4 in 5 UK Boat Owners May Quit Cruising Due to Post-Brexit Schengen Rules

[arsenelupiga]

Originally Posted by boatman61

The Spanish Costas have been the reef of many Brits retirement dreams.. house scams through buildings regulations, that bar in the sun to fun fund the retirement..
I have seen a few of those crash and burn... first six months boundless energy and enthusiasm, next six months 4hr long happy hours, after that come spring the for sale sign goes up and some creative book keeping begins.. its like old boats, there's always another dreamer striding over the horizon...

what you describe is anecdotical evidence of hyperinflation. Sure, everyone belief is they deserved it. But reality is hyperinflation is here now and destroying everything of real value.

[barnakiel]

I so not care. UK tourists are like any other tourist - they come and are allowed a 90 days visit. That's plenty to have a Med vacation, I think. Few people have 90 days' off work.


Quiters quit, those who are into it remain. Cruising is not obligatory.

[boatman61]

Originally Posted by arsenelupiga

yeah but this still has not stopped fantasizing of new world citizens of med vacation on sunset of their lives after they cash in their hyperinflation gains. Unfortunately bodies are bit substandard and cant compete with younger female german tourists.

Personally I find the Dutch and Scandinavian ladies much more appealing..
But hey, each to their own..

[boatman61]

Originally Posted by arsenelupiga

what you describe is anecdotical evidence of hyperinflation. Sure, everyone belief is they deserved it. But reality is hyperinflation is here now and destroying everything of real value.

Naah mate.. I'm talking the 90's when I was cruising and living aboard from Fuengirola to the Ballearics and ports in between for a few years.
Ibiza and Mallorca summers and Agua Dulce, Almerimar or Fuengirola winters.. tried Benidorm once but left after a month.. to many lobsters in the marina and bars..

[GordMay]

Brexit & the City - the impact so far
This report highlights the damage that Brexit has already done to the City of London. More than 440 firms in banking and finance have moved or are moving part of their business, staff, assets or legal entities from the UK to the EU. While this is higher than previous estimates, it underestimates the real picture – and the potential longer-term impact.
➥ https://newfinancial.org/brexit-the-...impact-so-far/

[Greg K]

Originally Posted by GordMay

Brexit & the City - the impact so far
This report highlights the damage that Brexit has already done to the City of London. More than 440 firms in banking and finance have moved or are moving part of their business, staff, assets or legal entities from the UK to the EU. While this is higher than previous estimates, it underestimates the real picture – and the potential longer-term impact.
➥ https://newfinancial.org/brexit-the-...impact-so-far/

In the long run, this is probably the best thing that could happen to the city which was way too dependent on the financial sector for it's economy, distorting prices for goods, services, and housing for everybody else living in London. One can only hope that this will encourage a more diversified and balanced economy.

[Montanan]

Originally Posted by Greg K

Sailors in the EU with US built boats have faced this same issue with US suppliers for years. Too much paper work involved I've been told.

Greg, the distinction between the US and the UK/EU is that in the USA the compliance with most all of the standards is voluntary, a choice of the manufacturer / importer, but in many countries it is a requirement to be able to sell a good that it be certified and marked as such. There are some products that require certification in the USA, e.g., sanitary and health related such as plumbing good and some energy efficiency items [air conditioners, furnaces, appliances, or mileage per gallon for vehicles] and some pollution emissions items such as vehicles and their exhaust emissions. A manufacturer does receive push back from major retailers and from other manufacturers if the goods are not certified and there is added liability if a good is not "up to" common standards so most reputable manufacturers do have their goods certified, e.g. by say Underwriters Laboratory, or Intertek, etc.

[GordMay]

Originally Posted by Greg K

In the long run, this is probably the best thing that could happen to the city which was way too dependent on the financial sector for it's economy, ...

Yes, I'm sure that Allentown & Pittsburgh, Pa, felt the same way about their steel industry.

[Greg K]

Originally Posted by GordMay

Yes, I'm sure that Allentown & Pittsburgh, Pa, felt the same way about their steel industry.

Yeah, right, great comparison because like in the city, all of the guys who became millionaires and billionaires working at the mills distorted the local economies so much that ordinary folks could no longer afford to live there.

Unfortunately, the fate of one industry towns whether steel, lumber, mining, auto or finance is always the same. They die fast and hard, unless they can diversify. London will be fine.

[GordMay]

All good points, Greg.

[Greg K]

Originally Posted by Montanan

Greg, the distinction between the US and the UK/EU is that in the USA the compliance with most all of the standards is voluntary, a choice of the manufacturer / importer, but in many countries it is a requirement to be able to sell a good that it be certified and marked as such. There are some products that require certification in the USA, e.g., sanitary and health related such as plumbing good and some energy efficiency items [air conditioners, furnaces, appliances, or mileage per gallon for vehicles] and some pollution emissions items such as vehicles and their exhaust emissions. A manufacturer does receive push back from major retailers and from other manufacturers if the goods are not certified and there is added liability if a good is not "up to" common standards so most reputable manufacturers do have their goods certified, e.g. by say Underwriters Laboratory, or Intertek, etc.

Not sure what all that means, but just to give you an example of what I'm talking about, here's a very recent email reply I received from McMaster- Car to the following inquiry:

From: -------mail.com
Sent: Friday, March 26, 2021 7:52 AM

Feedback Email
Message
Are you able to ship to Spain? Could you please let me know? I need some imperial sized SS bolts and aluminum tubing. Unfortunately, only metric here. With thanks and best regards, Greg
==========
Hi Greg,

Thank you for considering McMaster-Carr for your purchase. However, we will not accept orders from you due to the cost of complying with US export regulations.

Shane

[contrail]

Originally Posted by Montanan

VAT is a privilege tax and a consumption tax; so be sure enjoy the privilege and the departure of your money.

Be that privilege of consumption being in the UK or in the EU.

Feeling rather privileged to not have any State or federal VAT, or sales or use taxation in Montana. We only have income tax and real estate property taxation. The cost of purchases of either goods and services is significantly less without any government imposed taxes on such consumption. That is why Canadians like to come to Montana to shop and purchase goods in Montana, considerable cost reduction when their is no VAT/GST below the 49th parallel. With the US / Canadian border closed except for essential travel purposes there has been a huge reduction of traffic in the stores.

And I can't even imagine what all those collected revenues to governments are intended to pay for. Nationalized health care would be one major differential between government service provided by the EU / UK and Montana but if I recall health insurance is paid as a separate taxation on wages paid [imposed on the employee and the employer].

What are the requirements for Montana residency? Have you thought of setting up a cruisers' mailing service like St. Brendan's Isle?

[Montanan]

Originally Posted by contrail

What are the requirements for Montana residency? Have you thought of setting up a cruisers' mailing service like St. Brendan's Isle?

As to Sales and Use tax, since Montana has neither, if a product is sold and shipped into the State there is no privilege taxation on the transaction.

If I as a Montanan was to purchase a good and have it shipped to or used in another State that has Sales and / or Use taxation then it would become a taxable event by the State into which the good was shipped or used. I only get the benefit of tax exemption, if I exercise my privilege to purchase or use a good in, The Last Best Place, Montana. My Montananism does not accord benefits across State lines.

Having a postal office box located in Montana accords no benefit except to receive letters and parcels. If the good remains in Montana then it is accorded tax exempt status, if it is transported out of the State then it become subject to the taxation of the jurisdiction where it has been taken.

Montana's Big Sky State and Status does not cover all the planet.

Montana Code Annotated:

42.15.109 RESIDENCY

(1) As provided in 15-30-2101, MCA, an individual may be a resident for Montana individual income tax purposes if the individual is domiciled in the state or maintains a permanent place of abode in the state. Section 1-1-215, MCA, sets forth rules for determining residency, and "domiciled" is defined in ARM 42.2.304. Whether an individual is a Montana resident for Montana income tax purposes is determined in light of all facts and circumstances.

(2) A Montana resident who enters the United States armed forces does not lose that status as a Montana resident solely by reason of being absent from this state in compliance with military orders.

(3) Special rules regarding nonresident military personnel and their dependents are located at ARM 42.15.112.

"Resident" applies only to natural persons and includes, for the purpose of determining liability to the tax imposed by this chapter with reference to the income of any taxable year, any person domiciled in the state of Montana and any other person who maintains a permanent place of abode within the state even though temporarily absent from the state and who has not established a residence elsewhere.

History: 15-30-2620, MCA; IMP, 15-30-2101, MCA; NEW, 2004 MAR p. 3147, Eff. 12/17/04; AMD, 2010 MAR p. 1088, Eff. 4/30/10.


Montana Code Annotated 2019
TITLE 1. GENERAL LAWS AND DEFINITIONS
CHAPTER 1. GENERAL PROVISIONS
Part 2. General Definitions of Terms Used in Code
Residence -- Rules For Determining
1-1-215. Residence -- rules for determining. Every person has, in law, a residence. In determining the place of residence, the following rules are to be observed:

(1) It is the place where a person remains when not called elsewhere for labor or other special or temporary purpose and to which the person returns in seasons of repose.

(2) There may be only one residence. If a person claims a residence within Montana for any purpose, then that location is the person's residence for all purposes unless there is a specific statutory exception.

(3) A residence cannot be lost until another is gained.

(4) The residence of an unmarried minor is:

(a) the residence of the minor's parents;

(b) if one of the parents is deceased or the parents do not share the same residence, the residence of the parent having legal custody;

(c) if neither parent has legal custody, the residence of the legal guardian or custodian appointed by a court of competent jurisdiction; or

(d) if the conditions in 20-5-502 are met, the residence of the caretaker relative.

(5) In the case of a controversy, the district court has jurisdiction over which residence is the residence of an unmarried minor.

(6) Except as provided in Title 20, chapter 5, part 5, and this section, the residence of an unmarried minor who has a parent living cannot be changed by either the minor's own act or an act of the minor's guardian.

(7) The residence can be changed only by the union of act and intent.

(16) "Domiciled" means having a residence in the state of Montana as stated in 1-1-215, MCA.


Your residence is your permanent home:

This is the dwelling you use as a home whether you own it or if you may someday leave.
It is a place where you remain when you are not elsewhere for work or other temporary purposes.
You don't change residency when you are away from home for a prolonged period.
You only change residency when you leave your home and don't intend to return, but instead, establish a new home elsewhere.
Montana Resident
You are a Montana resident if you have a permanent home in Montana.

You do not lose your Montana residency if you are temporarily living in another state and intending to return to Montana.

You lose your Montana residency if you establish a permanent home outside of Montana with no intention of returning.

If you establish Montana residency for any purpose, you are a Montana resident as far as taxes are concerned, unless there is a specific exception in Montana law.

Part-year Resident
You are a part-year resident if you moved to or from Montana during the tax year with the intention of establishing a permanent residence in your new state.

Nonresident
You are a nonresident if you do not have a permanent home in Montana at any time throughout the tax year.

[pk999]

I recently watched an RYA symposium where post Brexit issues were discussed.

RYA stated that boat owners who can prove their VAT paid boats were in the EU at the end of Dec 2020 can keep their boats in the EU indefinitely, whereas those what were out of the EU on that date are now subject to 18 months stay max. or pay VAT again in the EU. One day out re-starts the clock for another 18 months.

Crew and owners, however, are subject to the 90 in 180 day rules, regardless.

The downside to the indefinite stay boats, is that the UK customs have decreed they will charge VAT again when the boats finally return to the UK waters, even if originally UK VAT paid. It is ironic that the UK seems to treat its own citizens worse than the EU for having kept a boat in the Med for many years.

I do not know where the boat indefinite stay is documented - does anyone know?

The other bug bear is that any UK boat that wants to retain UK VAT status has only until Dec 2021 (extended from the original Dec 2020 deadline) to return to the UK, or the VAT has to be paid again on returning (after any absence of more than 3 years).

Either way it looks like the UK wants to claim multiple VAT payments for boats kept out the UK for periods of more than 3 years. I am not aware of any other items that are subject to VAT multiple times in the same ownership, or when sold second hand.

If anyone knows differently, please advise.

[Montanan]

Originally Posted by pk999

I recently watched an RYA symposium where post Brexit issues were discussed.

RYA stated that boat owners who can prove their VAT paid boats were in the EU at the end of Dec 2020 can keep their boats in the EU indefinitely, whereas those what were out of the EU on that date are now subject to 18 months stay max. or pay VAT again in the EU. One day out re-starts the clock for another 18 months.

Crew and owners, however, are subject to the 90 in 180 day rules, regardless.

The downside to the indefinite stay boats, is that the UK customs have decreed they will charge VAT again when the boats finally return to the UK waters, even if originally UK VAT paid. It is ironic that the UK seems to treat its own citizens worse than the EU for having kept a boat in the Med for many years.

I do not know where the boat indefinite stay is documented - does anyone know?

The other bug bear is that any UK boat that wants to retain UK VAT status has only until Dec 2021 (extended from the original Dec 2020 deadline) to return to the UK, or the VAT has to be paid again on returning (after any absence of more than 3 years).

Either way it looks like the UK wants to claim multiple VAT payments for boats kept out the UK for periods of more than 3 years. I am not aware of any other items that are subject to VAT multiple times in the same ownership, or when sold second hand.

If anyone knows differently, please advise.

The RGR procedure is not unique to boats, it applies to all goods. There is nothing distinct about vessels as it pertains to import and exports. Just another item crossing borders.

Guidance
Requested Procedure 23: Temporary export for return of goods in the unaltered state (Returned Goods Relief)
Updated 26 January 2021

Referencehttps://www.gov.uk/government/publications/appendix-1-de-110-requested-and-previous-procedure-codes/requested-procedure-23-temporary-export-for-return-of-goods-in-the-unaltered-state-returned-goods-relief: