Boats returning from Europe

[Phoenix_V]

23 minutes ago, Arthur Marshall said:

Surely it is going to be the same, now, bringing a boat into the UK from anywhere, the country it's coming from (EU or nonEU) is now irrelevant. That's the whole point of leaving the EU - to be a separate state.

of course

 

24 minutes ago, Arthur Marshall said:

If people had wanted the rules/taxes/duties to stay the same, we wouldn't have had a majority for change.

could you point me to the bit where it said that if we left the EU and you had already paid vat on your boat you would have to pay it again please

[Richard10002]

1 hour ago, Alan de Enfield said:

 

I think it must be time for your bed - you cannot even read a single line of text without making errors ;

 

"No, it is exactly the same as it ever was to bring a boat in from any non-eu country".

"Where did anybody say that that bringing a boat into the EU from a non-EU country was going to be any different?"

 

Spot the difference - clue - we are talking about bringing a boat INTO THE UK.

 

 

 

It is a shame that posts no longer have numbers. It would have been much easier to point you to your own post No., and the No. of the post you responded to.

 

Anyway... This was your response to blackroses post, (I think it was blackrose?).

 

"Are you suggesting that the requirements for taking a boat from the UK into the EU are more onerous than bringing a boat into the EU from any other non-EU country ?"

 

and that was the post I responded to.

 

The thread may be about bringing a boat INTO THE UK, but your post, and the post you responded to, were not.

 

 

 

 

 

[Phoenix_V]

Actually an EU registered boat returning to the EU (whether or not from the UK) appears to enjoy a greater chance of escaping double vat than the other way round - since that issue for whatever obscure reason has been raised, from the rya site;

 

"If the yacht is registered in the EU and on the condition that the requirements of Article 203 of the Union Customs Code (UCC) are met, the boat may be released for free circulation as returned goods according to Article 203 UCC on the condition that the declarant is established in the customs territory of the Union. The customs declaration may be lodged orally.

Where the declarant is not established in the EU, the possibility of an exception will need to be checked with customs. 

Caution: 

Please think carefully before changing the registration of your boat to an EU member state: "

-

 

[Alan de Enfield]

8 hours ago, Richard10002 said:

 

It is a shame that posts no longer have numbers. It would have been much easier to point you to your own post No., and the No. of the post you responded to.

 

Anyway... This was your response to blackroses post, (I think it was blackrose?).

 

"Are you suggesting that the requirements for taking a boat from the UK into the EU are more onerous than bringing a boat into the EU from any other non-EU country ?"

 

and that was the post I responded to.

 

The thread may be about bringing a boat INTO THE UK, but your post, and the post you responded to, were not.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

You are correct, Indeed it was in response to Blackrose who said :

 

When I asked about the potential difficulties in taking my boat to France a couple of years ago all the brexiteers said it would be no different than a boat coming from any other non-EU country and wouldn't be a problem.

 

To which I had respnded :

 

Are you suggesting that the requirements for taking a boat from the UK into the EU are more onerous than bringing a boat into the EU from any other non-EU country ?

 

Note the part in bold.

 

 

[Arthur Marshall]

9 hours ago, Phoenix_V said:

of course

 

could you point me to the bit where it said that if we left the EU and you had already paid vat on your boat you would have to pay it again please

If that was the case when bringing a boat back from any other country, then it was already written down.  If people don't do their research, they can't complain. Bank accounts have been closed, I believe mobile phone roaming charges have changed, you have to be in a different line at customs - all just regularising the changed national position. I'm sure readers of other papers than mine can tell me what advantages individuals have gained from the change, and what's got cheaper, easier and quicker (mine seems not to have spotted much). For us boaters, of course, we no longer have the threat from the EU of banning the use of red diesel for propulsion, so we win there. Don't we?

 

[Phoenix_V]

34 minutes ago, Arthur Marshall said:

If that was the case when bringing a boat back from any other country, then it was already written down.

it may  have been for boats which have never been eu paid but for boats already vat paid what was written down changed at the last minute read the first post of this thread

36 minutes ago, Arthur Marshall said:

For us boaters, of course, we no longer have the threat from the EU of banning the use of red diesel for propulsion, so we win there. Don't we?

is that why you voted for brexit then?

[ditchcrawler]

10 hours ago, Phoenix_V said:

 

 

could you point me to the bit where it said that if we left the EU and you had already paid vat on your boat you would have to pay it again please

I asked that question very early on in the thread and people indicated to me that was the case

[markeymark]

1 hour ago, Arthur Marshall said:

If that was the case when bringing a boat back from any other country, then it was already written down.  If people don't do their research, they can't complain. Bank accounts have been closed, I believe mobile phone roaming charges have changed, you have to be in a different line at customs - all just regularising the changed national position. I'm sure readers of other papers than mine can tell me what advantages individuals have gained from the change, and what's got cheaper, easier and quicker (mine seems not to have spotted much). For us boaters, of course, we no longer have the threat from the EU of banning the use of red diesel for propulsion, so we win there. Don't we?

 

Pretty sure I read in another thread that we will have to pay duty on red from 2022 in the UK...or red for boats will be replaced with white....Alan may know the answer to that one.

[Phoenix_V]

12 minutes ago, ditchcrawler said:

I asked that question very early on in the thread and people indicated to me that was the case

ffs this from the rya in post 1 "In April 2019 HMRC advised the RYA that, “In the event of the UK, leaving the EU without a deal, HMRC will allow RGR for any pleasure craft, which has union paid status and belongs in the UK because of registration or the nationality/place of establishment of the owner. "

 

RGR = returned goods relief

 

1 we were not told

2 we were told the exact opposite

3 even so most of us were not naive enough to not suspect they might renege but it still does not mean there was much we could do about it or make it fair

Edited February 28, 2021 by Phoenix_V

[Tam & Di]

Just now, markeymark said:

Pretty sure I read in another thread that we will have to pay duty on red from 2022 in the UK...or red for boats will be replaced with white....Alan may know the answer to that one.

That was pretty much my understanding too - the "no red fuel for propulsion engines" is not uniquely an EU thing - just another thing UK voters were mislead about.

 

Tam

[Alan de Enfield]

6 minutes ago, markeymark said:

Pretty sure I read in another thread that we will have to pay duty on red from 2022 in the UK...or red for boats will be replaced with white....Alan may know the answer to that one.

 

 

The consultation (that was probably just 'this is what we are going to do anyway exercise) was that you can continue to use Red diesel for domestic use as long as you have a seperate fuel tank feeding only the domestic requirements, and a seperate tank for white supplying the propulsion method.

 

If you only have a single tank then you MUST use white, but you will pay the lower rebated price for the proportion you declare (60/40 ?).

Apart from any rise in the 'base' price that the seller adds (due to changing equipment etc) the boater should see no difference (unless they have previously been making false declarations), as red was charged at 'full duty' (exactly the same as white will be) for propulsion use.

[Arthur Marshall]

1 hour ago, Phoenix_V said:

 

is that why you voted for brexit then?

I didn't. I voted to remain, and still think a decision to narrow horizons and erect borders where there were none is one of the stupidest and most ignorant decisions ever made*. And expensive, as people seem to be finding out much to their apparent surprise.

However,  it was a democratic decision, we live in a democracy and, unlike many, I like to live in the world as it is, not as I have a fantasy of it being or try to pretend it is anything other than it is. Any other comments I might make would have to be deposited in the politics wing where I no longer appear (much).

 

*ETA This is my personal opinion, others are perfectly able to hold different ones, and does not mean anyone should think I am insulting them. I'm not, different conclusions are always possible from identical evidence.

Edited February 28, 2021 by Arthur Marshall
Clarification!

[Phoenix_V]

1 minute ago, Arthur Marshall said:

I didn't. I voted to remain, and still think a decision to narrow horizons and erect borders where there were none is one of the stupidest and most ignorant decisions ever made. And expensive, as people seem to be finding out much to their apparent surprise.

However,  it was a democratic decision, we live in a democracy and, unlike many, I like to live in the world as it is, not as I have a fantasy of it being or try to pretend it is anything other than it is. Any other comments I might make would have to be deposited in the politics wing where I no longer appear (much).

these problems are not an ineveitable consequence of brexit and capable of being reversed, unlikely maybe but not fantasy, this thread is about problems created for boaters and discussion therof and I agree any should not need to be diverted into politics

[Arthur Marshall]

53 minutes ago, markeymark said:

Pretty sure I read in another thread that we will have to pay duty on red from 2022 in the UK...or red for boats will be replaced with white....Alan may know the answer to that one.

Of course we are. It never had anything to do with the EU. I forgot irony doesn't really work on the internet...

[Arthur Marshall]

5 minutes ago, Phoenix_V said:

these problems are not an ineveitable consequence of brexit and capable of being reversed, unlikely maybe but not fantasy, this thread is about problems created for boaters and discussion therof and I agree any should not need to be diverted into politics

While they are capable of being reversed if anyone thinks it worth the bother, they are obviously an inevitable consequence of splitting off from the EU, otherwise they wouldn't be happening. This is what I meant about living in the real world - solving these problems, and any others that arise, is unfortunately going to be political. Nothing to do with which party anyone supports or what one thinks of whoever happens to be in charge.

If you can think of a way of changing things without involving politicians, I'll be impressed!

What does need to avoided, which I think is what you meant anyway, is descending into a left/right slanging match or endlessly arguing over history. Whether anyone was a Brexiteer or a Remainer is now completely irrelevant.

Anyway, as it doesn't affect me any more than the toilet threads, it's really none of my business so, while I find both interesting discussions, I'll butt out...

[Richard10002]

3 hours ago, Alan de Enfield said:

 

 

You are correct, Indeed it was in response to Blackrose who said :

 

When I asked about the potential difficulties in taking my boat to France a couple of years ago all the brexiteers said it would be no different than a boat coming from any other non-EU country and wouldn't be a problem.

 

To which I had respnded :

 

Are you suggesting that the requirements for taking a boat from the UK into the EU are more onerous than bringing a boat into the EU from any other non-EU country ?

 

Note the part in bold.

 

 

 

I see you took your own advice and went to bed.

 

Yes... I noted the part in bold when I first read it... thank you for confirming it  I actually responded to the whole sentence, rather than just the bit in bold. Your question suggested that you hadn't read blackroses post, or had misunderstood it.

 

 

 

 

[Richard10002]

3 hours ago, Arthur Marshall said:

 For us boaters, of course, we no longer have the threat from the EU of banning the use of red diesel for propulsion, so we win there. Don't we?

 

 

Given that we are where we are, and can do nothing to change things..... So..... Hurrah for red diesel! One of the three benefits of leaving the EU.

 

For the sake of clarity, the other two were VAT and something to do with ports.

 

I'm looking forward to seeing VAT reduced below 15% on everything that wasn't eligible while we were in the EU, and I'm sure the ports will be delighted, although peterboat seems to be more pleased that they aren't being used as much now.... something to do with wear and tear I think he said??

 

I'm guessing that the ban on red diesel has been changed by now.... hasn't it?

[mrsmelly]

5 minutes ago, Richard10002 said:

 

Given that we are where we are, and can do nothing to change things..... So..... Hurrah for red diesel! One of the three benefits of leaving the EU.

 

For the sake of clarity, the other two were VAT and something to do with ports.

 

I'm looking forward to seeing VAT reduced below 15% on everything that wasn't eligible while we were in the EU, and I'm sure the ports will be delighted, although peterboat seems to be more pleased that they aren't being used as much now.... something to do with wear and tear I think he said??

 

I'm guessing that the ban on red diesel has been changed by now.... hasn't it?

Where have you seen that VAT rates are being reduced below 15 per cent? Ive seen nothing about it in the news. Why on earth would you think that will happen?

[Richard10002]

2 hours ago, Phoenix_V said:

is that why you voted for brexit then?

I believe that Arthur voted against Brexit.

 

I sensed a note of sarcasm in his post that you may have missed.

 

It would seem that the red diesel issue was yet another red herring which shows that Brexiteers were scraping the bottom of their barrel of lies when convincing Phil's numpties to vote to throw the economy under a bus.

[Phoenix_V]

6 minutes ago, Richard10002 said:

I sensed a note of sarcasm in his post that you may have missed.

maybe in mine too

[Arthur Marshall]

2 hours ago, Richard10002 said:

I believe that Arthur voted against Brexit.

 

I sensed a note of sarcasm in his post that you may have missed.

 

Irony, please, not sarcasm. I would never sink so low...

[Richard10002]

39 minutes ago, Arthur Marshall said:

Irony, please, not sarcasm. I would never sink so low...

Sorry  

[Phoenix_V]

54 minutes ago, Arthur Marshall said:

Irony, please, not sarcasm. I would never sink so low...

Verbal irony is a figure of speech that communicates the opposite of what is said, while sarcasm is a form of irony that is directed at a person, with the intent to criticise. The current study used functional magnetic resonance imaging (fMRI) with the aim of mapping the neural networks involved in the processing of sarcastic and non-sarcastic irony. Participants read short texts describing an interaction between two characters, which ended in either a literal, sarcastic, or non-sarcastic ironic comment. Results showed that the mentalising network (mPFC) and semantic network (IFG) were more activated for non-sarcastic irony than for literal controls. This would suggest that interpreting this kind of language involves understanding that the speaker does not mean what they literally say, as well as processes involved in conflict detection and resolution. Sarcastic irony recruited more of the semantic network, as well as areas associated with humour appreciation and subcortical structures, indicating that more complex neural mechanisms underlie the comprehension of sarcastic versus non-sarcastic irony.

[IanD]

1 hour ago, Phoenix_V said:

Verbal irony is a figure of speech that communicates the opposite of what is said, while sarcasm is a form of irony that is directed at a person, with the intent to criticise. The current study used functional magnetic resonance imaging (fMRI) with the aim of mapping the neural networks involved in the processing of sarcastic and non-sarcastic irony. Participants read short texts describing an interaction between two characters, which ended in either a literal, sarcastic, or non-sarcastic ironic comment. Results showed that the mentalising network (mPFC) and semantic network (IFG) were more activated for non-sarcastic irony than for literal controls. This would suggest that interpreting this kind of language involves understanding that the speaker does not mean what they literally say, as well as processes involved in conflict detection and resolution. Sarcastic irony recruited more of the semantic network, as well as areas associated with humour appreciation and subcortical structures, indicating that more complex neural mechanisms underlie the comprehension of sarcastic versus non-sarcastic irony.

Are you suggesting that only clever people can understand sarcastic irony? 'Cos that's prejudice, that is... ?

Edited February 28, 2021 by IanD

[Phoenix_V]

“Sarcasm is the lowest form of wit, but the highest form of intelligence.”

― Oscar Wilde