Cyprus-Forum.com

[Pyrpolizer]

Sorry skipper you are wrong on this.

The TCCC acts by authority of RoC. The RoC may decide anytime it feels the TCCC is not doing the job right to appoint another organisation. The EU officials go check the plantations etc AGAIN under authorisation from RoC. Normally no Government would give her consent so that EU officials come in the country and do all that job.
The fact that th TCCC was stamping products before, does not mean anything. In fact if you notice after UK was caught importing illegally, the products could no longer be exported in the UK.
Nobody took away TCCC's stamps, so if that body had that authority why the exports stopped?

Yes the products went to Turkey then mixed with Turkish products there were again exported in the UK under a kind of CHEATING procedure i.e certified as Turkish products.There was no need to take any measures however because that practice proved unprofitable.

There is evidence the TCCC is in fact not doing its job right. There is evidence they import whole ship loads from Turkey and pass the over to Europe through Limassol the very next day certified as TC products (CYPRIOT PRODUCTS to be precise). The RoC already knows that but keeps a blind eye.
Now tell me what will the EU do when she finally discovers this cheating. Who is going to pay the million Euros fine? The TCCC or RoC?
And what should the RoC do after that? Surely the TCs will once again accuse us we want to struggle them. Won't they Skipper?

[skipper]

What would make a difference to me would be to get packages in via plane so that I could manufacture and export my goods, something that is n't possible at the moment so it gets done in Turkey.

Can’t you export them from Larnaca?

There are major problems with VAT and Tax in that I would have pay both twice if I exported via Larnaca, although I'm pretty sure that the GC's turn a blind eye to the Tax situation but the VAT is connected to the EU, agricultural goods dont have VAT however manufactured goods do. They tried later to amend the Green Line Regulation for a "reverse charge" scheme to apply however its a no go, I'ill quote the relevant paragraph from the annual report regarding the regulation:

The Republic of Cyprus renewed its request to the Commission to propose amendments to the Green Line Regulation and/or the 6th VAT Directive in order to simplify certain VAT provisions concerning the trade across the Green Line. The proposals included a request to apply a reverse charge mechanism for supplies made by taxable persons established in the areas13 to taxable persons in the government-controlled areas, a request to apply simplified
procedures for the collection of tax on goods supplied by taxable persons established in the areas when these are supplied in the government-controlled areas to non-taxable persons, a
request to allow for supplies made to the areas to be treated as export transactions (amending Article 5 of the Green Line Regulation) and the request to allow for simplified procedures when goods are crossing the line with a view to be transferred to other Member States. The
Commission has seriously examined these proposals and communicated to the Republic of Cyprus extensively why the majority of the proposals would have deviated too much from the acquis to be taken up by the Commission, even though some of them may be attractive from
the point of view of simplification.

One example can be given for illustration: The Republic of Cyprus requested that supplies made to the areas be treated as export transactions (amending Article 5 of the Green Line
Regulation). This proposed measure is not consistent with the provisions and the philosophy of the Green Line Regulation where it is assumed (upon request from the Republic of Cyprus) that no importation takes place when goods arrive from the areas. Consequently, the reverse
transaction cannot be treated as exportation. In other words: zero-rating supplies made from the Government-controlled areas to the areas could only be justified if these were to be treated as exports. This is the case irrespective of whether these supplies are called exports. If goods
leaving for the areas are treated as exports, goods coming from the areas must equally be treated as imports. Only under those circumstances would the proposed change be acceptable.

[Pyrpolizer]

You are a treasure Skipper, I am so glad you joined this forum. I ve learned so many things from you within 2 days that I never learned in one year of losing my time here in meaningless discussions and quarels.
Thanks.

[skipper]

Sorry skipper you are wrong on this.

The TCCC acts by authority of RoC. The RoC may decide anytime it feels the TCCC is not doing the job right to appoint another organisation. The EU officials go check the plantations etc AGAIN under authorisation from RoC. Normally no Government would give her consent so that EU officials come in the country and do all that job.
The fact that th TCCC was stamping products before, does not mean anything. In fact if you notice after UK was caught importing illegally, the products could no longer be exported in the UK.
Nobody took away TCCC's stamps, so if that body had that authority why the exports stopped?

Yes the products went to Turkey then mixed with Turkish products there were again exported in the UK under a kind of CHEATING procedure i.e certified as Turkish products.There was no need to take any measures however because that practice proved unprofitable.

There is evidence the TCCC is in fact not doing its job right. There is evidence they import whole ship loads from Turkey and pass the over to Europe through Limassol the very next day certified as TC products (CYPRIOT PRODUCTS to be precise). The RoC already knows that but keeps a blind eye.
Now tell me what will the EU do when she finally discovers this cheating. Who is going to pay the million Euros fine? The TCCC or RoC?
And what should the RoC do after that? Surely the TCs will once again accuse us we want to struggle them. Won't they Skipper?

Like I said the TCCC had the authority from 1960 to deal with commerce from the with regards to TC's, its in the 1960 consitution, you know the one that GC's still say is in force.

You are completely wrong with the reason why exports stopped, what happened was upto a certain time (1987 I think but I cant be sure) certificates where stamped by the TCCC with RoC stamps, the authorities here (in their infinite wisdom) decided they wanted TRNC stamps, the GC's noticed this so changed their stamps also.. then in the early 90's a GC company in the UK took the UK government to the high court about TC patatoe imports, the high court ruled that this was an EU matter so it went to the ECJ which finally ruled that the stamps where not recognised and so phytosanitary cerificates did not pass and the products could not benefit from reduced duty.

None of these exports where ever said to have come from Turkey as if they had there would be high duty put on them. I cant comment on the mixing as this would have most likely happened after.

Like I said in my previous post, the EU is basically stamping and checking things in the north its not the RoC as per the regulation, sure they voted as the 25 members to allow it but EU officers are not working as proxy for the RoC. In light of this, if goods where deemed to have broken the rules the GC's would not be liable for a fine since they where not the ones that certified the goods.

From time to time I've read about these so called violations, each time they turn out to be not true. One was regarding the tomatoes a few months back (mentioned in the last report) and more recently the over turned lorry that was said to be carrying patatoes from Turkey which turned out to be GC patatoes being sent to the north. If what you said was really going on, I dont think the GC's would keep a lid on it, I'm not even sure if it would be economically feasible.

[Pyrpolizer]

Skipper,

Can we discuss this matter of VAT a little more?
I will give an example as how a case would be from where I reside.
I have some manufactured agricultural products to export that costed me 1000 pounds +15% VAT=1150
If I would sell those products locally at lets say 1500 pounds then I should add VAT on them thus sell them at 1725.

My profit is 500 pounds (1500-1000) since I received 225 pounds VAT from sales, having already paid 150 to my suppliers so I pay the difference of 75 to the government and I am clear.

If those products go for export in the EU then I CANNOT add VAT to them. I once again sell them for 1500 pounds nett and because I received no VAT from sales the government comes back and gives me the 150 pounds I already paid to others.
So in both cases my profit is 500 pounds.

Anyway could you now follow this example and tell me what happens from the place you reside. As far as I understand you pay no VAT to RoC because exports don't have VAT. Are you saying that you are actually losing the return of VAT you paid to your suppliers? (because obviously those suppliers are not registered at RoCs VAT)?

[Pyrpolizer]

Like I said in my previous post, the EU is basically stamping and checking things in the north its not the RoC as per the regulation, sure they voted as the 25 members to allow it but EU officers are not working as proxy for the RoC. In light of this, if goods where deemed to have broken the rules the GC's would not be liable for a fine since they where not the ones that certified the goods.

Do those documents have to be re-stamped by RoC for final approval or not?

From time to time I've read about these so called violations, each time they turn out to be not true. One was regarding the tomatoes a few months back (mentioned in the last report) and more recently the over turned lorry that was said to be carrying patatoes from Turkey which turned out to be GC patatoes being sent to the north. If what you said was really going on, I dont think the GC's would keep a lid on it, I'm not even sure if it would be economically feasible.

Well that’s what the British said to cover up their responsibility. However the direction of the truck was towards Larnaca not towards the northern part which proves the British were actually lying.

[skipper]

Skipper,

Can we discuss this matter of VAT a little more?
I will give an example as how a case would be from where I reside.
I have some manufactured agricultural products to export that costed me 1000 pounds +15% VAT=1150
If I would sell those products locally at lets say 1500 pounds then I should add VAT on them thus sell them at 1725.

My profit is 500 pounds (1500-1000) since I received 225 pounds VAT from sales, having already paid 150 to my suppliers so I pay the difference of 75 to the government and I am clear.

If those products go for export in the EU then I CANNOT add VAT to them. I once again sell them for 1500 pounds nett and because I received no VAT from sales the government comes back and gives me the 150 pounds I already paid to others.
So in both cases my profit is 500 pounds.
So in the end I earn 1000 pounds and (since I already paid 150 pounds VAT to others to manufacture me the goods) I pay the remaining 1

I export them at the EU at 2000 pounds plus VAT=2300. I make 1000 pounds profit. I already paid 150 pounds VAT received 300 so still owe another 150 pounds to the VAT office that I eventually pay.

For me personally there is no problem. Everybody pays the same VAT so there is no unfair competition.

So actually nobody is charged with VAT at the country of manufacture (it is just a plus and minus figure), whereas the whole VAT cost is paid by the consumer at the country of destination.

Anyway could you now follow this example and tell me what happens from the place you reside. As far as I understand you pay no VAT to RoC because exports don't have VAT. Are you saying that you are actually losing the return of VAT you paid to your suppliers? (because obviously those suppliers are not paying registered at RoCs VAT).

The Tax case is definitely paying twice, taxed once in the TRNC and again in the RoC but the VAT is n't really paying twice and as such is bad terminology.

There are two cases where there is a VAT problem, the first is if I purchase raw materials from the south the company selling them to me has to to charge me VAT because I dont have a RoC VAT number and it cant be classed as an export. The second case is if I order goods from the EU to be picked up in the south the EU company cant sell them to me without VAT because I dont have a EU VAT number.

I could get my parts via Turkey, normally containers get sent to Mersin port in Turkey where they are loaded onto another ship, for this there is the extra unloading, storage and reloading fees, plus the extra shipping fees. However this is only is useful if you are handling containers as they dont leave the free port. So what do I for a package? I have to get a company in Turkey to buy the goods on my behalf, get it delivered to them, they then have to sell it to me with a profit and fill in the relative customs declaration and pay the courier to send it to the north where once I recieve it I have to pay duty (and VAT but that is reclaimed). There are other issues aswell that in the end it just make sense to outsource it to a Turkish company who can handle the logistcs along with the lower labour costs it ends up costing you less and is more practicle. I still make some money, but I dont employ any TC's and the local economy does n't benefit either, but hey atleast the Turkish company gets a little.

[skipper]

Like I said in my previous post, the EU is basically stamping and checking things in the north its not the RoC as per the regulation, sure they voted as the 25 members to allow it but EU officers are not working as proxy for the RoC. In light of this, if goods where deemed to have broken the rules the GC's would not be liable for a fine since they where not the ones that certified the goods.

Do those documents have to be re-stamped by RoC for final approval or not?

No they dont, at the Green line the officer just checks that the documentation is authentic and the the goods match the description, after that the goods have the status as "Community goods".

From time to time I've read about these so called violations, each time they turn out to be not true. One was regarding the tomatoes a few months back (mentioned in the last report) and more recently the over turned lorry that was said to be carrying patatoes from Turkey which turned out to be GC patatoes being sent to the north. If what you said was really going on, I dont think the GC's would keep a lid on it, I'm not even sure if it would be economically feasible.

Well that’s what the British said to cover up their responsibility. However the direction of the truck was towards Larnaca not towards the northern part which proves the British were actually lying.

I'ill be honest with you and considering the "turkish tomatoe army poisoning" histeria last time I think I'ill reserve judgement on this one.

[Pyrpolizer]

No they dont, at the Green line the officer just checks that the documentation is authentic and the the goods match the description, after that the goods have the status as "Community goods".

Thats right this is what happens at the Green line. But things don’t fly to Europe from the Green line. Nor do they get at T2L certificate at the Greenline.

[skipper]

No they dont, at the Green line the officer just checks that the documentation is authentic and the the goods match the description, after that the goods have the status as "Community goods".

Thats right this is what happens at the Green line. But things don’t fly to Europe from the Green line. Nor do they get at T2L certificate at the Greenline.

There's nothing in the regulation that says that goods have to go via Larnaca port via sea and since the goods have community status they cant be descrimitated against in that respect, probably no one has ever tried to send something via courier.

In respect to the certificate of origin documentation, from Article 5:

1. Goods which are allowed to cross the line shall not be subject to export formalities.
However, the necessary equivalent documentation shall be provided, in full respect of Cypriot internal legislation, by the authorities of the Republic of Cyprus upon request.