Ebay holding my money ransom

[pvmr1980]

Posted again as answer incomplete.

I have never sold on Ebay until this year. As we are downsizing, I have been selling old items from our loft which we have owned for years or been left by family who have since deceased. These items were purchased with money earnt whilst working and vat paid on the original purchase. Over the year, I have sold just over £1000 which is much needed towards household costs, but due to rules by Ebay on reporting "taxable income", my money (£27) is not being released unless I give my NI Number. I totally object to Ebay policing my account on behalf of HMRC and I'm sure blackmailing a client is unethical and potentially illegal. I understand the need for ensuring a business is taxed, but for a 70 year old clearing stuff out this is appalling. 

The answer I received just directed me to policy.

It did not answer: Why did ebay allow me to continue to sell items knowing it was not going to pay the proceeds from my sale to me; holding them ransom?  If the policy is 30 items, then simply prevent sales over that. 

[susaturne47]

Well whether cumulative or not I haven’t reached it or even a £1000 so I don’t owe any tax. That’s the thing tho the scenario is all wrong for private sellers and they appear to be treating us all as though we’re a business. They could actually target businesses if they wanted and leave the rest of us with no tax liability alone. If eBay and HMRC had the will to tackle the problem of non declared business sales they d be putting their efforts where it would have some benefit, instead they re wasting their time with the likes of me which is counterproductive and taking their resource fro where it really needs to be eg business sellers like car dealers trading on their site etc.
Kind Regards,
Sue

[papso22]

Because it's a reporting requirement that covers 38 countries all with different rules regarding trading and tax, it will inevitably catch people in the net that HMRC will not be interested in in the slightest.

HMRC will not act on every report, they will resource according to risk as they have always done.

[susaturne47]

I worked for them for thirty three years so I know but still it’s all sort unecessary to set parameters that don’t ‘catch’ their target. Both eBay and HMRC should have thought out the parameters because all they ve done is caught most people in a net when what they actually wanted to to net a real target, instead of wasting their time dismissing private sellers. There was a better way to tackle this and it’s clear to me all they are doing is wasting their time and mine. Targeting is based on turnover and tax performance ratio for any given trade. HMRC already have a wealth of data from all online databases to target risk and eBay collecting individuals NINOs will have very little impact on tax avoidance.
Kind Regards,
Sue

[papso22]

But the parameters and reporting requirements were not decided on just by the government,  the Treasury, or HMRC.  They were decided by 38 countries and presumably by majority vote.  I wouldn't be surprised if the UK didn't particularly want it given what we already had domestically, although one of the objectives is to gather overseas sales data which we didn't necessarily have before.

So the UK can't  change the requirements to fit our systems and tax  laws, or ignore them  because we already have a better way of doing things.  

Looking at the scale of the sales on here by some private accounts, I think there will be some tax collected as a result of the initiative.

I understand that TPRs are a VAT compliance tool, I don't see them working for direct taxes.  

[susaturne47]

The system doesn’t work. With today’s technology they can do better. This is about my private information remaining private. I am not interested in how 38 counties decide how they can tackle distance selling but I am interested in protecting my information from everyone of them. I realise eBay are going along with this because they feel there’s no choice under UK law but the laws an ass and an infringement of my rights. The only people I will deal with to discuss tax are HMRC and I m not prepared to divulge my NINO to anyone who asks for it particularly when I know I have no tax liability to declare. My info doesn’t need to be put on there. What happened to innocent until proven guilty in the UK! If I had a liability I d be declaring it to HMRC not eBay. Between the two of them they can come up with as many ‘solutions’ as they like but I don’t have to agree with them and they haven’t involved me in discussions. Whenever there’s a big problem the solution never works, how can it across different counties with different rules and tax regimes. Quite frankly it’s ridiculous thinking a simple system or one size fits all could work. They need to break it down to reality country by country without infringing an individuals rights. Of course to do that they might have to staff the Civil Service adequately, something they ve not done in the UK for at least 40 years, just cut, cut, cut. Whatever mess ensues, I m keeping my information out of it. If I were a business with a tax liability I would conform to international rules. I m not. I don’t think I should be treated as a business, so they can try to police fraudsters, many of whom will be under alias names and providing someone else’s details, which is why I m protecting mine. EBay have me as a private seller, there’s my declaration right there. Anyone can look at my sales and decide if I m private or a business seller, it’s not rocket science! HMRC have my NINO and all my tax info, eBay don’t need it to pass it to HMRC! It’s a simple check for HMRC to link my NINO to my eBay account, so they can do that as they have enough of my personal info, name, address, DOB, phone, email. That’s enough of my information in one place I think and enough for them to decide if I m a tax risk. They have everything they need already to look at me.
Kind Regards,
Sue

[jonatjonatjonat]

I'd argue ebay should be more than happy to be rid of sellers who sell used perfume (a third used in some cases) as 'New, unused'.

it appears you may get your due monies in a few months time.

[papso22]

My only (and final) comment is that ebay allowing sellers to register as a private seller means absolutely nothing.

Others have already commented on the perfume listing rules.

Sellers break many of Ebay's rules all the time.  That includes account type and deliberately avoiding restricted items by manipulating listing criteria.

[style_wise]

Many Sellers feel the way you do and I agree with some of your analysis. That said, eBay are following the law, not policing or blackmailing. They are actively seeing to treble the listing allowance of private sellers.

Also eBay had good clarity about this legal change. Sellers were well informed about what is now required when choosing sell, or choosing to exceed 30 items and/or £1700.

HMRC also has an anonymous tool where you can check your tax liability before selling. Search:

Check if you need to tell HMRC about your income for online platforms.

[susaturne47]

I do not misdescribe goods. *bleep* are you talking about, do something useful with your life instead of trying to antagonise.
Kind Regards,
Sue

[jonatjonatjonat]

How is a bottle of perfume that is a third empty New? Because that is what the listing said. it's not rocket science!

[susaturne47]

What is everyone going on about perfume for? If they allow you to list it then you can sell it! I think people on this forum must be bored. Over & out.
Kind Regards,
Sue

[susaturne47]

I’d no idea if it said new. The description did not and any buyer knows that. Did you look at my feedback and see how satisfied the buyer was. I doubt it because all you want is an argument. Over and out.
Kind Regards,
Sue

[jonatjonatjonat]

You can't list Used perfume (which given you'd used a third of it it was) so you listed it as New and unused (which it isn't)

https://www.ebay.co.uk/help/policies/prohibited-restricted-items/cosmetics-policy?id=4290

If ebay wants to look more professional - being rid of sellers of used perfume is certainly a good start.

Over and out. 

[insidethe93]

jonatjonatjonat wrote: "How is a bottle of perfume that is a third empty New? Because that is what the listing said. it's not rocket science!"

Don't forget that the manufacturers don't fill them to the top, for sneaky marketing purposes or shrinkflation, but I'm not disagreeing as one-third is definitely not all down to the manufacturer.

Years ago I remember once being given a cosmetics gift and it looked like a sizeable amount had been taken out such that the gifter was at pains to point out she hadn't taken any, so these sneaky marketing dodgy practices have been going on for ages - we're so used to it that consumer watchdogs just ignore it? whereas consumer regulation could help customers by specifying the maximum amount of a container that can be left empty - enforced on weight and volume and appearance. Remember as a child opening a chocolate Easter egg and being very upset by the disappointment of how much you got compared to the packaging? Ever receive a box of chocolates from an admirer, expecting 2 layers but you get only one with most of it being packaging?

[susaturne47]

My item was accurately described as a third used in the description and the buyer was fully satisfied with her purchase. There is such a lot of rot talked in these forums from people who like trying to have a argument. Don’t get drawn into it.
Kind Regards,
Sue

[insidethe93]

I certainly wasn't trying to have an argument. It's the very last thing I want. Sorry I offended you, which in this case was due to me failing to read the thread fully or properly and thus having a misunderstanding.

[jonatjonatjonat]

Nah - they are referring to me.

Their listing states the condition is New as follows.

A new, unused item with absolutely no signs of wear. The item may be missing its original packaging, or the original packaging has been opened or is no longer sealed. The item may be a factory second, or a new and unused item with minor defects. See the seller’s listing for full details and description of any imperfections.

You cannot list Used Perfume or cosmetics - it's only possible to list New but apparently so long as you state in the description you've used a third of the bottle thats fine (it isn't).

Stating fact is just that. Fact. Frankly if this seller wasn't so annoyed about having to give up their NINO to ebay - they'd no doubt continue to list used cosmetics and perfume.

[susaturne47]

No worries. My original comment was about eBay withholding funds due to failure to provide a NINO, I m not a business and haven’t got a tax liability and I refuse to put my NINO on eBay for my own identity protection. It was someone else who thinks they are the ‘eBay police’ saying they think eBay would be glad to get rid of me because I relisted a partially used bottle of perfume on there (one I d actually bought on there partially used). They were pointing out you can only list new perfume! As for any H&S issues or packaging problems, there were none. It’s just there are people on eBay who want to pick issues with people. They need to get out more or get a real job. I mean who starts looking at all your previous listings to try and find fault with you, except a loser!
Kind Regards,
Sue

[susaturne47]

I bought it on there used like that.

[sml192]

---

@style_wise wrote:

Many Sellers feel the way you do and I agree with some of your analysis. That said, eBay are following the law, not policing or blackmailing. They are actively seeing to treble the listing allowance of private sellers.

---

No, it is the Trading Allowance for Business Sellers that they are seeking to increase.  Nothing to do with Private Sellers.