Andy Gardner wrote:
At 2:42 pm +1200 5/16/01, Steve Phillips wrote:
* The tax dept wont allow us (or anyone else) to peer as they require us to pay GST on the traffic
Do you pay GST on bartered goods?
Not wanting to divert the debate off topic, but legally, yes, you are required to pay GST on bartered goods. If you provide goods or services and associate a value with those goods and services, then there is an obligation to pay GST. If you traded with me 50Kg of Mexican jumping beans for a sheep, I would have to pay GST on the value of the sheep and you would have to pay GST on the value of the jumping beans.
As GST always sinks down to the bottom of the food chain (the final consumer of the goods), I can't see the point in two non-consumers swapping equal value tax invoices. Common sense would suggest that generating paperwork, with no actual difference in the amount of tax paid to the government, is a waste of everyone's time.
So true. Two companies who enter into a contra arangement (legally should) go through the process of swapping GST cheques, and the subsequent payment/claim for GST with IRD - despite the fact that the net tax effect is nil. But I am not at all sure if the "APE" situation is even a contra deal. It is, afaik, an arrangement by which carriers can channel data. It is an expedient arrangement by which the parties derive a mutual advantage. No-one is providing a good or a service. Is that correct? Keith Davidson --------- To unsubscribe from nznog, send email to majordomo(a)list.waikato.ac.nz where the body of your message reads: unsubscribe nznog