camtang Posted February 11, 2015 Report Share Posted February 11, 2015 How do tourists and fish importing go together? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
reef Posted February 11, 2015 Author Report Share Posted February 11, 2015 importers in general pay 70% of biosecurity costs Tourist pay zero, its all paid by the taxpayer. So why do tourist pay nothing??? If MPI has a shortfall in revenue then they should get it from Tourist, not importers Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
camtang Posted February 11, 2015 Report Share Posted February 11, 2015 Are tourists importing fish? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
livingart Posted February 11, 2015 Report Share Posted February 11, 2015 Only ones with wet trousers Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
reef Posted February 11, 2015 Author Report Share Posted February 11, 2015 Are tourists importing fish? yes, they can, :roll: they are special Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
camtang Posted February 11, 2015 Report Share Posted February 11, 2015 So what on earth do tourists have to do with importing fish and the increasing fees?? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
reef Posted February 11, 2015 Author Report Share Posted February 11, 2015 So what on earth do tourists have to do with importing fish and the increasing fees?? Don't Tourist use MPI/Biosecurity?? yes they do and it is 100% funded by tax payers. SO why should importers pay the ridiculous fee increases when Tourist pay nothing. taxpayers pay for 30% of biosecurity costs and importers 70% Some cost should be paid by Tourist , and if that was the case then importers would not have to pay the massive price increases. So they should get some fees from importers and some from Tourist, which means tax payers pay less as that is the aim of Biosecurity/MPI, But i think above discussion is going to confuse Hobbyist, too much information. Best to focus on vet costs and mileage , plus the end price will be too high for most hobbyist if prices go up. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
alanmin4304 Posted February 11, 2015 Report Share Posted February 11, 2015 It seems to me that with fish it is user pays actual and reasonable costs and costs have gone up in the last 5 years. Tourists don't need to pay for fish quarantine and your figures are not the same as ours. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
reef Posted February 11, 2015 Author Report Share Posted February 11, 2015 You keep harping on that the figures are not the same, then show us ? Do you think I am making it up or have made a gross error in working out the likely expenditure based on $200 hr for checking fish. Yes tourist don't pay for fish quarantine , obviously ., but why don't they pay for the use of biosecurity then when there luggage gets checkedand screened by mpi? It all costs money, how is that user pays as you suggest it should be? This is why it would be a good point to make it in a submission. It was pointed out by mpi At the meetings that it is something that we could make a submission on as how was it fair that importers pay a higher share of biosecurity fees than tourist who pay nothing for the use of biosecurity at the borders. Interested to see your figures? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Benjansss Posted February 11, 2015 Report Share Posted February 11, 2015 I Imagine it's because they don't want to put tourists of coming here Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
reef Posted February 11, 2015 Author Report Share Posted February 11, 2015 yes 100% agree. So why should we accept that as tax payers? Its all good and well trying to get commercial importers to pay, but the taxpayers end up paying for it anyway. it kills small Business. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Benjansss Posted February 11, 2015 Report Share Posted February 11, 2015 I don't get why they just don't automatically let in fish that stictley can't susvive under 20 degrees or something like that Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Adrienne Posted February 11, 2015 Report Share Posted February 11, 2015 The discussion above is nothing to do with what fish they let in. It is to do with the proposed MPI price structuring and whether or not the FNZAS is going to put a submission in against/or supporting the proposal. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ira Posted February 11, 2015 Report Share Posted February 11, 2015 yes 100% agree. So why should we accept that as tax payers? Because tourists pay taxes and bring in significantly more money than they cost? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Benjansss Posted February 11, 2015 Report Share Posted February 11, 2015 I know that I was just asking because it's being mentioned that importers can't bring in new fish Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
reef Posted February 11, 2015 Author Report Share Posted February 11, 2015 because it's being mentioned that importers can't bring in new fish That was mentioned as it can be used in a submission to show the point to MPI that the hobby can't grow and it is capped, so any prices increases will cause prices to rise to a point that it will stagnate the hobby further. Already fish prices are the highest in the world and any further price increases will make it ridiculously high. Prices in NZ are high due to the small market/quarantine period and the fees we have to pay to MPI. When doing these submissions you need look at the whole picture and future as many just look at tunnel vision and don't take into account the long term damage. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
camtang Posted February 11, 2015 Report Share Posted February 11, 2015 So finally I have established that tourists have nothing to do with fish importation. Prices in NZ are high due to the small market/quarantine period and the fees we have to pay to MPI. And the fact we are so far away from everything, so freight it not cheap. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
reef Posted February 11, 2015 Author Report Share Posted February 11, 2015 So finally I have established that tourists have nothing to do with fish importation it does in a about way. as the costs to run biosecurity in new zealand is not spread evenly. commercial operators get charged more which gets passed on to the end users. To offset some of the prices rises, they could charge Tourist for biosecurity and leave the current importing fees the same. Most small thinking importers/hobbyist don't care that prices are going up, but they don't see the big picture that prices increases stops the hobby from growing as it is becoming so expensive. Its a big chain reaction. higher prices means less fish are sold, means less importers will invest in facilities, means less dry goods are imported, means less shops hold stock, etc, etc. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
livingart Posted February 11, 2015 Report Share Posted February 11, 2015 Yes I can see where it is a big extra cost to boutique importers which could make the business less viable Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Colour_genes Posted February 11, 2015 Report Share Posted February 11, 2015 I think in this instance, the tourists are actually the equivalent of the fish, ie biosecurity are inspecting them to make sure they don't have carry any heinous diseases, have bad personal habits (like murder, drug smuggling, or destroying habitat for instance) or nasty baggage, before they are allowed to come into the country. It is the tourism companies, and every single person in NZ that benefits in some way from the 'importation' of 'sanitised' tourists that should be paying the biosecurity fees for inspecting them, and indeed they/we do, via our taxes. This surely includes anyone who works in the hospo industry, accommodation providers, bus companies, shops & all manner of people in all sorts of ways, so taxes are the best means to deal with that. But the only people to really benefit from the importation of fish, are the retailers & purchasers of those fish, so the retailers pay the costs & then pass most of the cost onto the purchasers. Simple really, imho Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
reef Posted February 11, 2015 Author Report Share Posted February 11, 2015 I think in this instance, the tourists are actually the equivalent of the fish, ie biosecurity are inspecting them to make sure they don't have carry any heinous diseases, have bad personal habits (like murder, drug smuggling, or destroying habitat for instance) or nasty baggage, before they are allowed to come into the country. That is well put. But the only people to really benefit from the importation of fish, are the retailers & purchasers of those fish, so the retailers pay the costs & then pass most of the cost onto the purchasers. Yes, but govt benefits as it gets taxes from staff that the shops hire, it gets jobs for MPI staff, who also pay tax. shipping companies/couriers etc, there is a whole raft of industries that benefit from small boutique importers, and lets face it nz Business is made up of small companies, about 70% or more. so at the end of the day all small business's will get shafted from high MPI fees. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
reef Posted February 12, 2015 Author Report Share Posted February 12, 2015 alanmin4304 wrote your figures are not the same as ours. Looking forward to the correct fiqures Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Adrienne Posted February 12, 2015 Report Share Posted February 12, 2015 It is not good to alienate the people who will make the decision It was good to see your figures, now we need to see why ours differ so much. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
reef Posted February 13, 2015 Author Report Share Posted February 13, 2015 7 days to go before Submissions close. Hope there are many submissions. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
reef Posted February 13, 2015 Author Report Share Posted February 13, 2015 6 days to go to close date. alanmin4304 hows the figures coming on? need to check them to make sure we are on the right track. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts