate and dishonest.

Six years, some pretty fanatical efforts, and not one single shred of evidence, of any kind, of a seller in trouble  purely for the value they place on a CN22.