Import duty on a EU tax paid boat - a question

[jfm]

As in my post #11 for belt and braces.

Your post 11 doesn't distinguish between 1. entering into a contract to transfer ownership and 2. transferring ownership. They're different things. The notarisation of the BOS achieves nothing unless you bring the notary to the port to see the boat and certify its physical location at the moment the BOS is delivered by buyer to seller.

 

[jfm]

Interesting. I wasn't aware of the burden of proof reversal in this specific case - hence my previous suggestion.
Btw, my general (and superficial!) understanding of the UK legal system is that it's based on the presumption of innocence principle...
...though of course I can see why it isn't, in this case!

In uk at least it isn't even specific to this case. Burden of proof is very widely reversed in uk tax law! Presumption of innocence applies of course in most criminal and penal laws ( though not always, eg if you kill someone and claim self defence you have the burden to prove it was self defence)

 

[Tranona]

Your post 11 doesn't distinguish between 1. entering into a contract to transfer ownership and 2. transferring ownership. They're different things. The notarisation of the BOS achieves nothing unless you bring the notary to the port to see the boat and certify its physical location at the moment the BOS is delivered by buyer to seller.

The first line specifically refers to ensuring that the Bill of Sale is completed in France (and possibly notarised by a French lawyer), which I think was your point.

 

[jfm]

The first line specifically refers to ensuring that the Bill of Sale is completed in France (and possibly notarised by a French lawyer), which I think was your point.

You sort of got the right answer there by accident. Though the thing that transfers ownership is delivery of the BoS, not completion of it nor signature of it. In my transactions the BoS is completed but not delivered (nor signed, if I'm the seller) at the time of contract, so that it becomes an agreed form document (or some other route to agreed form is employed).

I'm not sure why you are arguing here: people talk in the context of RGR about making sure the boat is returned to EU by current owner and only then sold. Sure, but what does "sold" mean? Or "transaction" as you put it? It is necessary to distinguish between entering into a contract to buy a boat and the separate act whereby ownership is transferred. Only the latter need be done inside the EU after RGR; the former may be done outside the EU with no adverse consequences. But of course the obligation on the seller to do the latter inside the EU after RGR needs to be imposed on him by a specific clause in the former, otherwise why should he bother? I've seen plenty of brokers get the details of all this wrong