The Canadian Taxman Goes Browsing on eBay 221
Kaneda2112 writes "A story in the Globe And Mail points out that the Canada Revenue Agency is now trolling eBay Canada for high volume sellers — looking to make sure eBay's biggest users are accurately reporting their income. They've successfully gotten a court order for the names, addresses, and other personal information for that website's biggest users. 'Canadians spend about $5-billion online each year and eBay is by far the largest electronic marketplace, accounting for about a quarter of the total sales. The site was visited by nearly 11 million Canadians in August, according to company figures. The CRA said in court filings that it is targeting people who qualified for eBay's PowerSeller program in 2004 and 2005. Only top eBay sellers can qualify for the program, which provides benefits to members. Those benefits include prioritized customer service, special promotions and sales tips.'"
huh? (Score:5, Funny)
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
http://it.slashdot.org/article.pl?sid=07/09/26/144210 [slashdot.org]
Extending the list... (Score:5, Funny)
Re:Extending the list... (Score:5, Funny)
- RG>
Are you telling me... (Score:3, Funny)
Re: (Score:2)
Re:Are you telling me... (Score:5, Funny)
Makes sense (Score:5, Insightful)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Question is, what's different when you sell via eBay?
If you create a home-based business and sell products and services out of your home, you are expected to pay all the necessary business and income taxes that accrue based on your business. If you create an e-commerce website (or use Yahoo or Amazon), you're expected to do the same. All you've
The Law (Score:4, Insightful)
Having helped my folks set up their own small home business, I learned a few things about tax law. There are two types of corporation - provincial corporations and federal corporations. As a provincial corporation, you only need to charge your customers GST, not the local PST.
This sort of, kind of bugs me. The law behind this was written in a day and age where it's rare for provincial businesses to trade outside their borders, and even if they do it's a minor part of their income, a drop in the proverbial bucket. But huge businesses like NCIX are still registered in BC, even though they make millions in sales to other provinces (especially Ontario) - and that's a MASSIVE chunk of PST missing, not to mention that it creates an unfair playing field for local businesses. I know many Ontarians who go to NCIX just to skip out on the PST, and it's arguably stealing business from local, er, businesses.
IMHO if the majority of your operations are not in your home province you ought to be forced to incorporate federally and be forced to follow the local tax laws wherever you operate (in Canada at least!).
Re: (Score:3, Informative)
Re: (Score:2, Informative)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Nitpick (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
I've just started looking around the
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
So maybe taxes don't suck? They pay for things most of us like and use... Do you like driving on reasonably nice roads more than your iPod? Is a reasonably sane national healthcare plan more valuable to you than, say, Halo3? Would your prefer allowing crack-heads to cart of your TV, or perhaps you would like a latte instead?
There's nothi
Re: (Score:2)
Anyway, he comes up with this: paying taxes are like paying dues. If somebody didn't want to pay their dues for the country club, then the other members of the country club would be right to want him kicked out, and to call him a leech for wanting to be in the country club without paying his dues. I was stunned at the idiocy of the statement.
We were drinking and j
Re: (Score:2)
I do agree to a point, but it reminds me of a great quote from West Wing:
"I don't know where you get the idea that taxpayers shouldn't have to pay for anything of which they disapprove. Lots of them don't like tanks. Even more don't like Congress."
All of us would like to keep more of our money, and all of us can come up with things we think are wholly unnecessary. Part of the
Re: (Score:2)
Re:Makes sense (Score:5, Insightful)
Does it matter? Straightforward or hidden, complicated or simple, you end up paying the same amount in the end. If you want to support public healthcare, education, etc etc, you better be prepared to pay up.
I dislike how most people equate taxes to Bad Thing(tm). You really want to pay for healthcare yourself? Say you're rich and make 6-7 figures, you want to deal with the ensuing crime problems when poor people can't afford to? You want 40% of your health care costs to line the pockets of execs, or do you actually want medical care for that money? There are places where socialization is appropriate, and there are places it is not. For the most part IMHO the Canadian gov't does a good job at most things, and I'm happy to pay my taxes, because I know I will suffer if the gov't suddenly stopped taxing us, either directly or indirectly.
Re: (Score:2)
Yeah I'm sure the government is totally clean and uses all tax money altruistically for us citizens.
Re: (Score:2)
What? Record profits? Record number of claims denied? Record number of people uninsured due to preexisting conditions or high risk status?
-fred
Re: (Score:2)
Many of us don't want to support those things, though.
I dislike how most people equate taxes to Bad Thing(tm)
I dislike paying them to support your favorite pet causes.
Whether paying for a war of aggression far far away, or for healthcare for people too lazy to take care of their own bodies, or for drug law enforcement, or bailing out failing obsolete industries... I don't just "not want to", I find it
Re: (Score:2)
Luckily you have to pay anyway, no matter how offensive you find it. Why should we tolerate your offensive egoism?
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
Many of us don't want to support those things, though.
Then get out there and vote. If there's no candidate out there who will support your views, then consider becoming one. If there is TRULY nobody (or very few people out there) that will support your views, then perhaps that says something.
I dislike paying them to support your favorite pet causes.
I suppose an education system is also a pet cause? What about road repairs paid for by tax dollars? Is that a pet cause too?
...or for healthcare for people too lazy to take care of their own bodies
Ahhhh, out comes the massive superiority complex. Look buddy, not everyone who gets sick does so out of their own ignorance. Not everyone wh
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
If by "education" you mean funding a massively disfunctional system that rewards obedience over performance, then yeah, I'd call that a pet cause. Now, come up with a way to educate rather than babysit/indoctrinate, and I'll reconsider my stance on that one.
What about road repairs paid for by tax dollars? Is that a pet cause too?
When local governments start selling toll-rights to the highest bidder, and have no shortage of takers - Yes, I would s
Re: (Score:2)
Tax is not a bad thing, but (Score:2)
If a government chooses to waste our money on overpaid contractors, lame initiatives like fund religious schools, building half a subway line, etc.
I'd happily choose to pay for my own medicare, make my own donations...at least it's my decision.
Re:Makes sense (Score:5, Insightful)
If sacrificing a few dollars of my hard-earned income will reduce crime in the streets, enable the poor to pull themselves out of poverty, and give opportunity to those who have none, then by all means I will support it. After all, a prosperous, safe, and productive country is good for all Canadians.
See, the thing you're not getting about public health care is that... nobody's saying "the gov't must pay for it because the citizens are too broke", because 100% of our health care dollars come out of taxes in the first place. The population *is* paying for this, the money isn't falling out of some money tree somewhere, and overwhelmingly our public health care (designed for everyone) costs far less than the American equivalent (which doesn't even serve most of the population, only the poor), and on the whole has far better care.
I am willing to bet, strongly, that if you calculate the average lifetime investment by a Canadian into health care (in the form of taxes paid), it will cost far less than what the average American pays for his health care, and on the whole it will be on-par, if not better, than the care Americans receive. After all, 40% of your health insurance premiums go into "administration", whereas this number is closer to 4-5% in Canada, IIRC. Ceteris paribus, on that fact alone our health care will cost some 30% less.
It's funny how you claim that public health care will bankrupt your country. We've had this system for decades, and the Canadian government has been well into the black for the past few years, and we're running a trade surplus. Our currency is appreciating (for better or for worse), and we're well on the way to paying off all that debt we accumulated during the boondoggle of the 90s. Compared with your nation, who is dangerously in debt (per capita-wise higher than ANY debt Canada had ever run, and I thought we had it bad in the 90s), currency is falling against ALL other major world currencies... It seems like you guys are the ones on the road to bankruptcy, and you're not even getting free health care out of it!
I dont' get the classic American aversion to nationalized health care - I suspect it's a holdover from the "oh no, socialism/communism is EEEEEVIL!" conditioning of past years, but seriously, you people are ALREADY paying for your health care system, paying a MASSIVE overhead on top of the actual cost of health care to the insurance companies... A nationalized system won't be perfect, and obviously government bureaucracy is not the most efficient spending mechanism in the world, but it's a heck of a lot better than what you've got now. We Canadians can keep our overhead to 4-5%, there's no reason why you Americans can't do the same, and pocket the other 35% to improve the prosperity of your people.
Re: (Score:2)
It's funny how you claim that public health care will bankrupt your country. We've had this system for decades, and the Canadian government has been well into the black for the past few years, and we're running a trade surplus.
In fairness to the people you are bashing; the U.S. has way lower taxes than we do and it would be political suicide in the US to increase taxes to Canadian levels.
Its also worth noting that countries that have universal healthcare established it long before many of the procedures that make it so expensive today were conceived of. If we didn't have medicare already in Canada, it would be impossible for us to introduce it also.
And when ridiculing the U.S. you need to keep in mind the enormous amount of
Re: (Score:2)
Well, the US couldn't afford to cover everyone right now, unless they raise taxes. I'm already taxed easily over 35% (fed, state, FICA, Medicare, etc). To do this, they'd have to raise taxes quite a bit, which would bankrupt ME.
No thanks, I'll be willing to take care of myself....keep more of my money, invest in a Health Savings Account (that I can use to invest money in to make more money)...and have a high deductible insuranc
Re:Makes sense (Score:4, Interesting)
All that oversight is sure doing great things for your health care. Not only do you pay much more than we do for it, but you're not eve n getting the service you paid for - denial of care rates are sky high, and it looks like health insurance providers will find any excuse under the sun to not give you the care you paid for.
I mean, the only solution to this problem is... *gasp* government regulation! After all, what other way is there to force companies to act counter to their own interests? (failure to provide care, or providing shoddy cheap care, is more profitable)
And once you realize how tightly the system must be regulated to remain reasonable, you come to the inevitable conclusion that things would be cheaper and better off if it were unified. After all, the cost of the regulators and other such systems can be better put to use hiring doctors and nurses! Not to mention that the government has an obligation to transparency, and any member of the public is free to obtain a copy of the health care budget and complain when spending gets wasteful.
Re: (Score:2)
Personally, I'm trying like hell to keep a system like your Canadian Socialized Medicine out of my country (the good ol' USA), so it doesn't bankrupt us. Don't want to make the downfall of our Government take place any faster than it already is!
You couldn't convince me, either. I'm sure there is tons of fat to be trimmed out of the Canadian healthcare system. This is true of any large instituti
Re: (Score:2)
Then where do the REST of the Canadian tax money go? Canadians pay less per GDP than Americans on health, yet they pay more per GDP on tax. Not to mention that Canada has a way smaller army to support than USA.
Re:Makes sense (Score:4, Interesting)
In the US, the answer is simple: because that's what the market will bear. Turns out people will pay pretty much whatever they can afford, and then some, to keep breathing. So, big surprise, that's exactly the price level the free market settled at.
Personally, I'm trying like hell to keep a system like your Canadian Socialized Medicine out of my country (the good ol' USA), so it doesn't bankrupt us.
That's pretty uninformed.
The US spends more per capita on its existing health care system than Canada does. Our health care is better than yours and it costs less, a lot less. Health care in Canada costs 10% of the GDP. Health care in the US costs 15% of the GDP. Hell, if Canada, increased its health care spending to 15% of the GDP; the amount you ALREADY spend on health care, we'd be in amazing shape. That would amount to a 50% funding increase.
A study by the Harvard School of Medicine found:
-------------
"Savings gleaned from a national health insurance system like Canada's would be enough to provide medical insurance for the 41 million Americans who now lack coverage, the researchers said."
"The study puts the administrative cost of the U.S. system at $294 billion per year, compared to about $9.4 billion in Canada. That translates to a per-person cost of $1,059 in the U.S. and $307 in Canada. A similar study, conducted in 1991, put per-capita costs in the U.S. at $450 and Canadian costs at one-third of that."
"Also, the study noted, private insurers spend large sums on marketing and underwriting, costs that the Canadian system doesn't have to bear."
---------------
That last note alone is amusing; and I wish there were some numbers attached to it. What percentage of your private health coverage costs goes towards paying for TV advertising to tell you how great your insurer's coverage is? What percentage of your private health care costs go towards paying marketers and lobbyists to convince congressmen, senators, and people like you that Canada's system is 'teh devil' that will bankrupt your country? There's some real irony there.
Canada's system isn't perfect by a longshot, and if you don't want the system and can come up with something better, I'm listening! Canada wants a better system than its got too. But while you figure out what that system is you'd be considerably further ahead with Canada's system than your own.
Re: (Score:2)
For profit enterprise is rarely cheaper than something done when profit isnt a concern. Should people really profit off of basic medical care any more than they should off of fire and police protection?
Re: (Score:3, Interesting)
> out and be all "holy shit, taxes are too high!" He might be on to something...
This is why I truly appreciate Brian Mulroney.
If nothing else, he got rid of a hidden, difficult-to-navigate tax and replaced with a tax that is clearly visible at the cash register. Harper, on the other hand, has earned by disdain because I know TANSAAFL.
I think ALL tax, wherever possible, should be a separate line item on the bill. Especially
Re: (Score:2, Flamebait)
Re: (Score:2)
I think reminding consumers that they need to watch what their government is doing each and every time they buy something should be lauded.
I truly believe that the GST was the wake-up call many people in this country needed. Transparency in ALL gover
Re: (Score:2)
I don't understand your objection. There are different taxes because there are different activities, and the government attempts to collect the money it needs while simultanously rewarding some behavior and fitting within various people's sense of right and wrong. To explain each tax...
Re: (Score:2)
Absent a progressive income tax, it would be impossible to finance the government, period. A flat tax rate would have to starve poor people to fund the government
Do you realize that you can exempt the first X amount of income, right? Let's say twice the poverty level. Let's call it $30k just for discussion purposes. Everyone gets a deduction of $30k. That means anyone making less than that pays no taxes. It also means if you made $10 million, you'll only have to pay taxes on $9,970,000. Figure out the percentage of the remaining income (after exemptions) and tax a flat amount based on that. Lets just call it 15%, again just for discussion. If you earn $10 million,
Re: (Score:2)
Don't know why you said that tongue-in-cheek; it seemed like a good idea to me. At least that way they can set the money aside while it's still in their hands, rather than taking it by force after it's been distributed. As a side benefit such a system would el
Slow news day? (Score:5, Interesting)
This is nothing more than an audit and a crackdown on unregistered businesses. In other words, the Canada Revenue Agency is doing its job (this concept may be unfamiliar to Americans when relating to governmental agencies)
If you're operating a business, then you should be paying taxes as such. Plain and simple.
Unfamiliar to Americans (Score:5, Funny)
Absolutely. The number one complaint we Americans have is that the IRS doesn't do its job. We all think that it doesn't audit enough people and would be truly satisfied with it if only it were more thorough.
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
That changes when the people being asked are the ones being audited. Everyone's in favor of making sure the other guy pays his fair share, but that opinion changes rather quickly when they become the other guy.
Sarcasm (Score:3, Insightful)
Re: (Score:2)
"Actually, my entire post was meant to be read with a tone of sarcasm, as the moderators who modded it funny evidently realized."
Funny rather than insightful? I guess nobody with mod points realizes just how low the IRS audit rate actually is.
It is quite low (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
You know what they say, the most efficient part of any government is the department that takes your money. The CRA is run less aggressively then the IRS so it's not as confrontational.
Re: (Score:2)
Yes, it is a little unusual. Around here (the USA) the government usually sits around not doing much and charging us an awful lot for it, while blustering around trying to look busy. When the government actually does do something it's usually incorrect, wrong, over-reaching, or just plain stupid. And, of course, if anyone actually criticizes the government they're
Re: (Score:2)
In other words, the Canada Revenue Agency is doing its job (this concept may be unfamiliar to Americans when relating to governmental agencies)
You surely understand that we're a bit anti-tax, yes? Hell, the US born of a tax revolt, and we (by and large) haven't really gotten that out of our system (pretty much everything from the Whiskey Rebellion to present-day anti-tax dodges and enterprises). So it's natural that we're a bit stranger than most when it comes to taxes. ;)
As for bureaucrats not doing their job (but being shocked when they do)? I suspect that you'll find that to be rather common world-wide. Canada is one of those weird places
Re: (Score:2)
However, as long as we've got taxes in place, it's only fair that everyone pays their share. That way, the rest of us pay a wee bit less.
The Candian government (Score:2)
--------------
Don't steal, the government hates competition.
Maybe it's because I'm British, or a socialist.. (Score:5, Interesting)
Maybe it's just me, a lefty liberal socialist Brit, but I don't really understand the mentality behind the 'humourous' tagline here. Selling stuff on eBay means you're earning money. Why shouldn't it be taxed like any other income? Ok, someone selling a couple of DVDs isn't really going to make any dent in the government's revenue, but there are powersellers on eBay with a turnover to rival a large highstreet store, all tax free if you're a bit underhand about it. That's not a good thing. That's a few more potholes in the road, one less nurse looking after you in hospital, a few less books in the school library. Tax evaders aren't Robin Hood*, they're plain old criminals.
If you give a damn about the quality of your community you probably ought to welcome Uncle Sam getting ideas along the same lines.
* English folk hero, robbed from the rich to give to the poor, portrayed very poorly in film by Kevin Costner.
Re:Maybe it's because I'm British, or a socialist. (Score:5, Interesting)
Yeah I don't get it either. The basic logic works like this, "I was getting away with it before, don't change/enforce the law so I can't continue my bad practices!"
It's like when they put in speed/redlight cameras. The majority of people who bitch are the very people the gear is meant to catch. And they're not really pissed off because of the supposed violation of privacy, it's because they know they won't get away with their previously bad behaviour.
I for one welcome this. I think there should be a discretion though, I mean if I fail to report the $13 toy I sold on ebay last year I shouldn't face prison time. But if you're doing [say] more than $1000/year in sales it should be mandatory.
Red light cameras. Not the same. (Score:2)
Red light cameras really don't add safety. Regardless of how long the light has been yellow, if it is yellow, I'm stomping on my brakes. Is there someone 2 feet from my bumper? I don't know- I don't have time to check because I have to stop NOW or I might get a $50 ticke
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
I do the speed limit and stop for lights because it's safe. But I really don't want a ticket either so I'm extra cautious. Even when it's "safe" to do say 20 over the limit I still don't.
And why is being efficient bad? Should cops forgo using computers to look up license plates because it's too simple when trying to find stolen cars
Re: (Score:2)
Second, I don't see why the only viable solution is to put cops out instead of cameras. Obviously the cameras are catching people. Maybe the LAW needs updating. As in, more stiff penalties. Like run two lights in a year and lose your license. Instead of just fining people money, since that seems not to discourage p
Legal theory (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Why should there be an industry that does nothing but keep you out of trouble with overly complex laws? Would we tolerate such complexity in vehicle codes?
It would take some getting used t
Fair Tax (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
After all, if you possess such a wonderful piece of legislation, why not use it for purposes it was never designed for.
Re:Maybe it's because I'm British, or a socialist. (Score:2)
are you kidding? (Score:2)
Re:Maybe it's because I'm British, or a socialist. (Score:2)
And that if is, if that money would actually be used for the good of all. Yes, I'm (or rather, was) actually a "tax 'em fuckers" person. More tax == good. The actual Robin Hood IS in this case the state. Or should be. More tax means more social balance and fewer criminals (along the theory of "people who have something to lose are wary to lose it"). In theory.
In fact, with the crooked, inapt,
Re: (Score:2)
Re:Maybe it's because I'm British, or a socialist. (Score:2)
Speaking as somebody who has never used eBay (well, I once bought something from half.com but that's it) and thus has no particular stake in this, what bothers me isn't so much that you're required to pay taxes on sales online. Technically speaking I believe you're required to do so in the United States right now and I believe you're even supposed to pay sales tax if the site doesn't handle that for you.
What bothers me is that the government seemingly got subpoenas for information on these people solely
No federal sales tax (Score:2)
Re:Maybe it's because I'm British, or a socialist. (Score:2)
That is stuff that they bought for personal use, and are now selling to someone else is exempt. Not something that they bought with no intention of using, and then re-sold.
Dear Farmer Johnson (Score:2, Funny)
Your cooperation is not an option.
Sincerely,
Your Cannuck Government in cooperation with the US Dep. of Homeland Security
Hmmm... (Score:2, Offtopic)
TRAWLING not trolling. (Score:2)
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Trawling [wikipedia.org]
Re: (Score:2)
ebay's Power Seller program (Score:3, Informative)
http://pages.ebay.com/services/buyandsell/welcome.html [ebay.com]
How do I qualify?
Each month eBay automatically sends email invitations to qualified sellers. To qualify, members must:
Have been an active member for 90 days
Average a minimum of $1000 in sales per month, for three consecutive months
Achieve an overall Feedback rating of 100, of which 98% or more is positive
Have an account in good financial standing
Although that is direct from the eBay site it is not 100% accurate. My experience indicates that invitations to the Power Seller program are based on quantity of items sold and not dollar amounts. Somewhere between 3 and 5 items per month for three or four consecutive months will trigger the invitation email. I get invitation emails quite a bit but never have I sold $1000 worth of stuff in any month let alone three consecutive months.
Re: (Score:2)
how will they know if eBay told them everything? (Score:2, Offtopic)
I live in Canada and I am chocked by taxes, so I try to do everything in my power to avoid paying as much taxes as possible, it is my civil duty in fact to prevent the government from making me poor, so I wouldn't have to ask the gov't for help, which I do not. It is also important to prevent the gov't from getting
Re:how will they know if eBay told them everything (Score:2)
As for Canadian taxes, that's what is paying for your nationalized healthcare (don't hit me). We always hear the raving about how wonderful nationalized healthcare is and how much we in the US need it. Granted, we hear it from the asshat nanny-staters who want to control every aspect of our
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
It's the running joke in british sitcoms, eh? heheh.
But will it affect prices? (Score:2)
Sales tax != income tax!!! (Score:2)
eBay sellers don't have to pay sales tax to the government in most cases. They do, on the other hand, have to pay income tax, and always have. If they make income, they have to pay income tax.
This program is to catch people who are cheating on their taxes. If eBay prices are low because the seller is breaking the law, then that's too bad.
This is very old news to fans of Andrew Vachss (Score:2)
Lune tapped a few keys, pointed an immaculate fingernail at his computer screen. "You know what that is?" he asked me, as what looked like a string of auction bids popped into focus.
"A bunch of dope dealers talking in code?"
"No. It's the IRS."
"Huh? I don't get it."
"It's a pattern," he said, spinning on his chair to face me. "You know all this talk about America's 'underground cash economy'?"
"It's not just talk."
"Exactly! It
sounds like BS (Score:3, Insightful)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Sensitivity (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Yeah, why equate tax collection with the female? Obviously the male tax collector would not waste time browsing and go right to the taxes to be collected.
Maybe it's a hunter vs gatherer thing.
Re: (Score:2)
Tom
Spelling correction (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
No difference in evidence. If you have made a significant number of sales on Ebay, then there is prima facie evidence that you are in business and can be audited, just like any other business. There may be some question about validy of Ebay data such as someone signing up under a false identity, but I digress...
If you are making allusions to a criminal act, all you have is hearsay or possibly bravado. There is no prima facie evidence of any act.
Re: (Score:2)
It's always considered income. However, it's usually not worth the government's time to discover if you sold a guitar, prove it, and come at you for $5 or whatever you own (don't kno
Re: (Score:2)
First, the IRS (federal government) doesn't collect sales tax, they collect income tax. If you spend $100 on concert tickets then sell them on ebay for $250, you're supposed to pay income tax on $150. If you only get $95 for the tickets, the IRS doesn't care (you made no income). Sales tax is only collected by cities and states, and they're the ones that would go after you if you don't pay. In California, you're supposed to declare your internet purchases on
Re: (Score:2)
Yeah, OK that is different. First of all there is only one government and only they can collect taxes. In the UK (and EU) every one up the chain from the producer to the consumer is paying sales tax (VAT/IVA/TVA/whatever), but because the amount you pay is offset against the amount you charge in theory you're only paying on your profit and the ultimate consumer can't offset so they pay the full amount, I imagine this is to avoid the coke case you mention, but opens up all sorts of loopholes and red tape. Ov