Home of N2D.

You are not logged in. Would you like to login or register?



27-9-2012 12:38 am  #1


Receipts and HMRC/Border Force

The reason why there are multiple receipts for tobacco is bloody HMRC/UKBA/Border Force themselves! They brought it in (Customs and Excise Notice 477) when they tried to restrict the amount of tobacco on sale in Belgium. Together with tobacco companies they set a limit of a 3kg sale on certain UK brands and forced it on the tobacco shops. Tobacco shops had to agree or they wouldn't be supplied with these tobacco products and they also had to grant access to sales receipts data if they were asked to by their suppliers. To ensure that tobacco shops didn't go over these limits by human error, they themselves had the tills software altered so should barcodes of these tobacco brands be entered ... the sale had a limit of 3kg. Thus protecting themselves from losing their supply.

This is much the same as in our superstores like ASDA etc when you purchase paracetamol etc. The tills don't let you go over the limit set by the store. Of course you can just go round and buy some more ... again and again.

Actually it's all complete bollox because countries like Bulgaria and Poland seldom, if ever, issue receipts (except in airport shops). The receipt proves nothing at all about whether goods are for a commercial purpose or not. Blocked Dwarf is 100% correct when he says all that matters is if the duty has been paid and the duty paid label on all the EU tobacco products does that.

So if Border Force try it on with you and ask 'Why do you have multiple receipts?' ... just answer 'Because of you!'


http://i45.tinypic.com/24uxqug.png We don't do nice ... we do right!

It's not that l have something to hide ... it's l have nothing l want to show you.
 

27-9-2012 6:21 am  #2


Re: Receipts and HMRC/Border Force

Smoking Hot wrote:

The reason why there are multiple receipts for tobacco is bloody HMRC/UKBA/Border Force themselves! They brought it in (Customs and Excise Notice 477)

I did say SH was on the case!

Smokey, do we have a copy of C&E Notice 477? Would it be yet another thing to add into the SOT?

Last edited by The Blocked Dwarf (27-9-2012 6:22 am)


"I, uh, let her out the trunk...heard what, err, She snarled at THEM...."

http://i45.tinypic.com/24uxqug.png
 

27-9-2012 6:31 am  #3


Re: Receipts and HMRC/Border Force

I would like a copy of this notice, the weak point to my case was multiple receipts for a single purchase, the customs are using things like this against us and the magistrates are believing them.

I am waiting for my decision to arrive then make the appeal to the court.

I wish I had knowledge of this before the court hearing on Tuesday!

 

27-9-2012 6:58 am  #4


Re: Receipts and HMRC/Border Force

http://customs.hmrc.gov.uk/channelsPortalWebApp/channelsPortalWebApp.portal?_nfpb=true&_pageLabel=pageLibrary_ShowContent&id=HMCE_PROD1_026197&propertyType=document


Tobacco products duty: control of supply chains
HMRC Reference:Notice 477 (May 2009)

It was brought in in May 2009. However EU law did not change until September 2009. David Ash (Daytripper) and myself tried to get a case to the ECJ via Commissioner Semanta's Office. However Eu law was changed by an agreement between OLAF (anti-fraud office) and the cigarette companies and the case was moot (cancelled).

The effect was to reduce shipments of tobacco from the UK  to Europe to that which was comparable with 'local' demand.

It was targeted at three brands GV, Cutters Choice and Amber Leaf. It only effected UK manufactured tobacco.

Since then Imperial have moved GV production to Mechelen in Belgium, and BATS moved Cutters Choice production to the DUCAL plant in Luxembourg so circumventing the regulation.

All it has done is cost jobs here.

The tobacco companies strong armed the local distribution networks into selling UK nationals the then MIL of 3KGs only.
Hence the 3KG 'limit' so no receipts for more than 3Kg so they could say they were complying with the notice...

bobi

 

27-9-2012 7:16 am  #5


Re: Receipts and HMRC/Border Force

Good information here but why is it not in the public domain, Again we have the lack of transparancy and UKBF exploiting the publics lack of knowledge, Thats USSR style Government.
HOPE THE JUDGE IN TONY'S CASE GIVES THAT IN HIS DECISION, THEN THERE WOULD BE A GOOD CHANCE OF APPEAL.

 

27-9-2012 7:19 am  #6


Re: Receipts and HMRC/Border Force

Ive had a quick look at Notice 477 and 476, I could not find any specific reference to limits for each transaction, do you think a FOI request might help us?

 

27-9-2012 7:26 am  #7


Re: Receipts and HMRC/Border Force

You will get no response to an FOI on anything to do with Notice 477 as the data is commercially sensitive and would divulge data about the tobacco companies , I know I've tried..
It is in section 3 Supply Chain Policy ;- the policy is 3Kg per transaction, I'm surprised they've not tried to lower it to 1Kg in line with the MIL.

bobi

 

27-9-2012 7:28 am  #8


Re: Receipts and HMRC/Border Force

Tony1956 wrote:

I would like a copy of this notice, the weak point to my case was multiple receipts for a single purchase, the customs are using things like this against us and the magistrates are believing them.

I am waiting for my decision to arrive then make the appeal to the court.

I wish I had knowledge of this before the court hearing on Tuesday!

Well, as you can see it's new. Did you know beforehand that Border force were using individual receipts as a reason? Was it in the legal 'bundle' from Border Force or any other letters you got from them?

A copy of just the Notice 477 is just part of what happened.HMRC collaborated with UK Tobacco Companies and the Tobacco Manufacturers Association to limit supplies to Belgium. Ultimately it was the Tobacco Companies themselves who imposed this limit on Belgian tobacco shops by none other than blackmail ... 'Limit your sales or we'll stop supplying you'

l can virtually guarantee you that HMRC/UKBA/Border Force will deny any knowledge of this arrangement. Whether you believe them is another matter.

We can only counteract when things like this are used in court if we know about them. ln the 2+ years we've been doing this, we've never had this before and none of our large correspondence with people going to Condemnation Proceedings at Magistrates Court have had it either.


http://i45.tinypic.com/24uxqug.png We don't do nice ... we do right!

It's not that l have something to hide ... it's l have nothing l want to show you.
     Thread Starter
 

27-9-2012 7:32 am  #9


Re: Receipts and HMRC/Border Force

Some more info for Tony,
At Ayr Sheriff court 2004 the UKBA stated that having smoking paraphanilla only showed the person being stopped knew the ropes and deliberatly opened a packet and bought a lighter to deceive the customs.
I will post exect case when I find my judgement,
The judge said he paid no creedance to a passenger not having anything smoking wise  on his person in a non smoking environment.
Maybe you can use that case as an athourity in any appeal plus the recept thing and you may have something possitive to work on.
Good luck Tony hope you win.

 

27-9-2012 8:07 am  #10


Re: Receipts and HMRC/Border Force

l also have a friend who absolutely insists on having individual receipts for all his purchases no matter how small each purchase is. He gives tobacco to his family members that smoke re xmas and birthdays. The receipt goes with the gift just in case the authorities question the person receiving the gift as to where they got the tobacco from. For example ... if Customs stopped their vehicle for a diesel test and came across a carton of EU Duty Paid cigarettes etc.  (grin)


http://i45.tinypic.com/24uxqug.png We don't do nice ... we do right!

It's not that l have something to hide ... it's l have nothing l want to show you.
     Thread Starter
 

27-9-2012 9:16 am  #11


Re: Receipts and HMRC/Border Force

3. Supply chain policy
3.1 What is a supply chain?
In its simplest form a supply chain is a series of transactions. One example of a
supply chain in the context of this notice could be:
Manufacturer A produces cigarettes and sells them to Wholesaler B who
subsequently sells the cigarettes to Retailer C. Retailer C then sells the cigarettes to
the end user, Customer D.
Notice 477 Tobacco products duty: control of supply chains
May 2009
Page 4 of 18
3.2 What is a supply chain policy?
You are required by law to have and maintain a written supply chain policy. This is a
statement of best practice setting out the measures you have put in place to comply
with your legal duty, to avoid, or reduce the risk of commercial quantities of your
tobacco products being obtained for the purpose of smuggling into the UK.
3.3 What should be included in my supply
chain policy?
We do not stipulate the content of your supply chain policy as it is in your interests to
have the flexibility to implement measures suited to your particular business
circumstances. However, examples of the kind of things we would expect to see
covered in a supply chain policy are contained in Appendix A.
The examples contained in Appendix A are not intended to be exhaustive, neither are
they compulsory, but they are provided as a guide to help you develop your policy.

 

27-9-2012 9:27 am  #12


Re: Receipts and HMRC/Border Force

Smoking Hot wrote:

Tony1956 wrote:

I would like a copy of this notice, the weak point to my case was multiple receipts for a single purchase, the customs are using things like this against us and the magistrates are believing them.

I am waiting for my decision to arrive then make the appeal to the court.

I wish I had knowledge of this before the court hearing on Tuesday!

Well, as you can see it's new. Did you know beforehand that Border force were using individual receipts as a reason? Was it in the legal 'bundle' from Border Force or any other letters you got from them?

A copy of just the Notice 477 is just part of what happened.HMRC collaborated with UK Tobacco Companies and the Tobacco Manufacturers Association to limit supplies to Belgium. Ultimately it was the Tobacco Companies themselves who imposed this limit on Belgian tobacco shops by none other than blackmail ... 'Limit your sales or we'll stop supplying you'

l can virtually guarantee you that HMRC/UKBA/Border Force will deny any knowledge of this arrangement. Whether you believe them is another matter.

We can only counteract when things like this are used in court if we know about them. ln the 2+ years we've been doing this, we've never had this before and none of our large correspondence with people going to Condemnation Proceedings at Magistrates Court have had it either.

It was mentioned somewhere in my paperwork but I dont recall the receipts being used against me, that is probably why I did not expand on it and ask him questions about in court, one of the receipts has got 2 bottles of brandy on it, I will check the receipts and see if they are on the springfield receipt or on the gold leaf receipts

 

27-9-2012 9:36 am  #13


Re: Receipts and HMRC/Border Force

A new line in the SOT , so "mething like ;"multiply receipts were issued to me for a single transaction by the retailer in line with HMRC's XYZ and are in no way to be taken as suggesting commerciality"? What would be really useful would be written confirmation from a retailer that they are applying this policy....but I doubt that will happen.


"I, uh, let her out the trunk...heard what, err, She snarled at THEM...."

http://i45.tinypic.com/24uxqug.png
 

27-9-2012 9:37 am  #14


Re: Receipts and HMRC/Border Force

Ive just checked the till receipts, the Gold Leaf are on 3 receipts of 50 pouches each and, interestingly enough, the brandy is on the same receipt as the Springfield, Would Real Tobacco let us have a copy of their Supply Chain Policy, they should have something that shows they have limits imposed on them??

 

27-9-2012 10:20 am  #15


Re: Receipts and HMRC/Border Force

The Blocked Dwarf wrote:

A new line in the SOT , so "mething like ;"multiply receipts were issued to me for a single transaction by the retailer in line with HMRC's XYZ and are in no way to be taken as suggesting commerciality"? What would be really useful would be written confirmation from a retailer that they are applying this policy....but I doubt that will happen.

Would you risk losing your supplier of brands that make up the majority of your business? l'd be very surprised if the Tobacco Companies didn't have a confidentiality agreement anyway.

l'd suggest writing to the Tobacco Company themselves ... it's a win - win situation. They'll either agree that they have such a policy in force or reply and refuse to answer. 

Last edited by Smoking Hot (27-9-2012 10:23 am)


http://i45.tinypic.com/24uxqug.png We don't do nice ... we do right!

It's not that l have something to hide ... it's l have nothing l want to show you.
     Thread Starter
 

27-9-2012 10:32 am  #16


Re: Receipts and HMRC/Border Force

I am posting my intentions of appeal to Hull Magistrates within the next hour!

Who is going to write to the tobacco company? It would be good if we can get them to tell us about the supply restrictions on the buyer!

 

27-9-2012 11:24 am  #17


Re: Receipts and HMRC/Border Force

Smoking Hot wrote:

The Blocked Dwarf wrote:

A new line in the SOT , so "mething like ;"multiply receipts were issued to me for a single transaction by the retailer in line with HMRC's XYZ and are in no way to be taken as suggesting commerciality"? What would be really useful would be written confirmation from a retailer that they are applying this policy....but I doubt that will happen.

Would you risk losing your supplier of brands that make up the majority of your business? l'd be very surprised if the Tobacco Companies didn't have a confidentiality agreement anyway.

I wasn't criticizing Peter et al, I can well imagine that there was a nasty bit of blackmail involved and you are, I'm sure, 100% right about the confidentiality clause...otherwise there would no doubt be a notice on the REAL website already-as there is about exchange rates etc.

l'd suggest writing to the Tobacco Company themselves ... it's a win - win situation. They'll either agree that they have such a policy in force or reply and refuse to answer. 

I am still waiting on a reply to PM about a simple refund for something. They only answer their phone with the barest courtesy and refuse to talk to anyone without the caller first being vetted...I kid you not.

However that aside a copy of the letter to the Tobacco Company and possible response (whatever it is or isn't) would probably make a nice addition to any SOT...especially if it goes to court. "As you can see from my letter to Big T complaining about their supply chain issuing me multiple receipts for a single transaction" perhaps? Balance of Probabilities and all that...be a bit hard for an Officer to claim that my having multiple receipts was a sure sign of smuggling if I've already complained to Big T about it.


"I, uh, let her out the trunk...heard what, err, She snarled at THEM...."

http://i45.tinypic.com/24uxqug.png
 

27-9-2012 11:30 am  #18


Re: Receipts and HMRC/Border Force

I would have thought it would be sufficient to state on oath that Belgian Tabacs have their tills setup so that they cannot issue receipts which show more than 3kgs per sale of any Uk product in order to comply with their supplier agreement. Then if necessary baffle them with notice 476/477
How would the prosecution prove otherwise?


http://i45.tinypic.com/24uxqug.png
 
 

27-9-2012 12:00 pm  #19


Re: Receipts and HMRC/Border Force

Bobi wrote:

You will get no response to an FOI on anything to do with Notice 477 as the data is commercially sensitive and would divulge data about the tobacco companies , I know I've tried..
It is in section 3 Supply Chain Policy ;- the policy is 3Kg per transaction, I'm surprised they've not tried to lower it to 1Kg in line with the MIL.

bobi

Maybe Customs are happy to keep it at 3kg per transaction, if it were to be reduced to 1kg we would then get 5 receipts for a 5kg case, that could sound alarm bells, it would be against EU regs to limit a customer to 1kg for personal use, it would be nice if we could prove that customs are behind the limiting of sales to the guide levels!

 

27-9-2012 1:00 pm  #20


Re: Receipts and HMRC/Border Force

Tony1956 wrote:

Ive just checked the till receipts, the Gold Leaf are on 3 receipts of 50 pouches each and, interestingly enough, the brandy is on the same receipt as the Springfield, Would Real Tobacco let us have a copy of their Supply Chain Policy, they should have something that shows they have limits imposed on them??

Whilst that confirms the receipt question, it would be of greater assistance to yourself re your appeal, members of the forum and us if you can verify whether in all the letters (incl his notebook) you received from BF, that they quoted the individual receipts as a reason for seizure? lf they did, could you please quote exactly what they said?

If they did not originally list it as a reason then they had no justification in bringing it up in court. You could've used the infamous 'l object' (grin)


http://i45.tinypic.com/24uxqug.png We don't do nice ... we do right!

It's not that l have something to hide ... it's l have nothing l want to show you.
     Thread Starter
 

Board footera

 

Powered by Boardhost. Create a Free Forum

Disclaimer:- This forum is an open forum, and anyone can post their thoughts here (within reason). Therefore the views expressed here are those of individuals and not necessarily those of Nothing 2 Declare. We try to allow as much freedom of speech as possible, including views that some may find objectionable. This includes the views of UKBA, Border Force, HMRC, legitimate cross-border shoppers, non-legitimate importers, general public and anyone else that wishes to post.
Regarding ourselves, we categorically do not condone smuggling and neither do we condone the current tactics used against legitimate cross-border shoppers by UKBA/Border Force and HMRC. The current tactics benefit both Customs and smugglers alike.
Although some people use real names, there is no guarantee that they are who they say they are; it is impossible for us to verify identities of all members.