Jump to content

Withholding taxes-non US Submitters-answering your questions


Recommended Posts

I too believe that making an option to opt out from sales to US buyers would prevent many submiters from taking down their portfolios. For a lot of people it's against morals to pay anything to the US. For example just think about counties in war with the USA in history or suffering some kind of millitary intervention from them. But you don't have to go that far..

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Replies 1.2k
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Top Posters In This Topic

Posted Images

Opt in/ opt out. It would be useful if you have big percentage of sales in USA. It would be handy if there were two columns in STATS, USA and the REST, so everyone can calculate if it is worth to.

Link to post
Share on other sites
I too believe that making an option to opt out from sales to US buyers would prevent many submiters from taking down their portfolios. For a lot of people it's against morals to pay anything to the US. For example just think about counties in war with the USA in history or suffering some kind of millitary intervention from them. But you don't have to go that far..

 

Let's be honest. The primary motive for disagreement here is not ideology, principles, morality or reluctance to pay anything to the US. If it was then they wouldn't be doing business with a US company in the first place because even before this news, SS made a profit and paid taxes on their profit which goes to the US government.

 

The second you do business with any foreign country, you directly or indirectly support their economy and that applied before this tax issue arose. Where were these ideals and principles then?

 

The real reason for the backlash now is the sudden thought of losing 30% from their personal income.

 

This situation shouldn't be used as an excuse to bash SS or insult the American people.

Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest Anonymous

I just recieved a very interesting email from SS support (specifically Michael Boring). As I've been banned on the forums I can't post questions here (didn't realise I can as a guest) I sent them a question, now totally unrelated to what I asked there was an interesting quote near the end:

 

"Shutterstock does not benifit at all from the tax. Furthermore, we have helped contributors tremendously by bearning the burden or past taxes"

 

Now it seems to me like this is a direct contradiction. If they have indeed paid previous taxes for us and are now laying this tax off on to us then that would suggest that this whole thing is nothing more than at attempt to rake in more money by SS...

 

So which is it shutterstock? Have you indeed paid these taxes for us in the past and is this nohting more than a profit increasing ploy or did I just get told a bit of a porky pie by an overzealous support guy that is trying to make your company out to be nicer than it is?

Link to post
Share on other sites

It's just not true what you're stating now.

My country has a 0/0 treaty with the USA (Netherlands).

but I refuse to give any personal info to the USA government out of principle and if I don't give personal info I'll loose 30% of my income and as a result from that, I directly support the american taxing system, which was never my intention to do so!

I don't live in America, I don't work in America and I don't get any benefits from supporting their tax system and at last not to speak about the american foreign policy.

 

And second: I never bashed or insulted american people personally and I'll never do!

 

Greetings

Devy

 

 

 

I too believe that making an option to opt out from sales to US buyers would prevent many submiters from taking down their portfolios. For a lot of people it's against morals to pay anything to the US. For example just think about counties in war with the USA in history or suffering some kind of millitary intervention from them. But you don't have to go that far..

 

Let's be honest. The primary motive for disagreement here is not ideology, principles, morality or reluctance to pay anything to the US. If it was then they wouldn't be doing business with a US company in the first place because even before this news, SS made a profit and paid taxes on their profit which goes to the US government.

 

The second you do business with any foreign country, you directly or indirectly support their economy and that applied before this tax issue arose. Where were these ideals and principles then?

 

The real reason for the backlash now is the sudden thought of losing 30% from their personal income.

 

This situation shouldn't be used as an excuse to bash SS or insult the American people.

Link to post
Share on other sites

It's almost impossible to follow up this thread.

 

My question: Are we going to be given a choice to opt in or out of selling to US buyers?

 

I personally feel we should, this is an international environment and it should be as fair for everyone as possible.

Link to post
Share on other sites

The trouble is that SS have never done this in the past and none of the other agencies have. Also it is safe to assume that this is no new law or tax or SS would have be using that to justify the move. It maybe a technical point of law that they do have to take this tax away from us but what seems very hard to believe is that a company the size of Shutterstock plus all the other stock agencies based in the US could and would get along for so long breaking a law that would net the IRS and incredible sum of money.

 

If it is the law then I find it very difficult to believe that for all these years, all the different agencies have been dodging huge amounts of taxes.

 

No, there's something fishy with the whole "it's the law" angle that SS administration are using. I think at some level we all feel this and I think this is why there is so much anger and frustration.[/

quote]

 

 

What other stock agencies are based in the US ?

I think most are based outside the US or have offices in other countries, so this law would not apply if you are using a Non US office.

All of SS's major competitors list contact details for Non US offices on their sites. It seem only SS didn't have this foresight!!!!!!!!!!!

Link to post
Share on other sites
It's almost impossible to follow up this thread.

 

My question: Are we going to be given a choice to opt in or out of selling to US buyers?

 

I personally feel we should, this is an international environment and it should be as fair for everyone as possible.

 

agree

Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest Anonymous

....

....

No, there's something fishy with the whole "it's the law" angle that SS administration are using. I think at some level we all feel this and I think this is why there is so much anger and frustration.

 

 

Personally I think these are perfect words to describe the situation.

I will not loose my time in burocracy, paper writing, attending offices, looking for certificates or authentications only for a 'foreign' country legislation. If no other solutions will be found so there will be 2 choices: give my 30% income or conclusively leave Shutterstock.

It's a pity, Shutterstock were and actually is one of the best microstock sites on the market: not so remunerative for submitters but clean, easy and cheap for buyers.

Please Admins, let this site grow up and do not permit a talent -not mine of course- exodus just for burocracy !

 

Thanks

vesilvio [banned]

Link to post
Share on other sites

True, but their billing/payment system is in the US eg DT. So don't be surprised.

 

The other agencies will soon follow to abide to law.

 

non-us, citizens... take your photos down off shutterstock. there are other agencies too, especially ones that deal better with problems like these (irs, taxes, etc.).

 

...

 

Not all Major agencies are based in the USA ;)

Link to post
Share on other sites

Tax law, probably in every country, is a real puzzle. For instance all of this problem has started because "US tax law imposes a 30% withholding tax on US source passive income, such as royalties,", but this site sels ROYALTY FREE LICENCE - is the law still applicable here?

And that "passive income".... hmmmm.... I don't think anybody can make any money here or on any other site simply by being passive. Making money in microstock is a hard work.

 

Thank you all fellow microstockers for providing all that information that you do. That will be a great help.

Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.

×
×
  • Create New...