Vintage instrument confiscated

Reinhard

http://www.google.com/hostednews/afp/article/ALeqM5jbiIkwfFZ0bfffw7Pn3HizGt4Jhg?docId=CNG.44b52072497865d431ab1cc8aa521caa.2e1

Read about this on another forum. Joe Bonamassa happened to post that he doesn't travel with vintage guitars anymore as he fears re-entering the USA with vintage gear(Lacey act?). There were fears of instruments like old 'Bursts being confiscated due to Brazillian rosewood fretboards etc. Strange world we live in.

singemonkey

This descent into idiocracy won't last long, I predict. Shocking though. I hope she's able to sue them.

It'd be like confiscating ivory artifacts from the British Museum - how stupid would you have to be.

Seventhson

Lots of stuff in america thats getting bad. But I shall not go there ?

Its silly. I mean if its made before the law was passed it shouldn't be taken away. Just silly.

singemonkey

This was Germany. Europeans can be morons too ?

Seventhson

singemonkey wrote This was Germany. Europeans can be morons too ?

Oh Dammit I always jump the gun when I hear things like this ? hahaha. my bad ?

Bob-Dubery

Not the Lacey Act. That applies to items moving across the borders of the USA.

Customs are getting more and more aggressive all over the place. I just got some documentation on forex from my bank (we're going to the UK and Spain next month). Usual stuff about annual limits blah blah. Then they made the point that any item you carry ou with you in excess of a certain value (I think 10k, but point is that there is such a limit) must be declared on the way out, otherwise when you return it may be deemed that you are importing said item, having bought it on your holidays, and duties may be payable, plus there may be fines because you did not declare and tried to circumvent the system.

In the case of vintange instruments it gets particularly tricky. In theory visiting orchestras to the USA could end up in a world of trouble as there are so many controlled woods involved. The wood of choice for bows for stringed instruments is prohibited by various acts. Presumably there are ways to get around this, but it has to happen in advance, you don't just arrive and say "hi! We're an orchestra."

I looked at buying a Lowden guitar some years ago. The dealer told me he would provide certification for any controlled woods on the instrument, proving that the the wood was harvested before whatever date was applied.

But 7thson, please note. That ploy only works in some cases, where dates are stipulated in the law. Telling the customs officials that the half kilo of smack you have with you was refined before the law being passed isn't going to make them change their minds.

Reinhard

X-rated Bob wrote Not the Lacey Act. That applies to items moving across the borders of the USA.

I was referring to Joe Bonamassa's touring from the USA. Like you said, Lacey act is an American thing.

kapepper

I have travelled a lot with gear, including vintage, between South Africa and Europe and never had a problem....

This is also a 1.5 million USD violin, only dont see how custom agents were suddenly focussed on a violin....

the sory is also a bit confusing

does she has to pay fees to import it?

Is it because of the wood?

Bob-Dubery

Reinhard wrote
X-rated Bob wrote Not the Lacey Act. That applies to items moving across the borders of the USA.
I was referring to Joe Bonamassa's touring from the USA. Like you said, Lacey act is an American thing.

OK. Apologies. But this isn't a local version of the Lacey act either. Under such laws the item just gets confiscated. Talk of duties and fines implies that the local customs authorities thought she was trying to import some expensive, dutiable item without declaring it.

Bob-Dubery

This report gives more details.

According to a press official at the airport in Germany and other sources, Horigome arrived from Tokyo last Thursday and tried to pass through a customs gate for tourists who have nothing to declare, as she usually does.

However, a customs official told her the violin, which was inside her bag, should be declared.

Horigome did not have a certificate proving she had paid import tax or documents verifying the history of her violin, so the instrument was confiscated.

The press official said the violin was taken to ensure Belgium-based Horigome paid the tax. The official also said it was seized as evidence since there was the possibility of tax evasion.

The office is still processing the case.

Horigome was reportedly asked to pay 190,000 euros (about 19 million yen) in tax, 19 percent of the 1 million euros the office valued her violin at.

According to the press official, it is possible the violin will be regarded as a tool of her livelihood and therefore no tax will have to be paid.

singemonkey

X-rated Bob wrote According to the press official, it is possible the violin will be regarded as a tool of her livelihood and therefore no tax will have to be paid.

[/quote]

Is that their way of saying, "We've f&^#d up and totally embarrassed ourselves but we won't admit it?" Really shameful that laws designed to target illegal importing could be turned on a concert musician. Most of these people are not rich, and these extremely expensive instruments represent a huge investment in their work.

Bob-Dubery

singemonkey wrote Is that their way of saying, "We've f&^#d up and totally embarrassed ourselves but we won't admit it?" Really shameful that laws designed to target illegal importing could be turned on a concert musician. Most of these people are not rich, and these extremely expensive instruments represent a huge investment in their work.

I don't think it's that at all.

Picture this happening in real time. Some customs official sees a lady walking through the "nothing to declare" entry. He pulls her over for a random check and finds a violin inside another bag.

So they ask her to take a seat and they try to get a value on the violin. Wow! It's expensive! Does she have any paperwork for the violin to show that she's previously imported it an paid duties, or that she took it out the country with her and declared it on the way out?

She doesn't.

So now they have to act on the basis that she was returning to the country with an item of great value, for which she has no paperwork to show that she previously owned it.

The guys are doing their job. The law may be an ass, but the officials are doing their job, and they're giving her a chance to prove that she's a pro musician (you can't expect customs officials to be intimately familiar with the world of classical music) and to prove that it's a tool of her trade (which will probably require affidavits, witness testimony, a receipt for the instrument or something else to show that she owned it before departure).

They're not morons, they didn't f### up (she did, by not getting proper paperwork for an extremely valuable instrument). They're just doing their job.

aja

If you owned such a violin and it was stolen, would you not want the officials at all airports to check up on the various instruments that make their way through the gates, even if it meant inconveniencing the odd musician during their travels? And if you were carrying such a valuable instrument, would you not have it insured - meaning you would have had appraisals done along with some extensive paperwork that you would carry with you?

I think the musician is responsible for this. I agree with Bob

charleshaupt

Ridiculous...

deefstes

X-rated Bob wrote
singemonkey wrote Is that their way of saying, "We've f&^#d up and totally embarrassed ourselves but we won't admit it?" Really shameful that laws designed to target illegal importing could be turned on a concert musician. Most of these people are not rich, and these extremely expensive instruments represent a huge investment in their work.
I don't think it's that at all.

Picture this happening in real time. Some customs official sees a lady walking through the "nothing to declare" entry. He pulls her over for a random check and finds a violin inside another bag.

So they ask her to take a seat and they try to get a value on the violin. Wow! It's expensive! Does she have any paperwork for the violin to show that she's previously imported it an paid duties, or that she took it out the country with her and declared it on the way out?

She doesn't.

So now they have to act on the basis that she was returning to the country with an item of great value, for which she has no paperwork to show that she previously owned it.

The guys are doing their job. The law may be an ass, but the officials are doing their job, and they're giving her a chance to prove that she's a pro musician (you can't expect customs officials to be intimately familiar with the world of classical music) and to prove that it's a tool of her trade (which will probably require affidavits, witness testimony, a receipt for the instrument or something else to show that she owned it before departure).

They're not morons, they didn't f### up (she did, by not getting proper paperwork for an extremely valuable instrument). They're just doing their job.

I think Bob nailed it right here. Right on the money.

domhatch

i think it's always far too easy for us to just pass blame on to the law enforcers. i agree it's probably a little suspicious to sommer find a massively (and self-admittedly) valuable instrument in a traveller's bag, without said traveller's having any documentation to back up why she should be in possession thereof. but imagine the mission carrying around the documentation everywhere you go, being that musician?

two sides to every story. let's just hope it ends/ended well.
dh

Reinhard

I feel that same energy could rather be channeled into stopping drug smuggling and terrorism.

Bob-Dubery

Reinhard wrote I feel that same energy could rather be channeled into stopping drug smuggling and terrorism.

You think they're not? The customs officials are there to deal with anything suspicious that comes through customs. Ever watched that show on TV about Aussie customs officials at the airport? They just look for "suspicious" as well as carrying out random checks. The stuff they find ranges from narcotics through to rare birds (carefully packaged so they don't break their wings). All detected through basically the same controls.

I'm flying through Dubai next month. I know what's coming. When we get off the plane we will have to remove our shoes, and those get scanned separately before they are given back to us.

Don't worry.... they're not taking their eyes off of the security ball.

deefstes

Reinhard wrote I feel that same energy could rather be channeled into stopping drug smuggling and terrorism.

I think Germany is pretty good at stopping drug smuggling and terrorism. I don't see why they should not enforce customs procedures to act more decisively on drug smuggling and terrorism.

Bob-Dubery

domhatch wrotebut imagine the mission carrying around the documentation everywhere you go, being that musician?

I refer to the point I made earlier about the forex documentation I got from my bank. They specifically advised me to declare expensive items on the way out.

You might say that's a hassle. I say that in the long run it is going to save you a whole lot more time and hassle. Imagine if she were on her way to a gig and ran into this kind of situation.

Besides, how are the customs officials supposed to know that she's a musician? And if she is then so what? She could have left home with a cheap violin in that case, dumped it at the other end and tried to sneak in the expensive one. I'm not saying that she did do that, but it's a possibility.