Subject:
|
Re: Customs question...
|
Newsgroups:
|
lugnet.off-topic.debate
|
Date:
|
Tue, 20 Nov 2001 07:10:20 GMT
|
Viewed:
|
1151 times
|
| |
|
|
In lugnet.off-topic.debate, Richard Marchetti writes:
> 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.
<snip description of legal mumbo-jumbo>
> 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...
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 this; like you I barely care about it. I
suspect most people here have about the same level of caring about it.
However, we *love* to argue over points of principle, and that's what this is.
:)
James
|
|
Message is in Reply To:
 | | Re: Customs question...
|
| (...) 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 (...) (23 years ago, 20-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
|
|
|
|
