Govt cracks down on airport TRS rebates for Aust travellers

[Quickstatus]

I suspect the real reason that it won't be removed is because it would kill the retail side of the airport.

The money they bring in to the airport ensures that airport management/owners will lobby vociferously if the government ever tries to get rid of TRS.

Without retail airports will have to find another way to gouge customers out of money.

To the contrary, getting rid of TRS may encourage patronage of airport duty free. TRS works (if prepared to queue) for purchases outside of airport

 

[blackcat20]

But the incoming passenger card says such goods only need to be declared if the total value is above $900.

Which I've referred to several times up thread. But if it's over $900 they don't give a cough how much tax you've paid elsewhere.

 

[Hvr]

To the contrary, getting rid of TRS may encourage patronage of airport duty free. TRS works (if prepared to queue) for purchases outside of airport

Well if you get rid of TRS, i.e. duty free shopping then it would need to be a complete break, not just partial. Given experienced travellers know that duty free stores at the airport are usually a rip off then there isn't much of a market left.

Also, if you purchase items >$900 you're back at the same situation. Need to declare on return. And they know who you are because they get your details when you purchase the item.

 

[Quickstatus]

Well if you get rid of TRS, i.e. duty free shopping then it would need to be a complete break, not just partial. Given experienced travellers know that duty free stores at the airport are usually a rip off then there isn't much of a market left.

Also, if you purchase items >$900 you're back at the same situation. Need to declare on return. And they know who you are because they get your details when you purchase the item.

Exactly, why not no more airport DFS. These stores just pocket the GST instead of going to the treasury and allow the owners of the airport to charge higher rents. Prices are then very comparable. Of course the airports will still charge slightly than downtown because of the last minute factor.

Level playing field for everyone

 

[drron]

But the incoming passenger card says such goods only need to be declared if the total value is above $900.

But the section on the TRS says you must declare any goods you have made a TRS claim for.Dont know if it has ever been tested but I wouldn't just take it that clothing is exempt from that section.

 

[Hvr]

These stores just pocket the GST instead of going to the treasury and allow the owners of the airport to charge higher rents.

Sounds like a conspiracy. Whilst the Government doesn't care if large corporations pay tax, the ATO is generally strong on fraud. If as you say the stores just 'pocket the GST' then that is fraud. I doubt that is happening. Especially since I reckon a large proportion of transactions are paid with credit card.

More likely the prices are raised to near RRP without the GST included so that the punters think they're getting a bargain.

 

[CaptJCool]

Sounds like a conspiracy. Whilst the Government doesn't care if large corporations pay tax, the ATO is generally strong on fraud. If as you say the stores just 'pocket the GST' then that is fraud. I doubt that is happening. Especially since I reckon a large proportion of transactions are paid with credit card.

More likely the prices are raised to near RRP without the GST included so that the punters think they're getting a bargain.

Agreed....
the multiple DFS businesses in the city in Adelaide have all closed. A 10% margin to swap to profit and the liquids bans and the 25 cigs instead of 200 have all seen them shuttered.

TRS suggests Tourist perhaps if it meant Resident it'd call it a RRS

 

[juddles]

My 2 cents worth:

First up, I think there needs to be a clear understanding of the real difference between such terms as "Australian", "Australian passport holder", and "Australian resident". I am an Australian citizen, and passport holder, but I am NOT an Australian resident.

I use the TRS scheme from time to time as sometimes when I visit the homeland I buy some sort of item or equipment which I take back with me overseas.

IMHO, the TRS scheme is designed, fundamentally, for the purpose of allowing "visitors" to get back the GST on items that are purchased. I do NOT believe that any Australian resident should be able to seek devolution of the GST via the TRS scheme. I believe that such persons should go through a different process that puts much more onus on them to demonstrate why such an exemption should be given to them.

 

[opusman]

So you believe overseas retailers should have preference over Australian ones?

 

[Hvr]

So should Australian residents pay GST on international airfares? If not, then why on goods being taken overseas?

 

[RooFlyer]

So you believe overseas retailers should have preference over Australian ones?

Given juddles said he returned to Oz to buy stuff which he took overseas, I don't see where your comment comes from.

I'll buy in Australia and I'll also buy overseas, but I'll pay the tax due in either case, and my conscious is clear. Again, I'm no saint, but I'm genuinely disgusted by those that proudly practice deliberate tax avoidance (which is a crime, and I'm not talking about TRS here) and I pay what's due into my society for the various benefits it provides to me and others. I've posted this before: Tax evasion reporting form

 

[RooFlyer]

By the way, don't buy duty-free at DOH, where the prices are often higher than Australian retail

 

[Quickstatus]

So should Australian residents pay GST on international airfares? If not, then why on goods being taken overseas?

Goods can be used for 30 days domestically before being taken overseas.

 

[CMA222]

..........IMHO, the TRS scheme is designed, fundamentally, for the purpose of allowing "visitors" to get back the GST on items that are purchased. I do NOT believe that any Australian resident should be able to seek devolution of the GST via the TRS scheme. I believe that such persons should go through a different process that puts much more onus on them to demonstrate why such an exemption should be given to them.

So you believe overseas retailers should have preference over Australian ones?

Clearly Australian residents, if there were no TRS available for them, could still go overseas and support overseas retailers by buying the same goods and claiming the GST or duty refund as they leave that country, and the Australian retailers miss out. I know which system I prefer - buy Australian.

 

[Quickstatus]

Clearly Australian residents, if there were no TRS available for them, could still go overseas and support overseas retailers by buying the same goods and claiming the GST or duty refund as they leave that country, and the Australian retailers miss out. I know which system I prefer - buy Australian.

Not a lot of countries overseas do that and those that do make it so difficult it’s not worth it.

What’s the process in the UK?

In some places VAT refund only from stores participating in the scam/scheme. But usually better prices can be gotten in non participating stores anyway

They don’t do that in the US, except in New Orleans I came across a shopping mall which did it but for a small fee and Macy’s gave tourists a 10% discount when passport is shown

.....

Clearly Australian residents, if there were no TRS available for them, could still go overseas and support overseas retailers by buying the same goods and claiming the GST or duty refund as they leave that country, and the Australian retailers miss out. I know which system I prefer - buy Australian.

Not a lot of goods are “buy Australian”.

Iron ore is exported duty free, so we can buy the cars made from same ore with GST.

 

[Hvr]

What’s the process in the UK?

You take the goods and receipt(s) to an office in the airport. They check them and your passport and either provide a refund to a bank account/credit card or provide a cash refund with a cost attached at a nearby bank.

Thailand offers VAT free prices to tourists upon provision of your passport details and presumably a check of your valid tourist status.

 

[Quickstatus]

Sounds like a conspiracy. Whilst the Government doesn't care if large corporations pay tax, the ATO is generally strong on fraud. If as you say the stores just 'pocket the GST' then that is fraud. I doubt that is happening. Especially since I reckon a large proportion of transactions are paid with credit card.

More likely the prices are raised to near RRP without the GST included so that the punters think they're getting a bargain.

What I mean is that instead of offering the goods at GST free price, these DF stores take off the GST then add the same amount it back to the price of the goods, so essentially pocketing the GST.

 

[RooFlyer]

You take the goods and receipt(s) to an office in the airport. They check them and your passport and either provide a refund to a bank account/credit card or provide a cash refund with a cost attached at a nearby bank.

Thailand offers VAT free process to tourists upon provision of your passport details and presumably a check of your valid tourist status.

But they don't allow their own citizens to get a refund, do they?

 

[bwhouse]

It has been said multiple times already in the thread, but I will say it again. Forget the name of the scheme it is irrelevant, the issue is whether goods that are purchased tax-free (or have the tax refunded) are brought back into the country and not declared. I would hazard a guess that the only reason they picked that name was to highlight that the goods should not be brought back in. Ie by people that are leaving the country permanently.

If an Australian resident was to get the tax back on a large purchase and leave the item overseas that is perfectly legitimate. Likewise, if a tourist was to leave Australia for a weekend trip to New Zealand and then come back to Aus they would need to declare any items that had tax refunded. The same goes no matter how the tax was refunded on the goods, ie TRS, Duty-Free etc.

 

[Pushka]

Sadly I never buy enough to even bother about claiming it.