UKC

I have just found out that mountain footwear (including rock shoes) has a 19% import tariff under WTO rules.

Brexit is the gift that keeps on giving!

Alan

In reply to Alan James - Rockfax:

Rockfax stickies could be the answer. 

In reply to Alan James - Rockfax:

Time to stockpile a couple of pairs. I do remember panic buying some RPs when the rumour was they were being taken off the market due to CE testing. Thankfully that storm settled, hopefully this one will. 

Has there ever been a UK manufacturer of rock shoes? 

In reply to Presley Whippet:

Someone (was it Clog?) started development and even started to advertise them ("Friction is now Fact") but IIRC they never actually hit the shops. 

In reply to Pedro50: Yes, that's right, it was Clog in the mid eighties and endorsed, I think, by Ron Fawcett. They were truly awful; massively clunky, no friction whatsoever. I still have several lightly worn ones in the shed if anyone wants to remind themselves how good our modern shoes are! John. Edited to say that I don't remember where they were actually made. Same era as Troll's Ron Fawcett Rock Suit, which I'm sure I could also dig out if anyone fancies the full outfit!

In reply to Presley Whippet:

there were a couple in the 70s, with Hawkins (masters ?) & Gollies  (? ) although I can't remember who made those, maybe others I've forgotten or never saw. But never very popular compared to EBs

In reply to Alan James - Rockfax:

It is rather rubbish... although I am rather ashamed to confess I've been stockpiling them under the bed since the vote, along with walking boots and trail shoes. I also bought new ropes and kept them in the wrappers. Ours will need replacing within the year or so figured buying stuff before tariffs coupled with a worthless currency was a good plan.

The one flaw in this approach is that I may not get to do so much climbing if I can no longer afford to travel to Europe and the weather in Scotland can't be relied on to play ball..

In reply to Alan James - Rockfax:

Wearing my best cheeky grin, did your advertisers put you up to spreading this rumour? ;~} 

I foresee a flurry of shopping activity in the next few days. 

In reply to Fiona Reid:

You can possibly sell the gear and get your money back though.

In reply to Timmd:

Ha ha, I'd not thought of that  

Maybe I should buy more then...

Actually,  I'm more worried about fueling my dutch licorice addiction post brexit as right now I order a l load of it every few months from The Netherlands...

In reply to Alan James - Rockfax:

Fairly sure that this is the least of our worries. Boots cost stupid money already anyway. In any case should make the fella in llanberris nice and busy. What's the WTO tariff on guidebooks? 

In reply to snoop6060:

Guidebooks are zero duty. 

In reply to Doug:

Gollies were originally made by MOAC, who then sold the manufacturing rights to someone else who made the from poor quality materials. The original gollies were excellent (for their day, but not compared to todays offerings) but the newer ones were awful and had all the friction of a greasy pole!

In reply to Presley Whippet:

Has there ever been a large scale producer of any outdoor footwear in the UK in the last 60 years?

I mean a actually manufactured here?

In reply to johncook:

Agreed.

There was also the Croft B3 and B4xs.

Designed  by Jerry Peel and made in some factory in deepest Lancashire during the 80's.

In reply to pasbury:

Hawkins, brasher walsh and alt berg .

Must be a few others.

In reply to Alan James - Rockfax:

I'd be happy to buy my other gear from DMM and the likes to encourage British industry - but does any domestic manufacturer do shoes?

I'm not pro-Brexit overall, but I do think there need to be fewer "goods miles" and "food miles" (e.g. we should not be importing ANY food that is in season to grow that same food in the UK at all, be that at 0% or 100% tariff - it simply should not happen at all) and a boost to our manufacturing industry would also be good.

In reply to Alan James - Rockfax:

I thought JRM said we would all get cheap shoes?

In reply to Neil Williams:

DMM import their alloy from Europe, so 7.5% duty on their raw materials. 

In reply to Jenny C:

Bit less than 19% though

In reply to Doug:

Hawkins Masters came out in about 1967. They were my first rock boots in 1968. I'm fairly sure that Gollies came out very slightly later. The Masters were appallingly unsticky and excruciatingly uncomfortable. The next really big breakthrough was EBs about 2 years later: much stickier soles and much for comfortable. Then about another 7 or 8 years to the next 'revolution' - Fires. They changed climbing completely.

Big boots. Alt Bergs make truly superb British hillwalking boots, really well made, comfortable (like bedroom slippers for me when they're on; you hardly notice them) and good value. I'm on my second pair now.

In reply to pasbury:

Karrimor KSB's

In reply to Alan James - Rockfax:

How high is the WTO tarrif for corn? Can’t watch all of this unfold without popcorn...!

In reply to Alan James - Rockfax:

You could structure the business so there was a subsidiary company in the UK that placed contracts to a manufacturer in China to make the shoes.  

The 19% tariff would be applied to the price the UK company paid the Chinese contract manufacturer which would be a fraction of the price the UK company charged for products going to retail.  So if the shoes cost £100 at retail and the Chinese manufacturer only got £10 the tariff would be £1.90 not £19.

It's going to depend on whether the UK market is large enough for a particular brand to be worth re-organising a business to minimise tariffs.

In reply to Alan James - Rockfax:

Not to overlook that 19% isn't on the shoes, it's on the transport and insurance as well. Then whatever rate of VAT you are going to have.

Multiplied by the usual distributor and retailer markup.

In reply to tom_in_edinburgh:

https://xm-sfl.en.made-in-china.com/product/mvUEhKkcAOVM/China-Waterproof-C...

Go for it!

In reply to Presley Whippet:

Were Croft British? - I started out with a pair of Croft B4s which were sold to me too small and caused me a lot of pain - fine boots apart from the sizing error.

In reply to jimtitt:

It's on the product price at the point it enters the UK not the product price when it is sold to the consumer.   If you structure your business carefully the price when it comes into the UK could be raw materials + cheap contract manufacturing in Vietnam or China.  The expensive high-value elements like the intellectual property in the design and branding, retail and distributor markup can be added on by a subsidiary business within the UK.

In reply to Ian W:

They look like Anasazi VCS rip offs.

My point is that a large company like Adidas/5.10 probably already subcontracts manufacture to China or some other low cost country.   To reduce the effective tariff rate they just need to organise their business so the product is cheap at the point where it enters the UK and a UK subsidiary adds value through access to intellectual property before it goes to retail.

In reply to wercat:

That sizing 'error' still happens in some of the climbing shops. 'You need these at least 2 sizes smaller than you normal shoes' was heard, on Saturday, being said to a person who described themselves as a novice who wanted a pair of shoes for indoor top roping!

In reply to tom_in_edinburgh:

It's a wonder anyone pays any import duty at all if it was that easy. The duty is calculated on the value, not the price and customs will very quickly tell you if you artificially reduce the value! Or do Rolex just bring in a load of miscellaneous metal items and pay nothing?

And to help you out Article 71 UCC (and the WTO no doubt) says where the value of IP etc is not include in the price of the goods then they are included to obtain the customs value.

In reply to johncook:

Sizes vary a lot.  I wear La Sportivas and take 10.5s, and that’s quite a loose fit.  My regular shoe size is 13.  This is quite useful, as it makes them easier to get!

In reply to johncook:

Really depends on the brand. Sportiva, for example, can’t size shoes to save their lives. My comfortable size in some of their models is two sizes smaller than my feet, while others it’s one. 5.10, it’s my street size or half a size smaller.

In reply to jimtitt:

Rolex brand image is about manufacturing in Switzerland.  They can't just contract it out to China without destroying their value proposition.  The companies to look at are people like Apple, Nike etc with complex structures, low cost manufacturing and teams of lawyers figuring out how to do this stuff.

That's not how I read it.  Article 71 would apply to the case where you bought a physical item at low cost from a manufacturer in China but also as a necessary part of the transaction had to pay a royalty or other IP payment to that manufacturer.  It's about stopping people splitting the transaction into a physical sale plus a licensing deal to get round duty.

That isn't what is happening in the structure I proposed.  The intellectual property belongs to the UK subsidiary of the brand owner, not the Chinese manufacturer.   The transaction with the Chinese manufacturer is just a simple low-price payment for goods, there is no license fee associated with buying shoes from someone in China to whom you provided the design for the shoes.  The UK company owns the IP and that part of the value of the end-use goods was added in the UK so its got nothing to do with the sale of the physical product from China.

In reply to Alkis:

A few years since I worked in a climbing shop, but yes with sportiva I would expect (regardless of model or Climbing experience) people to go down at least two full UK sizes from their street shoes. 

​​​​​​Five ten were famously inconsistent and more than once I have had someone trying on 4 or 5 pairs of the same size/model to find the one that fits them the best (another good reason not to try in a shop and then buyonline). 

In reply to tom_in_edinburgh:

There's every chance this is a stock photo of some random shoe - even VCS's! The problem of subbing the work to china is that tou have to be shit hot on QC at the point of manufacture, however the big sports shoe types already have massive factories in Asia.

Thats one way to do it. Just copy Apple. And I wonder myself if the market isnt getting big enough now to make it worthwhile. I had a quick google earlier, but couldnt find what the EU tariffs are on stuff like this from the far east, and whether the european market as a whole isnt big enough. Mind you, if it was, people closer to the coalface than us would have done it already........Also dont know what tariffs there are on the value of IP etc - does this type of thing attract tariffs, or is it just physical goods? Is it something you have come across in your line - I seem to remember you have something to do with inventions / patents etc......

Edit - you seem to have answered the last bit before i asked......

In reply to Ian W:

The thing about IP is that it is intangible and there isn't a liquid market so there are a wide range of valuations which could potentially be justified.  Also a variety of different mechanisms through which it could be transferred and different rules in different countries.   

I don't think there is a simple answer but what is clear is that the way companies are structured and hold IP now might well not be the most tax efficient way of doing it if the UK leaves the EU and that the lawyers and accountants are going to make a ton of money out of this.  I also think that people in the EU and UK are going to lose their jobs as a result because when there is a tariff between the UK and EU of the same level as between the UK/EU and China the numbers probably say put the manufacturing in China.

In reply to Ian W:

The original KSBs were made by Asolo in Italy, current sports direct karrimor is made god knows where.  KSBs have never been made in the UK.

In reply to tom_in_edinburgh:

The customs are well ahead of you there! From the WTO rules (the rest you can read here https://www.wto.org/english/docs_e/legal_e/20-val_01_e.htm ).

"Article 8

1.    In determining the customs value under the provisions of Article 1, there shall be added to the price actually paid or payable for the imported goods:

(a)    the following, to the extent that they are incurred by the buyer but are not included in the price actually paid or payable for the goods:
(i)   commissions and brokerage, except buying commissions;
(ii)    the cost of containers which are treated as being one for customs purposes with the goods in question;
(iii)   the cost of packing whether for labour or materials;
(b)    the value, apportioned as appropriate, of the following goods and services where supplied directly or indirectly by the buyer free of charge or at reduced cost for use in connection with the production and sale for export of the imported goods, to the extent that such value has not been included in the price actually paid or payable:
(i)   materials, components, parts and similar items incorporated in the imported goods;
(ii)    tools, dies, moulds and similar items used in the production of the imported goods;
(iii)   materials consumed in the production of the imported goods;
(iv)   engineering, development, artwork, design work, plans and sketches, undertaken elsewhere than in the country of importation and necessary for the production of the imported goods;

1(c)    royalties and licence fees related to the goods being valued that the buyer must pay, either directly or indirectly, as a condition of sale of the goods being valued, to the extent that such royalties and fees are not included in the price actually paid or payable;
(d)    the value of any part of the proceeds of any subsequent resale, disposal or use of the imported goods that accrues directly or indirectly to the seller."

Your importer must pay directly or indirectly the IP costs to the brand owner so falls under 1c, if they aren´t accounting for this in some way then these costs aren´t tax deductible as part of their normal business and will instead be taxed as normal. Even if you managed to make a tortous way to avoid this the customs have the even bigger stick.

"Article 5

1.     (a)   If the imported goods or identical or similar imported goods are sold in the country of importation in the condition as imported, the customs value of the imported goods under the provisions of this Article shall be based on the unit price at which the imported goods or identical or similar imported goods are so sold in the greatest aggregate quantity, at or about the time of the importation of the goods being valued, to persons who are not related to the persons from whom they buy such goods, subject to deductions for the following:.... "

From my own experience this means they look on Google for the retail price of the product, look in their database for the margins on these products since I´m the importer and then set the value, in my case it was only about €2 but still a whole morning wasted.

The reverse situation I received a visit from a couple of nice gentlemen from the customs at the request of the Brazilian authorities and I had to show how I achieved the valuation on something I exported to Brazil, you don´t undervalue stuff on an invoice if you want to stay in business!

Incidentally your concept that 19% on a pair of €10 shoes means €1.90 on the retail price is bonkers, the €100 shoes will now cost €119 under normal retail margins (plus a bit more for the actual work/costs involved).

In reply to jimtitt:

There's a list of about 8 different ways of calculating the value for customs.  You need to figure out which one applies to your case i.e. construct a legal argument for the one you like.  The default is Article 1 where the value comes from the invoice.   In the case where a UK company which owns IP places a simple contract with an arms-length manufacturer in China its not immediately clear to me why Article 1 wouldn't apply.   

Paying lawyers to construct an argument for the treatment they want is something big companies can afford.

In reply to Neil Williams:

… hmm... and where do you think DMM get all the alloy from they use to make all their shiny kit... that'll be the EU then...!!!

In reply to yesbutnobutyesbut:

Thanks for info - I also dont know where they are currently made, and i'm not about to venture into sports direct anytime soon to find out. (NUFC supporter, not keen on Mike Ashley).

In reply to tom_in_edinburgh:

You'll need an even more highly paid international lawyer; are there any UK based brands even marketing climbing shoes? Really dont know what would happen with for eg Scarpa, (other brands are available), being an italian company, and presumably IP being inside the EU.......

In reply to tom_in_edinburgh:

The preferred method is Article 1 (the invoice value) adjusted in accordance with Article 8, it says in the preamble that the two articles are to be read together and then in Article 1 itself;-

"Article 1

1.     The customs value of imported goods shall be the transaction value, that is the price actually paid or payable for the goods when sold for export to the country of importation adjusted in accordance with the provisions of Article 8........"

In reply to Presley Whippet:

Hawkins and Robert Lawrie both made rock shoes in the sixties. The Hawkins were called "Masters". Grey ankle boots made of reverse leather, they had soles about as hard and sticky as marble! They were my first pair of rock shoes, bought in 1965. I don't suppose anyone ever bought a second pair. They looked a bit like the seventies iconic Boreal Fire, but there the similarity ends. Robert Lawrie's, made in London, though Lawrie was a Lancastrian, and known as RLs, were better. Black canvas ankle boots, they were a bit stiff but at least had, for the day, reasonable friction. In the 70s you could get British made "Gollies" which were OK but the turquoise dye ran and made yer feet and/or socks blue. I had one pair of each but none compare to EBs.

In reply to jimtitt:

Article 8 looks fairly harmless if the importer owns the IP.  It would potentially be a nuisance if the importer was just a distributor.   

In reply to Martin Bennett:

Looks like we both made the same mistake with out first rock boots Martin!  I bought a pair of Hawkins Rockhoppers in 1982 - yellow and black jobbies - they were about as sticky as a car tyre and would probably have laster for ever.  After a year or two, there was still little sign of wear and I was still struggling to get past Severe, so I ditched them and bought a pair of EBs (which I bought half a size too big, so they weren't much better).

My climbing only took off when I bought a pair of Scarpa SuperRatz around 1985.  Now they were proper sticky...

In reply to tom_in_edinburgh:

Indeed but your scheme was discussing a UK subsidury of an overseas company and Article 8 b (iv) stops them just buying the IP, design etc, if that work was done outside of the UK it's value has to be included. There's never an easy way to dodge the customs

In reply to jimtitt:

It doesn't stop an overseas company setting up a subsidiary in the UK and assigning UK patents and trademarks to the UK subsidiary.  So the UK subsidiary is not licensing the IP for a fee, it owns the IP.  They could get cute and have a UK IP holding company separate from the UK trading company and have the UK trading company license the IP from the UK IP holding company so that their IP is ring fenced from any problems in the trading business.   

In reply to tom_in_edinburgh:

I expect in the clear light of day you´ll have realised that assigning the IP to a UK holding company hasn´t solved the problem that the design work etc has to be performed in the UK to be exempted which is the requirement, not who owns the rights. And that the trading company licensing the rights to the trading company is covered by the next rule down "royalties and licence fees related to the goods being valued that the buyer must pay, either directly or indirectly...."

If you managed to move all the IP etc over to your subsidiary then the parent company is left in the shit anyway since they get hammered in reverse, they pay import duty on the products as well when they come into Europe or the USA since you are talking about production in China/Vietnam (something Alan´s headline forgets to mention, there´s a reason why some companies make synthetic upper boots just for the European market).

You original plan is that the importer "adds" the IP value/trademarks etc after they have been imported, if the importer manages to remove ANY connection between the trademarked product and the import consignment (this will be difficult) they they are counterfeit and will be destroyed.

As the customs work down the rules (they aren´t alternatives the importer chooses, they are the order in which the customs apply the rules on their valuation) they whip out their trump cards:-

"(a)    “identical goods” means goods which are the same in all respects, including physical characteristics, quality and reputation.  Minor differences in appearance would not preclude goods otherwise conforming to the definition from being regarded as identical;
 

(b)    “similar goods” means goods which, although not alike in all respects, have like characteristics and like component materials which enable them to perform the same functions and to be commercially interchangeable.  The quality of the goods, their reputation and the existence of a trademark are among the factors to be considered in determining whether goods are similar;"

In other words your importer claims the boots are just some unbranded worthless crap from China and the customs say "no they aren´t they are f#ck-off expensive La Sportivas, pay up".

Now I´m going to do some work, writing the customs papers for stuff going to Australia and the USA, luckily there´s no duty to be paid the other end (bolts are like that) but of course the there´s the dreaded GST in Australia

In reply to jimtitt:

Sorry, I don't believe half of that.  I think you are being too simplistic about how these rules are applied and how large companies operate. 

I used to work for a US multinational in the chip business and they got their chips manufactured in Taiwan and packaged someplace in Asia before being sent to the US for final testing.   There's no way they paid customs charges based on the final price of the chips for the partially finished goods.

The market value of the partially finished goods coming from a contract manufacturer is what it says on the invoice and it is a small fraction of the price to the end customer.   The design IP is worth something, the patents and trademarks are worth something, their marketing spend is worth something, their support engineers are worth something, the relationships with distribution and customers are worth something and there is reasonable profit.   All these factors are to a degree intangible and the relative value is arguable: the accounting/tax guys were paid to find a defensible argument that reduced their taxes.   

In your own example the goods coming from China from a contract manufacturer are not similar to the final product from the company that owns the brand.   The chinese manufacturer has no trademark, they have no reputation, they don't even have a license to make the product to sell under their own name.    The product only becomes f*ck off expensive La Sportivas when it is sold legally by La Sportiva, otherwise, if it reaches the open market (rather than being supplied under contract to La Sportiva) it is an illegal, no-name, knock off which should be seized and is worth next to nothing.

The company I worked for had in house tax experts and paid for advice from  external accounting firms.   For most of the time I worked there they were involved in litigation with the IRS who didn't like the way their organisational structure kept profit outside the US.   Getting in arguments with the taxman or customs is just a cost of doing business when you've got people who do that for a living.

In reply to Alan James - Rockfax:

Loads of rockshoes currently sold in the UK are not actually made in Europe.

In reply to Alan James - Rockfax:

which tariff list is this from?

In reply to Alan James - Rockfax:

Do you know what the current tariff is for shoes that are produced outside the EU?
 

In reply to timjones:

I don't actually. I started this thread following information from Scarpa but I have been slightly guilty of not following it up hoping that other more informed contributors would post - which, to be honest, they have, although I am not sure that question has been answered.

The other more pertinent point I was trying to make, no matter how sick people are of it, is that this is yet another example of a Brexit bonus being anything but a bonus. Some of the usual Brexit apologists have been on the thread doing just that - excusing it as 'not all that bad'. One day they might like to make the case for a brexit bonus that actually is a 'bonus' although I am not holding my breath on that one.

Alan

In reply to Stephen Reid - Needle Sports:

The ones made by Scarpa, La Sportiva, Boreal, Ocun and Tenaya are made in Europe. 

Alan

In reply to tom_in_edinburgh:

Oh well, I´ll leave it up to you to start your boot importing company

In reply to timjones:

Its 16.9% (product code 640411). (http://madb.europa.eu/madb/euTariffs.htm?productCode=640411&country=CN)

Some countries do have a "tariff preference", so for Vietnam (for eg), its 11.9%

In reply to Presley Whippet:

First pair of boots I had were I think Hawkins Rockhoppers (??) (around 1981 ish) other choice was EBs - may have been black and yellow??? - upgraded to Asolo Canyons a couple of years later which felt a quantum leap better, then Hanwags and then Fires which were just awesome 

In reply to Alan James - Rockfax:

And those made by 5.10, Evolv and BD are not. Even of the ones made in Europe, it is highly likely that many of the components, rubber, laces, eyelets, fabric, leather, glue etc are not.

Across the outdoor trade as a whole, by far the bulk of what is sold in Europe is made outside the EU, and in the technical clothing market this must close to 90%.

In fact, if we only had to rely on stuff made within the EU we'd be a lot worse of in terms of quality and choice, not to mention financially.

In reply to Stephen Reid - Needle Sports:

Remember that the EU has trade deals with 60 other countries, it may be that the shoes from Vietnam are not subject to WTO tariffs. As of march 29 they would be.

In reply to Andy Hardy:

As per my previous post, the general "shoe tariff" for shoes imported to the EU is 16.9%. From Vietnam its 11.9% as a result of a preferential arrangement (see the link). The WTO shows no other exceptions.......

In reply to Cumbrian Climber:

My point is that five of the most popular brand of rock shoe are likely to be more expensive after Brexit.

I am not sure what your point is?

Alan

In reply to Alan James - Rockfax:

Most brands are cheaper in Europe and America than they are in the UK. Maybe the manufacturers have already taken account of the tarrif change/increase in their UK pricing? (Over the last 15 years?)

In reply to Ian W:

I missed your post (more details than mine too)

In reply to Andy Hardy:

I didn't think the WTO would set tariffs in the event of no trade deal, but the UK (subject to WTO rules)?   It would be interesting to know how the Scarpa/mountain footwear/19% figure has been arrived at. 

In reply to Jim Hamilton:

The WTO would not set tariffs, the existing WTO tarrifs are the default that would apply in the event of no trade deal. We would have no trade deal with the EU and with all the countries currently covered by EU trade deals.  

In reply to Mike Stretford:

Exactly, the UK is then subject to WTO rules and tariffs due to GATT. Or the UK leaves the WTO and soars to economic glory trading with Afghanistan, the Comoro Islands and the rest of the garbage.

In reply to Jim Hamilton:

It would.

I've just had a quick plonk around the WTO / EU websites, and for exports of EU made "sports footwear with rubber soles (sounds a bit like climbing shoes to me)" the standard tariff to 3rd countries is 30%. I cant find any reference to mountain footwear as in the OP, (but that doesn't mean there isn't such a reference......just I cant find it, and I keep getting back to product codes 640219 and 640411).

Unless anyone knows better........

In reply to Ian W:

I'm confused now - a 30% EU Shoe Export tax? Scarpa can't be happy!

The way I understood it is that the UK would be able to set whatever import tariffs it wants (within limits), but they have to apply equally to other qualifying WTO members.      

In reply to Jim Hamilton:

How confused would you like to be?  The WTO website can elevate your confusion to whichever level you like.........!

As far as I can tell, 30% is the standard, non-most favoured nation tariff, which would be automatically used unless and until some agreement comes into play. But there is a fairly errr "extensive" list of cross agreements on there to wade through......

As for Scarpa, no, they wont be pleased, but less pleased will be their importer and distributor. Maybe they will have the same mindset as BMW, who said that they would just concentrate on the 94% of their customers who arent in the UK......

In reply to Alan James - Rockfax:

But how are they going to enforce that when you eBay them from Europe?!

In reply to springfall2008:

As an individual you will be importing them from the European Union. So you will be liable for VAT, Customs Duty or Excise Duty before UK Customs releases them. You'll probably pay this plus the Post Office handling fee when you collect them from your local sorting office.

In reply to Removed User:

And if you want to make a claim against the seller EU law doesn't help any more.

In reply to Martin Bennett:

Indeed he was. An interesting chap. He did the Le Mans 24 hour race with Ivan Waller in a Jaguar - bought and registered in Bolton - and they recorded some pretty incredible times.

The car is still going today too.

Phil

In reply to jimtitt:

IIRC; if they do agree to refund you; they're not responsible for any VAT or Duty paid. You have to try and claim that back separately from UK Customs.

In reply to Alan James - Rockfax:

Are you sure this is just not project smear?

In reply to Alan James - Rockfax:

My point is that virtually all the outdoor gear that we buy is made outside the EU and yet, amazingly, somehow, the sky hasn't fallen on our heads...

In reply to Cumbrian Climber:

And it wont fall in. It will just make many items of climbing gear / clothing significantly more expensive should we leave without having first agreed deals / tariffs with the exporting countries, a very likely scenario given we haven't really started negotiating yet, and Theresa May seems to insist that we will leave on mar 29 come what may. Nothing has happened so far because we are still EU members.......

In reply to Rick Graham:

Unfortunately, Altberg make most of their (very good) boots in Italy.

I must remember to thank Mrs Profanity on her foresight in suggesting last year that we get some new boots and resole the old ones. With luck we are now future proofed for walking boots for many years as we have I believe three re-solings left.

In reply to Cumbrian Climber:

In countries which the EU has trade agreements, with, leave the EU and it's WTO tariffs until the UK has it's own agreements which can take years or decades.

In reply to Removed User:

Yeh okay, your assuming we follow the rules on this one, a lot of companies don't declare to avoid the VAT (quite common with orders from the USA or China right now)

In reply to springfall2008:

Exporting from the EU to other countries we have to supply a declaration and an invoice to show it has been VAT exempt for export at our end. This MUST be on the outside of the parcel (CN22 or CN23 as appropriate. We don't give a shit what customs collect the other end but we aren't paying our domestic rate of VAT for your stuff!

In reply to jimtitt:

No I was meaning for example packages from China, often marked as 'gift' to avoid the VAT (the threshold is higher for gifts)

In reply to springfall2008:

What, import Scarpa rockshoes from China? I'd check the import duty applied to shoes imported from Italy to China first

In reply to jimtitt:

No I was meaning the guys in Italy will hopefully get wise and start shipping 'gifts' too!

In reply to springfall2008:

So we've got to the point where we're proposing that overseas manufacturers collude in defrauding the UK taxman so as to make it less obvious that Brexit is economically damaging to us all?

In reply to john arran:

Yes.

In reply to springfall2008:

Sure, easy enough to slip that past the taxman over here!

In reply to willworkforfoodjnr:

As the UK crashes out and the economy tanks forcing spending cuts which make the last round of austerity look like a boom you can hear about old people dying from cold and feel smug about evading twenty quid of tax.

In reply to Ian W:

That's not true, most of the gear is made in Europe, La sportiva, scarpa, Beal, Edelrid, Mammut, Petzl, Boreal, Ocun, Totem cams, cassin/camp. Only 510 and BD are the only major brands that are not. You are distorting the facts to fit your view...

In reply to Ramon Marin:

What isn't true? Not sure which of my posts you are referring to. Only thing i can say is that i am most certainly not distorting any facts, to fit any view. I was being a typical boring accountant......

so let me know the post in question and I'll try to clarify.....

In reply to Alan James - Rockfax:

McKEuan told me that Brexit would jump up the prices of EU brand outdoor equipment. 

In reply to Alan James - Rockfax:

Outdoor boots and shoes cost a fortune in New Zealand and Australia, and many years ago somebody told me these kinds of tariffs were mostly to blame. 

It was nice living in the uk when it was part of Europe.  I made my last trip back from the mainland as a European last week.  Was quite sad.  Loads of wine and boots on board.  Fortunately the immigration people were quite nice to me, which is often not the case when you have been over there for a couple of months in a van. Normally lots of Qs.  But they were too busy trying to crowd into a small space to make room for the "changes" for next time when they will have to check just how much wine and boots I've brought back.

I used to be a third citizen,  Now I will revert to one. On returning from each trip it's gonna be a right pain trying to prove that you're not importing all of your own personal gear that you took over there and are bringing back again.  Keep all receipts of everything.  Forever.