Subject:
|
Re: Customs question...
|
Newsgroups:
|
lugnet.off-topic.debate
|
Date:
|
Tue, 20 Nov 2001 01:56:38 GMT
|
Viewed:
|
1175 times
|
| |
|
|
In lugnet.off-topic.debate, James Brown writes:
> Bottom line is that *you* don't get to define merchandise, the people who
> wrote the form (and made the law) do. Doesn't matter what you think.
Yeah, its gets attenuated pretty fast. In the U.S. such a thing has it's
origins in congressionally generated legislations, is duplicated by
administrative law (sometimes with errors, additions, and omissions), and
implemented by people that probably don't understand either. The original
law may or may not contain helpful definitions of terms used in the law.
The final arbiters on the matter would be the judicial system. In many
instances crimes are further defined by the intent of the persons committing
them.
Since ignorance of the law is no excuse. Please be aware that you are
expected to understand the minutia of thousands of pages of federal, state,
and local codes -- including both the original law, the administrative law,
etc. You are additionally expected to understand the details of all relevant
case law as it pertains to the possible offense. There will be a test --
it's called being confronted by an officer of the govt. (here's the name the
quote portion of our game: "He has erected a multitude of New Offices, and
sent hither swarms of Officers to harrass our people, and eat out their
substance").
Doesn't matter what I think? If the duty payment that is at stake is that
of another country, as it is for all of us in the states, then I don't even
care to think about it overmuch. Some other country's laws is surely
someone else's problem. If I can help a lego pal out by labelling the
package "gift" -- I mean, really, who cares? Why are some of you so
vehemently opposed to such a teeny, tiny white lie? Get over yourselves...
-- Hop-Frog
|
|
Message has 4 Replies:
 | | Re: Customs question...
|
| (...) However, your "act of kindness" may result in a lot of extra trouble for the recipient, if it's proved false. At best, they'll have to pay the duty anyway, but there may well be other penalties. If they *ask* you to mark it as a gift, then I (...) (23 years ago, 20-Nov-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
| | | Re: Customs question...
|
| (...) <snip description of legal mumbo-jumbo> (...) Personally I don't give a wet noodle how you mark your customs forms, unless you happen to be sending them to me, in which case I'd prefer honesty in the declaration. I'm not vehemently opposed to (...) (23 years ago, 20-Nov-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
| | | Re: Customs question...
|
| (...) Nope. It doesn't. At least, not in a legal sense Legally, you don't have a say. *Especially* if it's in another country :) Does it matter what you think in terms of how moral you are? Sure. How honest you are? Sure. (...) Ah-- debatably (...) (23 years ago, 20-Nov-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
Message is in Reply To:
| | Re: Customs question...
|
| (...) Bottom line is that *you* don't get to define merchandise, the people who wrote the form (and made the law) do. Doesn't matter what you think. thanks, James (23 years ago, 19-Nov-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
64 Messages in This Thread:
 
- Entire Thread on One Page:
- Nested:
All | Brief | Compact | Dots
Linear:
All | Brief | Compact
This Message and its Replies on One Page:
- Nested:
All | Brief | Compact | Dots
Linear:
All | Brief | Compact
|
|
|
|
