10% VAT tax added to all "free at sea drinks" on NCL while in Med?

[insidecabin]

1 hour ago, DCGuy64 said:

Exactly. All of the major lines charge more for their beverage package than NCL. Even when you compare the cost of Sail Away cabins to ones with FAS, the difference is minimal. NCL's UBP is a bargain. (MSC offers a great product and their beverage package is good, too)

 

🏆 Excellent post. That article is disgraceful in how misleading it is.

 

Nobody with any sense buys the MSC package they use the discounted offer when booking.

 

Just like no one smart pays for the NCL drinks package($100+pppd) they use the free at sea.

 

And noo e pays the Princess drinks package they take the Princess plus package

[DCGuy64]

12 minutes ago, fabnfortysomething said:

there has been a lot of posts this year that NCl are passing back costs to customer re taxes that are being misleadingly reported as due to local regulations then thanks to cruisecritic as being false

In USA its pretty standard for in port taxes to be applied with no complaints

when they try it in europe there are plenty of complaints as other cruise companies dont chatg the same! 

I don't see how anyone could say it's misleading since the levying of applicable VAT is actually in the Terms and Conditions everyone accepts. Other cruise lines apparently absorb the cost of VAT and simply charge customers a higher price for their beverage packages. This reminds me of the lady who complained that NCL only gives a measly $50 discount on excursions with FAS but "Viking includes all excursions at no extra cost." Yeah, and when you're paying $12,000 a person for a cruise on Viking vs $2,000 on NCL, obviously it's included.

[graphicguy]

30 minutes ago, DCGuy64 said:

I don't see how anyone could say it's misleading since the levying of applicable VAT is actually in the Terms and Conditions everyone accepts. Other cruise lines apparently absorb the cost of VAT and simply charge customers a higher price for their beverage packages. This reminds me of the lady who complained that NCL only gives a measly $50 discount on excursions with FAS but "Viking includes all excursions at no extra cost." Yeah, and when you're paying $12,000 a person for a cruise on Viking vs $2,000 on NCL, obviously it's included.

Reminds me a whole lot of a couple of years ago when people were complaining that they didn't want the "freebies" on a cruise with the "all inclusive" with Celebrity.  Then, others complained that they were paying more when they wanted the "free" perks added to their cruise.

 

Same thing here.  NCL is showing what they're being charged and why for the VAT in Spain.  While some other cruise lines are just charging a higher rate.

 

Either way, the beef should be with Spanish ports.  It's misplaced putting it with the cruise lines when they are just implementing the charges Spain is requiring. 

 

The whole "we're in Europe....you're not allowed to put charges in different line items".  OK, then go ahead and pay the higher rate and keep the VAT hidden instead.

 

 

[dan2097]

On 9/22/2023 at 6:49 PM, njhorseman said:

Yes, I'm aware that it's a British publication and I know that the laws are different there.

 

I'm also aware of the reputation of the British tabloid press...and this publication was a tabloid when it ceased putting out a print edition and continues to be considered a tabloid today. 

 

I'm also aware of the Spanish VAT...there's a thread about it posted here seemingly every 15 minutes.

 

The headline is exactly what I am reacting to. It's classic British tabloid clickbait .

 

Oh, the nerve of another sovereign nation to apply a tax to English citizens!! I guess it's easier to blame it on the cruise line, which is not imposing the tax but merely collecting it on behalf of the Spanish government than to blame it on Spain.

The Independent isn't a tabloid and the headline is correct for almost the entire world. In practically all countries other than Canada/United States prices are VAT inclusive unless explicitly stated otherwise.

 

Given that NCL cannot offer a free at sea service in Spanish waters, the ethical thing would be easier to increase the price of Free at Sea in applicable itineraries, or to make customers aware of this at the earliest opportunity, including when buying the package.

 

While the underlying issue is clearly Spanish regulations, the customers are dealing with NCL not the Spanish government, and NCL are failing to be transparent that they cannot deliver what they're selling.

 

Edited September 24, 2023 by dan2097

[Capitan Obvious]

8 minutes ago, dan2097 said:

In practically all countries other than Canada/United States prices are VAT inclusive unless explicitly stated otherwise.

 

When you overly "hedge" your argument, it simply raised red flags as to its accuracy. You want to paint the "all countries" picture, but when you hedge it with "practically", "other than", and "unless...otherwise" your point loses all substance.

 

8 minutes ago, dan2097 said:

Given that NCL cannot offer a free at sea service in Spanish waters, the ethical thing would be easier to increase the price of Free at Sea in applicable itineraries, or to make customers aware of this at the earliest opportunity, including when buying the package.

 

But NCL actually CAN offer the service. Not their fault when a governmental authority imposes a tax. But tax or no, the service IS still available to the guest.

 

You suggest they should increase the price of the Free at Sea. By how much exactly? Isn't having each guest pay their fair share of the VAT the simplest and fairest answer? If not, what do you propose that would be more fair to the guests?

 

The fact that a VAT can be imposed, along with the fact that the guest is responsible for its payment, is noted TWICE in the T&G of the Free at Sea packages. The guest agrees to those terms at the time of purchase. So isn't NCL already making their customers "aware of this at the earliest opportunity, including when buying the package"? If the customer doesn't read the published T&Cs is that NCL's fault or does the customer have any responsibility at all?

[dan2097]

2 minutes ago, Capitan Obvious said:

 

When you overly "hedge" your argument, it simply raised red flags as to its accuracy. You want to paint the "all countries" picture, but when you hedge it with "practically", "other than", and "unless...otherwise" your point loses all substance.

 

If I didn't hedge my argument then even a practically irrelevant counter-example like a microstate could be given. For developed countries https://travel.stackexchange.com/questions/34577/in-which-developed-countries-other-than-the-us-does-the-price-tag-not-usually

backs up my point. Japan switched back to requiring prices inclusive of VAT to be shown in April 2021.

2 minutes ago, Capitan Obvious said:

 

But NCL actually CAN offer the service. Not their fault when a governmental authority imposes a tax. But tax or no, the service IS still available to the guest.

 

You suggest they should increase the price of the Free at Sea. By how much exactly? Isn't having each guest pay their fair share of the VAT the simplest and fairest answer? If not, what do you propose that would be more fair to the guests?

 

These arguments are essentially a microcosm of the decisions that NCL have had to make when pricing an unlimited drinks package in the first place. If all guests actually fully used this it wouldn't be viable. NCL will have stats as to how much drinks are on average consumed at each location, and hence would be able to estimate how many drinks are likely to be consumed and hence what the expected mean VAT bill will come to. An unlimited drinks package is inherently incompatible with a "fair" distribution of costs, people who drink more are subsidised by those who drink less.

 

I don't disagree that it's fairer for guest to pay their own VAT, but that's also true of drinks in general.

 

2 minutes ago, Capitan Obvious said:

 

The fact that a VAT can be imposed, along with the fact that the guest is responsible for its payment, is noted TWICE in the T&G of the Free at Sea packages. The guest agrees to those terms at the time of purchase. So isn't NCL already making their customers "aware of this at the earliest opportunity, including when buying the package"? If the customer doesn't read the published T&Cs is that NCL's fault or does the customer have any responsibility at all?

This comes down to the level of consumer protection in different countries. In the UK you can't pitch one thing then have this contradicted in the small print of the T&Cs. Given that some descriptions of the package do elude to this potential charge e.g. https://www.ncl.com/sites/default/files/790164-BEV_Package_Flyer_UOBP_PPBP Update_V7_no_crops.pdf  but some do not e.g. https://www.ncl.com/sites/default/files/UK_Consumer_FAS+.pdf  I have no idea whether it would be enforceable if contested.

 

[insidecabin]

Let's see what happens on Oceania and Regent the same NCLH stable.

 

The main UK  AI brand operating in the med Marella does not pass on any local tax.

 

The early reports of the Spanish tax go back to 2010.

 

Here is a thread from RCI 2010

 

Oceania 2014

 

And the Spain port 2017

 

https://boards.cruisecritic.co.uk/topic/2411221-im-confused-about-the-spanish-tax-for-cruises/

 

 

[njhorseman]

4 hours ago, dan2097 said:

The Independent isn't a tabloid

According to what I've read The Independent became a tabloid in 2003, and ceased publishing  a print edition altogether in 2016.

 

Being a tabloid has nothing to do with whether you agree or disagree with what they've published, it's defined by the format of a print edition coupled with the typical sensationalistic journalism style of the publication.

 

The headline is clearly classic tabloid style clickbait.

 

4 hours ago, dan2097 said:

 

Given that NCL cannot offer a free at sea service in Spanish waters, the ethical thing would be easier to increase the price of Free at Sea in applicable itineraries, or to make customers aware of this at the earliest opportunity, including when buying the package.

 

No, the fair approach is to impose the tax only on those who purchase goods and services subject to the tax, not everyone. If I don't consume a taxable beverage why should I have to pay for it?

4 hours ago, dan2097 said:

While the underlying issue is clearly Spanish regulations, the customers are dealing with NCL not the Spanish government, and NCL are failing to be transparent that they cannot deliver what they're selling.

I can agree with the idea of NCL including a notice in the Terms and Conditions similar to "Certain governments may require us to collect a sales or Value Added Tax on some onboard purchases.".

 

What I don't agree with is the notion some posters seem to promote that NCL is somehow defrauding the passengers by collecting a government-imposed tax.

 

 

Edited September 24, 2023 by njhorseman

[dan2097]

19 minutes ago, njhorseman said:

According to what I've read The Independent became a tabloid in 2003, and ceased publishing  a print edition altogether in 2016.

 

Being a tabloid has nothing to do with whether you agree or disagree with what they've published, it's defined by the format of a print edition coupled with the typical sensationalistic journalism style of the publication.

 

The headline is clearly classic tabloid style clickbait.

While historically newspapers in tabloid format were associated with the style of journalism, more recently traditional newspapers have also switched to the tabloid format due to its convenience e.g. The Times.

Given the title includes the explicit qualification that it's only in Spanish waters I still don't think it's that click baity.

 

19 minutes ago, njhorseman said:

No, the fair approach is to impose the tax only on those who purchase goods and services subject to the tax, not everyone. If I don't consume a taxable beverage why should I have to pay for it?

That would fall under my second suggestion of making the guest explicitly aware of it when they're deciding their package, as opposed to potentially only when they see it in their daily patter.

 

19 minutes ago, njhorseman said:

What I don't agree with is the notion some posters seem to promote that NCL is somehow defrauding the passengers by collecting a government-imposed tax.

My only uncertainty is whether when a beverage package is purchased from European sales whether the pricing of the beverage package includes VAT, as generally you don't pay VAT twice on the same product (you could argue the drinks package and drinks are separate, although that's usually the business' problem rather than the consumers). My understanding is that in the US/Canada the beverage package doesn't include sales tax, so it's more clear cut that VAT would be applicable in places that charge it.

 

 

 

[DrUrsula]

15 hours ago, Finally solo cruiser said:

Hey fordpickup,

Just curious, what ever happened with your real time bidding?  I sail on the Jewel on Oct 3 and have gotten the email.  How long was your bidding period?

 

On 9/13/2023 at 5:26 PM, PATRLR said:

Just curious, when are you going?  We've got a med cruise booked in July 2024, round-trip Barcelona.  We've not received any such communication

We are sailing Sunday and haven't received one.  It also is no big deal as we will be off the ship in Bilbao. Even if ON the ship drinking before we get 12 miles out- 3 drinks at $15 value each is $4.50 with the 10% vat. Not a huge issue for me.

[graphicguy]

Bottom line….some are angry that there’s a VAT being charged by Spain.  They don’t want to see it.  They’d rather it be hidden from them.  (J/K)!

[cruiseny4life]

15 minutes ago, graphicguy said:

Bottom line….some are angry that there’s a VAT being charged by Spain.  They don’t want to see it.  They’d rather it be hidden from them.  (J/K)!

You're not really joking. I'd rather it just be included in the upfront cost. I'm not going to spend time moaning about it. If I have to be prepared to review the statement (to ensure NCL doesn't F it up), then I'd like to know whether it will, or will not be added to my bill. If they would just include (whatever their accounting team figures the fee to be) in the fare, I'd be happier. And yes, I'd prefer this method even if it means a slightly higher fare due to heavier drinkers. 

 

Bottom line - NCL could (if they wanted to) tell us to expect the fees in the specific ports it applies to each sailing. I doubt VAT laws/regulations change so often that it would be cumbersome. But NCL, being NCL won't provide all applicable information to guests. They'll just throw out vague statements that protect them. The money ain't the problem. VAT or not, I'll be getting my drinks. 

[durberville]

10 minutes ago, cruiseny4life said:

Bottom line - NCL could (if they wanted to) tell us to expect the fees in the specific ports it applies to each sailing. I doubt VAT laws/regulations change so often that it would be cumbersome. But NCL, being NCL won't provide all applicable information to guests. They'll just throw out vague statements that protect them. The money ain't the problem. VAT or not, I'll be getting my drinks. 

Totally agree with this. Port specific VAT tax info would be helpful. (This issue isn’t unique to Spain - we are cruising Alaska from Seattle and I’m still unclear about additional taxes 🤷‍♀️)

[graphicguy]

I get it.

 

Some want to see the VAT as a line item (me included) and some don't and want it rolled into the cost of their drinks while in those ports.  I think it's a catch-22.  I want the transparency.  I don't think there's a "correct" way to do it, however.  Someone, somewhere is going to be upset regardless of which way they do it.

 

Alaska cruises...Seattle charges drink taxes while in port until you get out to sea (not sure how far out the ship has to be).

[DCGuy64]

12 minutes ago, graphicguy said:

I get it.

 

Some want to see the VAT as a line item (me included) and some don't and want it rolled into the cost of their drinks while in those ports.  I think it's a catch-22.  I want the transparency.  I don't think there's a "correct" way to do it, however.  Someone, somewhere is going to be upset regardless of which way they do it.

 

Alaska cruises...Seattle charges drink taxes while in port until you get out to sea (not sure how far out the ship has to be).

Exactly my view, too. Every cruise line is in essentially the same business, which is travel and leisure. Getting the right fit can be tricky, because every change made to placate one segment of the industry will inevitably p*** off the other. Let's say NCL decides to build the cost of VAT into the price of every cabin, just so it doesn't do the proverbial nickel and diming. Well then the non-drinkers will be in an uproar over having to pay something they don't plan to consume. But if it's pay-as-you-go, you have the contingent who wants it to be included. 🤷‍♂️Classic no-win situation, i.e. you can't please all of the people all of the time. I have ZERO problem with NCL collecting a sales tax it is forced to. A $15 drink with a $3.00 tax costs the same as an $18 drink that's "tax-free." And I doubt I'm alone in this regard.

[CambsCruiser82]

Can someone help me out here as I’m getting confused. I have a cruise in November that starts in Barcelona and only visits EU ports. Will I be charged the 10% vat on all drinks for the entire cruise or just the days in Spanish waters?

[DCGuy64]

17 minutes ago, CambsCruiser82 said:

Can someone help me out here as I’m getting confused. I have a cruise in November that starts in Barcelona and only visits EU ports. Will I be charged the 10% vat on all drinks for the entire cruise or just the days in Spanish waters?

Hard to say. We now have a report of someone cruising in the Med who's NOT going to any Spanish ports and is still being charged VAT (see below). It's looking likely that you will be. What countries are you visiting?

 

Edited September 27, 2023 by DCGuy64
added link to other CC thread

[steamboats]

Usually with a cruise starting out of a Spanish port and with EU ports only the VAT applies for the whole cruise and not just within the Spanish ports.

 

Just to get some facts straight:

- it´s no Spanish tax but an EU tax and it applies for all EU countries (it´s just the rate which is up to the country - 10% reduced rate in Spain and 21% regular rate - you pay that extra in all shops onboard), it´s just that Spain enforced this. But I also had notes that the Italian VAT will be added to any purchase.

- all other cruise lines do have to pay that tax too... All more European based lines (MSC, Costa, AIDA TUI Cruise) do include the tax in the price of the drink, while the US based lines (NCL, RCI, Celebrity...) add it to the price of the drink - that´s just how it is handled usually in those areas of the world. We all pay a VAT in Europe but our laws require it to be included in the price on the price tag.

- it´s just NCL which is charging the 10% to every single drink of a package... RCI/Celebrity don´t do that. And I´d say that this (RCI/Celebrity) it totally correct regarding the tax laws. The VAT applies to the price of the package. That´s what the passenger has purchased. When you buy the package online you usually buy it outside of the EU (so maybe Maimi). Therefore the tax law of the country of purchase comes in (which would be US). That should be the same for an included package or Free at Sea package. You pay the package (included) with the cruise fare or you buy the Free at Sea package (and when you buy it with the cruise you didn´t buy it within the EU).

 

So it´s only NCL interpreting the EU tax laws like this - meaning they have to add the 10% to each drink which is ordered with a package.

 

steamboats

[greg2014]

We also booked cruise on Prima (1st Nov 2023, Barcelona to Rome) with ports of call in Spain, France and Italy. Question if they will charge 10% Spanish VAT only in Spain ports/waters or during entire cruise (including f.e. Italian ports).  

[RD64]

 nO point in getting all twisted about this people. You will have to pay the VAT or you won’t. No doubt - by the sounds of it - it doesn’t apply to every cruise - or for the duration of every cruise.

 

If the VAT is such a deal breaker for you then 1. Cancel and stay home 2. Don’t drink during those specific ports 3. Don’t drink at all - lots of options.

 

For anyone that has been to Europe before take a look at your receipts while in Europe - you are always paying VAT, and may be eligible to get the VAT back.

 

In Italy it is called IVA - it is included in the final price and it always shows up on the receipt. Different countries have different percentages. Different stores process the VAT differently. Gucci in Italy refund processed at airport - Longchamp,Goyard, and LV as well. El Corte Anglais in Madrid and Barcelona processed in store.

[BunnyHutt]

On 9/28/2023 at 1:52 AM, steamboats said:

When you buy the package online you usually buy it outside of the EU (so maybe Maimi). Therefore the tax law of the country of purchase comes in (which would be US). That should be the same for an included package or Free at Sea package. 

 

I disagree. 
 

Example, purchases of goods in the US are subject to where they are being consumed/received by the end user. If you’re buying a bottle of wine *at* a winery in California while on vacation from Ohio, you’re going to pay CA sales tax. Now let’s say you’re making an online purchase *from* the same winery (let’s also make the general statement that the winery has nexus in all states mentioned in this example). You enjoyed that bottle of wine so much that you want some shipped to you once you get home to Ohio. You will pay OH sales tax. Let’s also say you want a bottle shipped to your sibling in Missouri so they can also enjoy it. You will pay MO sales tax on that purchase. All from a vendor located in CA. 
 

Any drink package is simply a prepay of future receipt/consumption. If any state or country dictates that the specific value of goods consumed *in* that particular location, then that’s what you’re going to be charged. 

[steamboats]

4 hours ago, BunnyHutt said:

I disagree. 
 

Example, purchases of goods in the US are subject to where they are being consumed/received by the end user. If you’re buying a bottle of wine *at* a winery in California while on vacation from Ohio, you’re going to pay CA sales tax. Now let’s say you’re making an online purchase *from* the same winery (let’s also make the general statement that the winery has nexus in all states mentioned in this example). You enjoyed that bottle of wine so much that you want some shipped to you once you get home to Ohio. You will pay OH sales tax. Let’s also say you want a bottle shipped to your sibling in Missouri so they can also enjoy it. You will pay MO sales tax on that purchase. All from a vendor located in CA. 
 

Any drink package is simply a prepay of future receipt/consumption. If any state or country dictates that the specific value of goods consumed *in* that particular location, then that’s what you’re going to be charged. 

 

But this is an EU VAT and not a US tax... And I was talking about how the VAT is handled in Europe. Your sales tax is handled different that EU VAT. When it comes to the EU VAT the purchase is the purchase of the package which is sold via Miami. So EU is not interested in this. By the time you consume a specific drink you are in EU but the price of the drink is 0 as you don´t pay anything when you consume the drink (you have prepaid the package) and 10% of 0 is still 0. At the moment of consumption you don´t buy anything as you have prepaid your drinks by buying the package.

 

BTW, when you buy a package onboard an RCI ship in Barcelona when embarking you have to pay the 10% VAT on the price of the package. With RCI/Celebrity you don´t pay any VAT on a single drink when you have a package (of course you pay when you don´t have a package). So the way NCL is handling this VAT you could be taxed twice - for buying the package onboard and for every single drink you order.

 

steamboats

[steamboats]

@BunnyHutt in Europe we tax at the time of purchase and the tax rate is the one of the seller. So when I buy something in Spain online I do pay the Spanish VAT rate (which is 21%, reduced 10%) although I live in Germany (where the rate is 19%, reduced 7%). But the price tag does include the VAT by law. So the rate doesn't matter me. I may see it on the invoice that I paid 20% VAT but the price is still 49 Euro as written on the price tag.

 

steamboats 

[Capitan Obvious]

6 hours ago, steamboats said:

But the price tag does include the VAT by law. So the rate doesn't matter me. I may see it on the invoice that I paid 20% VAT but the price is still 49 Euro as written on the price tag.

 

Any tax is always a government's confiscation of your money. No matter what snake oil pitch is used, it is always the taking of your money. One thing that governments take advantage of is the general public's lack of math skills. (There are people out there who actually think 5 is different than 4+1 or 3+2).

 

For the government, nothing is better than their being able to take from you without you getting upset about it. It is to their advantage (advantage over you, btw) to hide as much information as they can. Their goal is to lull you into the "so the rate doesn't matter to me" mindset.

 

You think because the tax is "included" in the price that it is somehow different, but a price of 5 including tax is no different than a price of 3.5 plus a tax of 1.5. 

 

You might be thinking "the price is still 49 Euro as written on the price tag", but the real truth is that the actual price is 40.83 Euro. They get 49 by adding on the 20% tax of 8.17 Euro to get to 49.

[BunnyHutt]

9 hours ago, steamboats said:

 

But this is an EU VAT and not a US tax... And I was talking about how the VAT is handled in Europe. Your sales tax is handled different that EU VAT. When it comes to the EU VAT the purchase is the purchase of the package which is sold via Miami. So EU is not interested in this. By the time you consume a specific drink you are in EU but the price of the drink is 0 as you don´t pay anything when you consume the drink (you have prepaid the package) and 10% of 0 is still 0. At the moment of consumption you don´t buy anything as you have prepaid your drinks by buying the package.

 

BTW, when you buy a package onboard an RCI ship in Barcelona when embarking you have to pay the 10% VAT on the price of the package. With RCI/Celebrity you don´t pay any VAT on a single drink when you have a package (of course you pay when you don´t have a package). So the way NCL is handling this VAT you could be taxed twice - for buying the package onboard and for every single drink you order.

 

steamboats

I appreciate your insight, truly. However, your argument seems to want things to work both ways… end result being whatever is in your favor. You state that EU VAT is levied on point of purchase *within the EU* and therefore your purchase made in the US shouldn’t be subject to VAT. However, US tax law is based on point of destination so therefore you should still be charged VAT. Not to mention the economic impact of local European economies if imports were not subject to VAT. Any idea of “fair trade” flies out the window. As a side note, purchase point is only applicable for goods consumed within the EU… my online (or onsite) purchase from an EU country are not subject to VAT if I take/consume them in the US. But for on-site purchases the onus is on me to claim the refund at point of export. 
 

Regarding other lines not charging the customer VAT, that is simply not true. You just don’t like seeing it as a separate line item and that is your preference. I can guarantee you that companies are not absorbing this expense (which they are still required, by law, to file and pay) out of the goodness of their heart. It’s baked in somewhere - either in the cost of the cruise, the cost of the package or the cost of the drink. I personally appreciate the transparency offered by NCL and can control my own cost exposure versus paying some trumped up number.
 

And it’s still laughable to me that people who pay thousands of dollars for a vacation are crying over a $100 tax bill. But if that truly is going to be a sticking point, use your power as a consumer and spend your monies elsewhere. That just opens up more availability for those like me. 🙂

Edited October 1, 2023 by BunnyHutt