The Ethics of fee avoidance using PayPal and Ebay

Posts
12,816
Likes
17,475
I am confining myself to what I feel is morally correct, not what is legally binding in lengthy user agreements that I expect perhaps only one us has read. If that.
As for eBay - charging both a non-refundable listing fee (+ more fees for more photos etc) and then going on to charge a 10% final value fee, is in my opinion a bit much.
I'm in Dennis's camp when it comes to user agreements and holding up your end of a bargain. If you don't like eBay or PayPal's terms and conditions, there's a simple answer...don't use them. However, you will limit the number of eyes that will see your product and quite possibly, the person who would be willing to pay the most may not see it. You want to play, you have to pay. Whether it's 10% to eBay or 30%+ to a high end auction house (which will also charge your buyer a similar fee). All that caviar isn't cheap, you know.
Seller then said "NO, DO NOT BUY IT NOW". If you do i will cancel it. Come in person, inspect and pay cash. Seller was 2.5 hour drive..I tried to arrange to view but by the time I was able to travel(3hr drive), a local guy had bought the watch, and I missed out.
What I've read here is that some sellers would list an item, solicit offers on it, only to be told that the seller will only sell outside of eBay. I wish I had the power to cancel that seller's account, because that is fraud. The last time I looked, fraud was a crime in most jurisdictions. The fact that eBay is asleep at the switch is their problem, but it doesn't make that action justifiable under any circumstances.
Several forums I visit have stickies in B/S/T to the effect that "it's against PayPal's TOS to ask the buyer to pay fees." This holds whether it's
PP + 4%
PP gift
PP family/friends
PP net to me
With respect to the "4%" question" -- remember that this fee covers the buyer and seller in a transaction regardless of whether you choose to use a credit card or not. Buyers are protected to differing degrees by their credit card companies and sellers are assured of having good funds and not having to worry about bad checks or forged money orders.

The choice of the type of payment accepted should be left up to the parties involved, but I would never buy on eBay without using a credit card. Same is true even here on ΩF, unless I know you or you come very highly recommended by someone I know. On a private deal, I have no problem paying the 4% if the value is there. To me, it's a cost of doing business. If your margins are that tight, you likely aren't buying at the right price to make a decent profit. That's not my problem, please don't make it so.
Yup, when it comes to multinationals avoiding all the taxes that I pay, then I don't have an issue or problem with playing a similar game if the opportunity arises.
I see no justification for attempting to cheat a business out of a fee that you both agreed on because you think that they are evading taxes. Every state and country has laws that define what is and isn't considered tax evasion (as opposed to avoidance, which is both legal and expected). When you get a job as a tax auditor in your jurisdiction, then you get to make that call. Otherwise, either just assume they are operating legally or if you really think they are operating illegally in your country, then you have the right to boycott them. Tax evasion is a legal issue, not a moral one.

Sorry for being so long-winded here. I'm actually quite surprised that we are even having this conversation.
gatorcpa
 
Posts
6,618
Likes
11,375
Don't like their terms then don't use them. Are they perfect? Of course not but as I've said before - for the exposure you get as a seller, the 10-15% that eBay + PayPal charge is a pittance compared to what most other auction houses charge and many of these other auction houses don't offer the broad exposure eBay does, are frequently more restrictive as to the mode of payment, are less helpful if you run into a problem with the item and with few exceptions don't describe the item properly.

If some of you think eBay is horrific and you can do better - go and quit what you're doing and start your own auction company. It's not that easy or simple. And if you think eBay is greedy, go look at what big Pharma charges for their medicines.
 
Posts
174
Likes
203
but there are approximately 3 people on this forum to whom I would send cash. I've just seen too many cases on other forums where long-time, trusted members lose their job, get divorced or whatever and disappear with someone's money.

Are you saying that you feel that Paypal is safer? How do you handle if someone is a first time poster on the boards and has no history, is one safer than the other from a sellers POV?
 
Posts
7,562
Likes
34,662
I see no justification for attempting to cheat a business out of a fee that you both agreed on because you think that they are evading taxes. Every state and country has laws that define what is and isn't considered tax evasion (as opposed to avoidance, which is both legal and expected). When you get a job as a tax auditor in your jurisdiction, then you get to make that call. Otherwise, either just assume they are operating legally or if you really think they are operating illegally in your country, then you have the right to boycott them.

No I don´t have a problem with the idea of it. I´m all for standing up for what I believe. As I said I have never closed an Ebay listing early, be that for a side deal or for any other reason. As I don´t sell on Ebay anymore I have no need to attempt to defraud them and seeing as buying on Ebay is not the issue here boycotting them would be pointless.

I do however have a problem with large corporations not paying their way due to the skills of their accountancy and legal departments and I do boycott them when it has negative implications for me or my business.

Let´s be clear here extremely profitable* companies with turnovers in the billions who only manage to book a 2% gross profit after all their normal costs and their cross border `exotics` such as international licensing fees, intellectual property royalties, regional management fees, etc have been deducted are not playing in the same league as me when it comes to paying corporation tax.

If I was able to `disappear` these monies via an international web of companies, shell and holding companies, but still be able to access the funds then I too would be able to offer similar deals and freebies and to create huge name recognition through endless advertising campaigns with my additional budget and thus operate on a level playing field with my competition. Unfortunately that isn´t how it works.

extremely profitable* my obvious faux pax, what and where is the real profit?
 
Posts
785
Likes
651
The problem is that PayPal leaves the seller completely exposed to the point they could lose the item and the money they received as payment. Wire transfer leaves the buyer exposed. I don't have any problem providing a PayPal price and a wire transfer price. The buyer is the one receiving the benefit from PayPal not the seller. I have a few watches I've been meaning to sell, around the $3k price point, and I wouldn't dream of accepting PayPal from someone who doesn't have references.
 
Posts
785
Likes
651
Correct.
And all you fee avoiders are costing those of us who pay extra. If everyone paid their share, the fee might actually be lowered.

When is the last time you saw a fee go down? I'm sure the PayPal execs are sitting around getting a plan in place to lower fees because they're making too much money. 😉
 
Posts
12,816
Likes
17,475
I do however have a problem with large corporations not paying their way due to the skills of their accountancy and legal departments and I do boycott them when it has negative implications for me or my business.
Well, this is what I do for a living. I am a corporate tax consultant. What I do is within in law, I'm sorry that you think it isn't.

So I will consider myself boycotted.

I would advise you to get more politically involved to try to change the law in your area to something you think is fair. That is what we do in a democracy.
gatorcpa
 
Posts
2,036
Likes
5,434
I do however have a problem with large corporations not paying their way due to the skills of their accountancy and legal departments and I do boycott them when it has negative implications for me or my business.

As others have said, tax avoidance is legal, evasion is illegal. I suppose I'm a tax avoider - I have money in an ISA, and when working as a self-employed, limited company contractor pay myself a small salary and take director's dividends when I feel the need. I have no moral qualms about doing so as it's currently entirely within UK tax legislation.

When it comes to large multi-nationals, if they evade tax, I'd expect the tax authorities to prosecute them to the full extent of the law. However, if their skilled accountants and tax advisers arrange things within the law so they don't pay what I consider a "fair" amount then I'm less likely to blame them. The directors are doing what is their primary fiscal responsibility.

What I would do, if sufficiently exercised and as @gatorcpa said would be to lobby my legislators to change the tax laws to what I would consider a more transparent and acceptable regime

Given the fear of alienating big business, I don't see that happening any time soon, at least here in the UK
 
Posts
5,281
Likes
24,089
Pretty soon we are going to be flying this thread into the rare air of legislation vs moral fairness.
 
Posts
7,562
Likes
34,662
Well, this is what I do for a living. I am a corporate tax consultant. What I do is within in law, I'm sorry that you think it isn't.

So I will consider myself boycotted.

I would advise you to get more politically involved to try to change the law in your area to something you think is fair. That is what we do in a democracy.
gatorcpa

I don't remember saying anything about tax consultancy operating outside the boundaries of the law.

I certainly did say that I will boycott a company that has negative effects on me or my business, I don't see how you feel you fall into that category so I'm un-boycotting you 😉

I live in The Netherlands, where we have certain buildings in Amsterdam where upwards of, I believe, 10000 company head offices can be registered...under one roof..with not an employee of any one of these companies in sight. NL is one of the main players in the international company letterbox scheme.

I don't think lobbying the powers that be here in NL would lead to much, this is policy by design.

Anyway let's agree to disagree, I much prefer talking watches. 😀
 
Posts
25,980
Likes
27,647
When is the last time you saw a fee go down? I'm sure the PayPal execs are sitting around getting a plan in place to lower fees because they're making too much money. 😉

Maybe I should have made that point differently. Allow me to change it to: If all the fee avoiders just played by the rules they agreed to, the fees would not have went up. The percentage on shipping is a perfect example - it never used to exist until eBay discovered the people selling $1500 items for $100 plus $1400 shipping.

Pretty soon we are going to be flying this thread into the rare air of legislation vs moral fairness.

Well, it was your "ethics" that started the whole thing. What's legal isn't necessarily moral and vice versa.

..... and to reiterate, if you checked the box to agree to the terms and conditions, you're supposed to abide by them.
 
Posts
12,816
Likes
17,475
NL is one of the main players in the international company letterbox scheme
The Benelux countries are (in)famous for that sort of thing. Perfectly legal, and I can tell you the US government hates it.

But again, you have to want to lobby for change and not sit and curse at it.
gatorcpa
 
Posts
5,281
Likes
24,089
Maybe I should have made that point differently. Allow me to change it to: If all the fee avoiders just played by the rules they agreed to, the fees would not have went up. The percentage on shipping is a perfect example - it never used to exist until eBay discovered the people selling $1500 items for $100 plus $1400 shipping.



Well, it was your "ethics" that started the whole thing. What's legal isn't necessarily moral and vice versa.

..... and to reiterate, if you checked the box to agree to the terms and conditions, you're supposed to abide by them.

Actually it was my ethics question that started it.
 
Posts
3,086
Likes
3,579
If I sell via ebay I generally follow the rules. I can't remember an instance where I've avoided this.

However, I agree with Martin that they are hugely biased towards the buyer. Never mind buyer beware, it's seller beware.

I've had various instances where buyers have asked for a cheaper postage option, so I've obliged. Only for the buyer to then claim the item didn't arrive, even though I had a digital copy of their signature. Ebay sided with the buyer so I lost the item and the money.

They just don't give a shit and their customer service, if you're a seller is terrible.
What was their justification for siding with the buyer when
you had the Signature receipt? How does the "cheaper" shipping
option figure into this? Would another shipping method have protected you
from this? Trying to learn here.
 
Posts
12,816
Likes
17,475
The buyer is the one receiving the benefit from PayPal not the seller.
That is simply not true. The seller gets a guarantee of good funds provided that they abide by the agreement with PayPal. The buyer gets the ability to pay with a credit card and get its protection without the seller having a merchant account. That is a service and has a value in the marketplace. You can choose to use the service and pay (or split) the fee. You are still wise to require references from potential buyers.

Since eBay is now a separate company, you may have a problem with their buyer-centric policy, but that has nothing to do with PayPal anymore. eBay is ill-equipped to handle high value jewelry sales, as proper postal insurance is almost impossible. This is particularly a problem with international sales, and brings us into the whole eBay international postage program.

There are about a dozen posts here complaining about that.
gatorcpa
 
Posts
6,618
Likes
11,375
That is simply not true. The seller gets a guarantee of good funds provided that they abide by the agreement with PayPal. The buyer gets the ability to pay with a credit card and get its protection without the seller having a merchant account. That is a service and has a value in the marketplace. You can choose to use the service and pay (or split) the fee. You are still wise to require references from potential buyers.

Since eBay is now a separate company, you may have a problem with their buyer-centric policy, but that has nothing to do with PayPal anymore. eBay is ill-equipped to handle high value jewelry sales, as proper postal insurance is almost impossible. This is particularly a problem with international sales, and brings us into the whole eBay international postage program.

There are about a dozen posts here complaining about that.
gatorcpa

Not to mention allowing the individual seller to take credit card and installment payments thereby broadening their audience.
 
Posts
1,319
Likes
639
Interesting conversation. I sell around 10-20 items a day on Ebay but mostly low value ones ($10-$30). Even for such a small abmount of money it realy is hard to win the dispute with the buyer(even if he got the item). However i count the losses as costs of running the business. I am not sure if I would have enough curage to sell high end watch on Ebay, the risk of getting scammed is there and it is hard to protect yourself. If the margins on the watches were good then I would proabbly take that risk, but they're not i think therefore selling on forums o even starting you own web store and investing into marketing seems safer to me.