Diablo III - Auction House

[ECA]

I mean people have remade Diablo 1 for SC2


View: http://youtu.be/sUugzb05bZU


Why not just have that inside D3 instead? :/

 

[BloodOmen]

KABOOM! Shitstorm!

Bet its a barrel of laughs over at Blizzard HQ right now.

 

[BloodOmen]

I mean people have remade Diablo 1 for SC2


View: http://youtu.be/sUugzb05bZU


Why not just have that inside D3 instead? :/

Only modding we'll have from D3 will likely come once the cracked version is fully working and bug free, hopefully modders can sort it out and bring us some epicness.

 

[rynnor]

I wonder if VAT is being charged on these auction transactions when they involve someone in the EU?

 

[svartalf]

I wonder if VAT is being charged on these auction transactions when they involve someone in the EU?

Let's just say "Can of worms". This is going to get very interesting.

 

[Athan]

I wonder if VAT is being charged on these auction transactions when they involve someone in the EU?

I'd wager either:

a) They'll effectively factor this in and the accounting will be as if the item sold for the lower price to make the full price include the VAT (I'm sure in reading over EULA etc the other day I came across language implying taxes would be handled by them).

or

b) Claim it's a transaction between two third parties and thus Mr Taxman should talk to said third parties if they think VAT should have been paid (given there's a threshold of turnover I believe before a company has to pay VAT in the UK). Problem with this is that throughout EULA etc Blizzard state that you don't actually own anything in the game....

 

[Raven]

I wonder if VAT is being charged on these auction transactions when they involve someone in the EU?

I was also wondering about income tax on it too

If people are making £30 a day or whatever has been reported, that's a tidy sum over a year.

 

[Athan]

I was also wondering about income tax on it too

If people are making £30 a day or whatever has been reported, that's a tidy sum over a year.

7. Auction House Fees.
A. Transaction Fee. Where the auction is successful and your loot is sold and the auction is completed and verified by Blizzard, a transaction fee (the “Transaction Fee”) will also be imposed; the Transaction Fee will be deducted by Blizzard from the amount of the seller’s proceeds. [To calculate the amount of the applicable Transaction Fee, please visit http://eu.battle.net/support/gb/article/4800048.
B. Transfer Fee. If you, as the seller, decide to receive the proceeds of a sale anywhere besides your Battle.net Balance, you will be charged an additional fee (the “Transfer Fee”). [To calculate the amount of the applicable Transfer Fee, please visit http://eu.battle.net/support/gb/article/4800048. Note that for the Rubles Auction House, Transfer Fees are not applicable, as all proceeds of a sale within the Rubles Auction House must be received in your Battle.net Balance.
C. Transaction and Transfer Fees include any applicable value-added-tax.
D. Other Fees. Your payment method provider may also impose additional fees.
8. Accepted Payment Methods. You may view the payment methods authorized for use on the Auction Houses here http://eu.battle.net/support/gb/article/5000050.
9. No Refund. All Auction House transactions are final, and no refunds are permitted except with respect to any statutory warranties or guaranties that cannot be excluded or limited by law.
10. Taxes. You are responsible for taxes incurred when you use the Auction Houses. All auctions are subject to all applicable tax laws and regulations. Proceeds from auction sales may be considered income for tax purposes. You should consult with a tax specialist to determine your tax liability for these transactions.

So two things here. First 7.C. means they do indeed charge and handle VAT on the transaction fee (that £1/1EUR you get charged when an item sells on the RMAH).

Secondly they pass the ball on all other tax issues in point 10. This would cover both the fact you're making income and should declare it to the taxman, and also I believe the VAT issue. Their lawyers/accountants likely feel that it's the item seller is the one making the money and thus would be the one liable for VAT, if it's actually applicable to such sales. Blizzard is just a middleman for this purpose.

Compare the following:

1. Seller (S) puts item up for £100. Expects to get charged £1 transaction fee when it sells (actually 83.3p + 20% VAT). So S expects to only get £99 out of the sale.
2. Buyer (B) buys the item for the £100, this is all he expects to pay as that's what it's listed for.
3. Blizzard transfers item from S to B, receives £100.
4. Blizzard passes the £100 on to S, minus the £1 transaction fee. (You can also view this as Blizzard paying S £100, but also charging them £1, which amounts to the same thing.)
5. Blizzard has already told S they're responsible for all taxes for using the RMAH, so if S is liable for VAT (i.e. is a company with high enough turnover), they need to pay up to the taxman.

With this:

1. Seller (S) puts item up for £100. Expects to get charged £1 transaction fee when it sells (actually 83.3p + 20% VAT). So S expects to only get £99 out of the sale (but see point 3 below...).
2. Buyer (B) buys the item for the £100, this is all he expects to pay as that's what it's listed for.
3. Blizzard transfers item from S to B, receives £100. Blizzard 'charges' VAT on the sale, but to jibe with the £100 being passed around now that has to be that the actual item sale was for £99, and that has VAT included, so sale was actually for £82.50.
4. Now S only receives £82.50 and wonders WTF happened, and would have to go through some hoops to claim the VAT back if not actually registered for VAT.

Note that points 3 and 4 could also mean that it becomes:

1. Seller (S) puts item up for £100. Expects to get charged £1 transaction fee when it sells (actually 83.3p + 20% VAT). But also knows VAT will be charged on it. So knows any buyer will end up paying £118.80 (£99 + 20% VAT). That or lists for £100, knows he'll also pay another £1, so buyer will pay £120.
2. Buyer (B) sees the item for £118.80/£120 and pays that.
3. Blizzard transfers item from S to B, receives £118.50/120, takes £1 from S, passes them £99/100.

This now means that S has to do some maths before putting items up to be sure they're seen as for sale for the price point he wants (to be sure of undercutting competition). NOW mix in possible different VAT rates in the countries S and B reside in, also versus where Blizzard 'does business' for these purposes....

Yeah, I think Blizzard chose the simpler way to do this. I'm fairly sure a company of their size would have checked things with their lawyers and accounts plus tax authorities in applicable countries.

 

[rynnor]

I was also wondering about income tax on it too

If people are making £30 a day or whatever has been reported, that's a tidy sum over a year.

If they are a non-taxpayer its fine - if they already pay income tax this would mean they should be paying more.

On the VAT side Blizzard Europe are based in France with 17.5% VAT - so if you buy from the UK in theory you owe 2.5% VAT on the item.

 

[Vae]

If they are a non-taxpayer its fine - if they already pay income tax this would mean they should be paying more.

On the VAT side Blizzard Europe are based in France with 17.5% VAT - so if you buy from the UK in theory you owe 2.5% VAT on the item.

Actually France have 19.6% VAT...

 

[Athan]

If they are a non-taxpayer its fine - if they already pay income tax this would mean they should be paying more.

On the VAT side Blizzard Europe are based in France with 17.5% VAT - so if you buy from the UK in theory you owe 2.5% VAT on the item.

I still think Blizzard are operating RMAH as if the transactions are between 3rd parties, and thus Blizzard doesn't have to sort any VAT on the transaction between the two 3rd parties. The service Blizzard provided was to the seller and they get charged the separate transaction fee, upon which VAT is indeed charged. Any seller, if liable for VAT overall, will need to be honest with their taxman of course.

Of course the whole thing is a little blurred due to Blizzard keeping legal ownership of all in-game items anyway. The RMAH is more about transferring right to use the item on a given account.

 

[Mirt]

This whole auction house stuff is really irritating, I've got a tank-doctor half way through act 4 inferno and I didn't find a single piece of gear that would be an upgrade since Nightmare... I don't mind having an AH but I would love to find some loot I could use, rather than progressing via AH!

 

[Athan]

That's actually the AH being a cure for the "no good loot dropped for me!" situation. I've had the same going through Hell. I was well into Act 2 before anything decent dropped and had gotten a few upgrades via AH to fill some gaps.

If there was no AH then we'd both have been forced to farm content we'd already completed (within the difficulty) until decent enough stuff dropped.

 

[Raven]

Well if they fixed the item tables it would be a lot better. There are so many junk items it becomes tedious. STR/INT being quite a regular drop, STR on ranged weapons also dumb.

It seems to be manipulated to encourage people to use the AH and even more so the RMAH, something that should be optional rather than necessary.

 

[BloodOmen]

I mean people have remade Diablo 1 for SC2


View: http://youtu.be/sUugzb05bZU


Why not just have that inside D3 instead? :/

because that would have meant no Auction House because it'd be all custom gear purely for the MOD and no Auction House = less income for Blizzard = no likey likey

I'm just waiting for a decent private server to go up like Median XL, its just a shame Blizzard didn't embrace how amazing Diablo II mods were rather than push them to one side through fear of fans making something better than they did with Diablo III itself, fucking kill joys.

 

[pikeh]

Yeh, Median was the good kind of hard.
Didn't mind doing multi LC1 runs on that, actually got endgame gear!