Charge Back and Refunds

adamlotus75 · April 2016

Serious question - are the sales / donations taxed - I.e they have taken $112m but may have lost a lot of that in taxes?

CIG are not a registered charity so I'm guessing that a big chunk of that money went to the G.

Kefo · April 2016

adamlotus75 said:

Serious question - are the sales / donations taxed - I.e they have taken $112m but may have lost a lot of that in taxes?

CIG are not a registered charity so I'm guessing that a big chunk of that money went to the G.

Depends who you ask lol. People have been saying its a pledge/donation in which case I don't think they need to pay taxes on the amount. However if they are charging tax, they are charging VAT, then they should be reporting it as income in which case it would be taxed.

Im not sure what they are doing as they don't disclose financials but in my opinion I think something shady could be going on

Talonsin · April 2016

kemplartoast said:

Hey John,

Just a reminder - tomorrow is 4 weeks. http://forums.mmorpg.com/discussion/448002/remind-me-4-weeks-insider-info-how-deep-does-the-rabbit-hole-go

Post with your main...

What is it with people today?

Phaserlight · April 2016

Erillion said:

rodarin said:

Because that term is really not all that common

In my experience that is a VERY common term in project management ... in ANY field, not just video games.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Minimum_viable_product

Have fun

I have to agree with Erillion on this; "minimum viable product" is a very common term. That @rodarin thinks Chris has been talking to the developer of Ascent because they both used it recently is pretty funny, to me (although he may be right; strange world, and all).

Just because it's a common term doesn't mean it's a good thing Chris used it in this instance. It's a signal to me that things are really coming down to the wire and they are feeling pressure to get something out (anything!) that could be considered a "game" to an unbiased bystander, although plenty in this forum will tell you they feel they've gotten their money's worth already.

adamlotus75 · April 2016

Kefo said:

adamlotus75 said:

Serious question - are the sales / donations taxed - I.e they have taken $112m but may have lost a lot of that in taxes?

CIG are not a registered charity so I'm guessing that a big chunk of that money went to the G.

Depends who you ask lol. People have been saying its a pledge/donation in which case I don't think they need to pay taxes on the amount. However if they are charging tax, they are charging VAT, then they should be reporting it as income in which case it would be taxed.

Im not sure what they are doing as they don't disclose financials but in my opinion I think something shady could be going on

I was thinking of income tax - surely it's classed as taxable income / turnover?

kemplartoast · April 2016

Talonsin said:

kemplartoast said:

Hey John,

Just a reminder - tomorrow is 4 weeks. http://forums.mmorpg.com/discussion/448002/remind-me-4-weeks-insider-info-how-deep-does-the-rabbit-hole-go

Post with your main...

What is it with people today?

Sorry, I was not cool enough to have an account on this forum until now.

rodarin · April 2016

Phaserlight said:

Erillion said:

rodarin said:

Because that term is really not all that common

In my experience that is a VERY common term in project management ... in ANY field, not just video games.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Minimum_viable_product

Have fun

I have to agree with Erillion on this; "minimum viable product" is a very common term. That @rodarin thinks Chris has been talking to the developer of Ascent because they both used it recently is pretty funny, to me (although he may be right; strange world, and all).

Just because it's a common term doesn't mean it's a good thing Chris used it in this instance. It's a signal to me that things are really coming down to the wire and they are feeling pressure to get something out (anything!) that could be considered a "game" to an unbiased bystander, although plenty in this forum will tell you they feel they've gotten their money's worth already.

Well it may be common like some other colloquial phrases, but I doubt he has ever used it. Obviously the reason for that is he never thought it would come to this. But then again I doubt the white knights would use that phrase either. I suspect once they get a working persistent universe they will call it a day. Now that still doesnt mean its right around the corner. It also doesnt specifically say WHICH portion it will be. SQ 42? The MMO? I imagine most would assume the MMO portion. But who really knows, they talk about this thing likes it all the same thing. Which we all know that now it isnt.

Thats why I want to know what the alpha is, what it is an alpha of? To me its a generic space flyer sim. Test bed at best. It does nothing groundbreaking and is in fact more broken that working. If someone plopped this down and said (sight unseen) "this is Star Citizen', EVERYONE, especially the white knights would laugh it off the internet. Until of course they realized it REALLY was Star Citizen then the back peddling and excuse making would explode.

As fa as what I said, it would be a positive if he actually did have Jam helping him. It would have been good for him to have Derrik Smart helping him as well. Because, despite what all the 'citizens' want to think or believe that guy was TRYING to do this 10 or more years ago, and failed. He didnt have the budget obviously but he did put quite a bit into it. He certainly has as much 'knowledge' about it as anyone at CiG and I suspect Roberts would admit that as well. But all that gets lost because the guy has random fits of rage and makes some nonsensical ramblings. Still doesnt discount he knows what he is talking about most of the time. He just lets his personal feelings and conspiracy theories go crazy.

Burntvet · April 2016

I doubt CR ever mentioned "minimally viable product" when he was shilling his KS effort or promising people all kinds of stuff to sell more ships.

And never mind that this game is already a couple years past its supposed release date.

Adjuvant1 · April 2016

adamlotus75 said:

Kefo said:

adamlotus75 said:

Serious question - are the sales / donations taxed - I.e they have taken $112m but may have lost a lot of that in taxes?

CIG are not a registered charity so I'm guessing that a big chunk of that money went to the G.

Depends who you ask lol. People have been saying its a pledge/donation in which case I don't think they need to pay taxes on the amount. However if they are charging tax, they are charging VAT, then they should be reporting it as income in which case it would be taxed.

Im not sure what they are doing as they don't disclose financials but in my opinion I think something shady could be going on

I was thinking of income tax - surely it's classed as taxable income / turnover?

Alot of what they take in is deductible as business expense, CIG gets a load of international incentives, and funds are shuffled daily between 14 LLCs.

Deathenger · April 2016

kemplartoast said:

Hey John,

Just a reminder - tomorrow is 4 weeks. http://forums.mmorpg.com/discussion/448002/remind-me-4-weeks-insider-info-how-deep-does-the-rabbit-hole-go

Hey buddy you're right. Guess what! Chris Roberts just announced that they will not be releasing the game with all the stretch goals that were previously achieved thru the crowd funding campaign and ship sales.

Sounds like pretty big news to me. Kind of reinforces what people been saying all along!

kemplartoast · April 2016

Deathenger said:

kemplartoast said:

Hey John,

Just a reminder - tomorrow is 4 weeks. http://forums.mmorpg.com/discussion/448002/remind-me-4-weeks-insider-info-how-deep-does-the-rabbit-hole-go

Hey buddy you're right. Guess what! Chris Roberts just announced that they will not be releasing the game with all the stretch goals that were previously achieved thru the crowd funding campaign and ship sales.

Sounds like pretty big news to me. Kind of reinforces what people been saying all along!

He should have stuck to talking about that instead of making a bunch of wild, false predictions then.

laserit · April 2016

Kefo said:

adamlotus75 said:

Serious question - are the sales / donations taxed - I.e they have taken $112m but may have lost a lot of that in taxes?

CIG are not a registered charity so I'm guessing that a big chunk of that money went to the G.

Depends who you ask lol. People have been saying its a pledge/donation in which case I don't think they need to pay taxes on the amount. However if they are charging tax, they are charging VAT, then they should be reporting it as income in which case it would be taxed.

Im not sure what they are doing as they don't disclose financials but in my opinion I think something shady could be going on

You can rest assured.... If the Government is being ripped off they'll be right on it, they love their money.

They have to file and work within the rules and regulations. Deferrals and Write off's etc is what you pay the the CGA's the big bucks for. If the numbers don't balance and/or you get too aggressive with your write off's you can look forward to a nice government audit.

kabitoshin · April 2016

Damn my drunken random purchases, oh well been 3 years now, hell I'd probably buy more games that I wouldn't play anyways.

Tekro · April 2016

[mod edit] I was reading some of the comments here which made me have to go take a look and listen to the latest 10 for the chairman and where are you guys getting these absolutely CRAZY and far fetched ideas and notions and why are you spreading them like you have some gospel??!!? Ok he used the term 'minimal viable'.... WHAT IN THE WORLD are you guys doing?! Hanging on his scrotum?!?! Look regardless of the term being used in the industry, it is straight forward. NO company wants or hopes to release anything that is below what is considered the minimal playable or usable product. He is simply stating that once all the pieces come together in what 'they' consider a 'complete' passable version that their user base can use and enjoy wholistically.. Then at that point they 'may' release it as SC v1.0!!! Nothing more nothing less.. [mod edit] Now I can get off of that soapbox and go back to my leisurely reading and follow up on what's going on out there in gaming land.

Have a great evening all!!

Tek

Distopia · April 2016

Deathenger said:

kemplartoast said:

Hey John,

Just a reminder - tomorrow is 4 weeks. http://forums.mmorpg.com/discussion/448002/remind-me-4-weeks-insider-info-how-deep-does-the-rabbit-hole-go

Hey buddy you're right. Guess what! Chris Roberts just announced that they will not be releasing the game with all the stretch goals that were previously achieved thru the crowd funding campaign and ship sales.

Sounds like pretty big news to me. Kind of reinforces what people been saying all along!

That's all too convenient, it's also a bit premature to declare one self right on what people have been saying all along.. We don't even know what will be missing.

You guys have been hyping up an implosion more or less within CIG, not some stretch goals missing..

mr1602 · April 2016

The OP is correct in that technically (within the finance system) the money people were charged for Star Citizen cannot be considered a donation. The reason is that these people were charged VAT. It is illegal to charge VAT for 'donations'.

Distopia · April 2016

mr1602 said:

The OP is correct in that technically (within the finance system) the money people were charged for Star Citizen cannot be considered a donation. The reason is that these people were charged VAT. It is illegal to charge VAT for 'donations'.

Technically it seems it is still within the grounds of vat if that donation falls under "sponsorship". Which seems to be the legalese a crowdfunded product falls under (at least seems to fit best). As an entity under sponsorship is able to make taxable supply.

https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/vat-notice-70141-sponsorship/vat-notice-70141-sponsorship

1.2 What is sponsorship?

Sponsorship is a common feature of artistic, sporting, educational and charitable activities. However, it is not restricted to these areas and it can involve payment in the form of goods and services as well as money. The payments may also be described as something else, for example as a donation.

Am I making taxable supplies if I receive sponsorship?

Where you receive sponsorship or some other form of support you will normally be making taxable supplies if, in return, you are obliged to provide the sponsor with a significant benefit. Typically this might include any of the following:

naming an event after the sponsor
displaying the sponsor’s company logo or trading name
participating in the sponsors promotional or advertising activities
allowing the sponsor to use your name or logo
giving free or reduced price tickets
allowing access to special events such as premieres or gala evenings
providing entertainment or hospitality facilities
giving the sponsor exclusive or priority booking rights

This list is not exhaustive and there are many other situations in which your sponsor may be receiving tangible benefits. What matters is that the agreement or understanding you have with your sponsor requires you to do something in return.

mr1602 · April 2016

Last I checked, you cannot receive sponsorship and get a tax break. At least not in the UK.
Unless CIG really wants the tax department to investigate them, it cannot be a sponsorship nor a donation.

mr1602 · April 2016

Looking at this thread, I am surprized to see people telling others to 'not do a charge back'.
In essence, a charge back is a customer protection process and its objective is to protect the customer in situations exactly like this where the company is failing to meet its promise.

I would also like to dispel the notion that a charge back can hurt your credit rating. This cannot happen because a charge back is not actually a process done by the bank. The banks might act as a go-between Visa/MC/AMEX and get more information but the actual process is done by the credit card company.

Burntvet · April 2016

mr1602 said:

Looking at this thread, I am surprized to see people telling others to 'not do a charge back'.
In essence, a charge back is a customer protection process and its objective is to protect the customer in situations exactly like this where the company is failing to meet its promise.

I would also like to dispel the notion that a charge back can hurt your credit rating. This cannot happen because a charge back is not actually a process done by the bank. The banks might act as a go-between Visa/MC/AMEX and get more information but the actual process is done by the credit card company.

Well, the actual reality of it is this: doing TOO MANY chargebacks can affect your credit rating.

But, that number is more than a few, for several years in a row.

A charge back or two every year? No effect on your credit whatsoever.

And as I mentioned earlier in the thread, an incomplete or substandard product is one of the reasons explicitly stated in most/all CC cardholder agreements for doing a chargeback. Something into which SC clearly falls and further, will at launch (not having all the promised features in the final product that were advertised).

So, I encourage everyone that is dissatisfied with how SC is now, and the "minimal viable product" announcement from SC to chargeback as they are able.

It is fully legal to do so (in the US at least).

mr1602 · April 2016

Burntvet said:

mr1602 said:

Looking at this thread, I am surprized to see people telling others to 'not do a charge back'.
In essence, a charge back is a customer protection process and its objective is to protect the customer in situations exactly like this where the company is failing to meet its promise.

I would also like to dispel the notion that a charge back can hurt your credit rating. This cannot happen because a charge back is not actually a process done by the bank. The banks might act as a go-between Visa/MC/AMEX and get more information but the actual process is done by the credit card company.

Well, the actual reality of it is this: doing TOO MANY chargebacks can affect your credit rating.

But, that number is more than a few, for several years in a row.

A charge back or two every year? No effect on your credit whatsoever.

And as I mentioned earlier in the thread, an incomplete or substandard product is one of the reasons explicitly stated in most/all CC cardholder agreements for doing a chargeback. Something into which SC clearly falls and further, will at launch (not having all the promised features in the final product that were advertised).

So, I encourage everyone that is dissatisfied with how SC is now, and the "minimal viable product" announcement from SC to chargeback as they are able.

It is fully legal to do so (in the US at least).

This shows a lack of understanding of what a credit rating is.
A credit rating is the amount of 'risk' someone is willing to let you borrow money of.

I can charge back every transaction I've made. It won't hurt my 'credit rating' one bit.
Now, the credit card companies might decide to not do business with me but that's not because of my Credit Rating. What will happen is that the credit card company will not accept all of my charge back requests and deny some of the charge back requests. In that scenario, I owe the credit card company money and if I do not pay them back, THAT hurts my credit rating.
Hence it is the 'not pay them back' which hurts the credit rating, not the actual Charge Back.

As long as the credit card company accepts your reasoning of 'vendor failed to meet agreement', you can charge back as much as you like.

On a separate note, I can confirm VISA AND MC have put a 'fast track the charge backs' note on CIG.

Erillion · April 2016

mr1602 said:

On a separate note, I can confirm VISA AND MC have put a 'fast track the charge backs' note on CIG.

How did you confirm that ?

Have fun

Kefo · April 2016

Erillion said:

mr1602 said:

On a separate note, I can confirm VISA AND MC have put a 'fast track the charge backs' note on CIG.

How did you confirm that ?

Have fun

Probably by calling up Visa or MC and requesting a chargeback and the person who helped them said a little more then they should have. Hell maybe they or someone they know works for the company and can easily look to see what notes they have on CIG.

Not that it matters anyway because you will probably just post that you want to see proof and if for example they post a audio message of the conversation they had with a Visa rep you would probably say it was all staged anyway.

DKLond · April 2016

Hard fact as pure speculation again

Great stuff!

rpmcmurphy · April 2016

Oh stop being so bloody hyperbolic. You complain about other people talking shit while you do exactly the same thing.

The guy used the words probably and maybe, which makes the comment speculative. In no way can it be classed as 'hard facts', but then you clearly don't care about facts when you have an agenda to run.

Howdy, Stranger!

Charge Back and Refunds

Comments

https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/vat-notice-70141-sponsorship/vat-notice-70141-sponsorship

1.2 What is sponsorship?

Am I making taxable supplies if I receive sponsorship?

Howdy, Stranger!

Quick Links

Charge Back and Refunds

Comments

https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/vat-notice-70141-sponsorship/vat-notice-70141-sponsorship

1.2 What is sponsorship?

Am I making taxable supplies if I receive sponsorship?