Vintage instrument confiscated

Reinhard · 2012-08-26T19:34:14+00:00

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.

domhatch

X-rated Bob wrote
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.

don't get me wrong - i quite agree. but and however, it's just as possible for the documents to be forged. those poor law enforcement chaps have no end of a struggle these days.

glad i'm just li'l ol' me.
dh

Bob-Dubery

domhatch wrote
X-rated Bob wrote 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.
don't get me wrong - i quite agree. but and however, it's just as possible for the documents to be forged. those poor law enforcement chaps have no end of a struggle these days.

glad i'm just li'l ol' me.
dh

That's why you declare on the way out. Now you've presented the instrument to an official who have given you a document identifying the item and which serves as proof that you had the item on the way out. Now when you come back in
a) your copy of the document better match theirs
b) what you present better match the description on the invoice.

Sure, forgeries are possible (including putting a forged label in the violin you're trying to sneak into the country). All parties involved can only take reasonable precautions.

Reinhard

I think in the time they spent harassing the musician and burying themselves in paperwork a drug mule or 10 could have slipped through.

I suppose they are proud of "busting" the one violinist out of [insert some ridiculous amount here] who actually owns a very expensive instrument.

V8

X-rated Bob wrote 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.

Yip, my dad taught me the trick back in the 80's - when you know you are going to bring something back of value, take a similar (but much lower value) item on the way out use it to get a declaration, dump the cheap item and use the declaration on the way back in on your *new* item. This was before they bothered to note serial numbers? Perhaps a little more stringent these-a-days.

I've not had a problem travelling with instruments or computers & electronic gear - but I generally look like a backpacker so perhaps that is why. I'm told that Jozi is tightening up recently, so probably good to get back into the habit for your $$ items - I'm thinking that for travel insurance would help with a claim if you (unfortunately) had to make one.

Bob-Dubery

Reinhard wrote I think in the time they spent harassing the musician and burying themselves in paperwork a drug mule or 10 could have slipped through.

I suppose they are proud of "busting" the one violinist out of [insert some ridiculous amount here] who actually owns a very expensive instrument.

There's nothing to say that anybody was harassed or that she was recognised as a musician and thus singled out for a good buggering around.

When did you last travel internationally? At any airport there is a red corridor and a green corridor - green being "nothing to declare". There are nearly always officials in there who may, as is their right, pull somebody out at random.

Now in this case what we do know is that
a) she was moving through the "nothing to declare" channel
b) she had something that she should have declared
c) that something (the violin) was not on view but inside another bag.

This is not hassling somebody because that somebody is a musician, this is them doing their job. I really don't see what else they could or should have done. They couldn't have known ahead of time that she an expensive violin or, indeed, any kind of violin - because it was inside another bag and thus out of sight.

Reinhard

X-rated Bob wrote
Reinhard wrote I think in the time they spent harassing the musician and burying themselves in paperwork a drug mule or 10 could have slipped through.

I suppose they are proud of "busting" the one violinist out of [insert some ridiculous amount here] who actually owns a very expensive instrument.
There's nothing to say that anybody was harassed or that she was recognised as a musician and thus singled out for a good buggering around.

When did you last travel internationally? At any airport there is a red corridor and a green corridor - green being "nothing to declare". There are nearly always officials in there who may, as is their right, pull somebody out at random.

Now in this case what we do know is that
a) she was moving through the "nothing to declare" channel
b) she had something that she should have declared
c) that something (the violin) was not on view but inside another bag.

This is not hassling somebody because that somebody is a musician, this is them doing their job. I really don't see what else they could or should have done. They couldn't have known ahead of time that she an expensive violin or, indeed, any kind of violin - because it was inside another bag and thus out of sight.

Well she had nothing to declare, it was her instrument. She didn't buy it on her trip? You can argue she should have declared it leaving Belgium, but why declare it entering Germany?
She is based in Belgium, so why did German customs take it unto themselves to do such a thorough job, just because it is an EU country?
Also, them taking the instrument, determining it was worth something, then doing the paperwork could not have been a quick process by any stretch of the imagination. Meanwhile she is out of the "tool" she uses to earn a living. I hope she sues them for loss of income.

Bob-Dubery

Reinhard wrote Well she had nothing to declare, it was her instrument.

Unfortunately that doesn't amount to a row of beans. Ownership does not mean that you don't have to declare.

She didn't buy it on her trip? You can argue she should have declared it leaving Belgium, but why declare it entering Germany?
She is based in Belgium, so why did German customs take it unto themselves to do such a thorough job, just because it is an EU country?
Also, them taking the instrument, determining it was worth something, then doing the paperwork could not have been a quick process by any stretch of the imagination. Meanwhile she is out of the "tool" she uses to earn a living. I hope she sues them for loss of income.

You're guessing at the motivation. It's entirely plausible that she was pulled out for a random check and was found to have in her possession something she should have declared, and with no paperwork to prove when she'd bought it, how much she'd paid for it or if duties had previously been paid.

In fact the latter points are all true. We know these things. She did have the violin, she should have declared it, she didn't declare it and she had no paper work.

I'm sure it didn't take them a few minutes to establish what the instrument was worth. We know that the originally posted report didn't give the whole story, and it's quite possible the version I posted is more complete but still not down to every detail. Again it's likely that she was taken to some interview room asked some questions and then asked to wait whilst somebody got on the blower and called a museum or did some googling or something to try to get an idea of the value of the instrument.

I derive no pleasure froms this at all, but I really don't see, based on what we know, that there's any reason to conclude that it was harassment.

Loads of people get called over for all sorts of things at border posts every day. I myself was once caught with an "undesirable publication" on entering SA. I was given a receipt for it. If the laws were amended (as they subsequently were) such that the publication was now not undesirable I could go back and claim it. There must be a warehouse full of that stuff somewhere. I don't have the receipt any more, and even if I did I'm not going to go back to Beitbridge just to claim my copy of the Moscow Times.

Reinhard

X-rated Bob wrote
Reinhard wrote Well she had nothing to declare, it was her instrument.
Unfortunately that doesn't amount to a row of beans. Ownership does not mean that you don't have to declare.

She didn't buy it on her trip? You can argue she should have declared it leaving Belgium, but why declare it entering Germany?
She is based in Belgium, so why did German customs take it unto themselves to do such a thorough job, just because it is an EU country?
Also, them taking the instrument, determining it was worth something, then doing the paperwork could not have been a quick process by any stretch of the imagination. Meanwhile she is out of the "tool" she uses to earn a living. I hope she sues them for loss of income.
You're guessing at the motivation. It's entirely plausible that she was pulled out for a random check and was found to have in her possession something she should have declared, and with no paperwork to prove when she'd bought it, how much she'd paid for it or if duties had previously been paid.

In fact the latter points are all true. We know these things. She did have the violin, she should have declared it, she didn't declare it and she had no paper work.

I'm sure it didn't take them a few minutes to establish what the instrument was worth. We know that the originally posted report didn't give the whole story, and it's quite possible the version I posted is more complete but still not down to every detail. Again it's likely that she was taken to some interview room asked some questions and then asked to wait whilst somebody got on the blower and called a museum or did some googling or something to try to get an idea of the value of the instrument.

I derive no pleasure froms this at all, but I really don't see, based on what we know, that there's any reason to conclude that it was harassment.

Loads of people get called over for all sorts of things at border posts every day. I myself was once caught with an "undesirable publication" on entering SA. I was given a receipt for it. If the laws were amended (as they subsequently were) such that the publication was now not undesirable I could go back and claim it. There must be a warehouse full of that stuff somewhere. I don't have the receipt any more, and even if I did I'm not going to go back to Beitbridge just to claim my copy of the Moscow Times.

I still don't see why it is a German problem if she is returning to Belgium. If I go to Japan, buy an expensive guitar and fly back to SA: Does that mean I have to declare it and pay customs at every stop on my way back ? Surely the only customs officials it should concern are on the Belgium side?

Bob-Dubery

Reinhard wrote I still don't see why it is a German problem if she is returning to Belgium. If I go to Japan, buy an expensive guitar and fly back to SA: Does that mean I have to declare it and pay customs at every stop on my way back ? Surely the only customs officials it should concern are on the Belgium side?

She went through customs and so was intending to enter into Germany. It doesn't matter where she lives, where she was coming from or what her eventual destination was. She went through customs and into Germany - therefore what she's carrying is very much the business of the customs officials in Germany.

Some years ago I was travelling from the USA back to SA. I stopped at Amsterdam, and I had a wait of about 8 hours. I could have just stayed in the transit lounge, but I was carrying an EU passport and so I needed no visa to go through customs and catch a train into Amsterdam itself and have a look at some of the sights. Which I did. Holland was not my destination, but I crossed the border into that country and their officials thus had a right to question me. It's as simple as that.

If I'd been carrying a rare guitar with me, I might have had to declare it Amsterdam if I was trying to cross the border into Holland. If I was not entering that country then I would not have had to declare it to Dutch officials.

Thinking about it, there was a further stop on that trip - Nairobi. Theoretically I could have gone through customs and into Nairobi, but there wasn't much time and I was pretty tired so I just sat in the lounge until we got called for the flight to Johannesburg. Again, if I'd actually decided to go see Nairobi I'd have been entering into Kenya and the Kenyan authorities would have had the right to question me, check my baggage and so on.

Reinhard

X-rated Bob wrote
Reinhard wrote I still don't see why it is a German problem if she is returning to Belgium. If I go to Japan, buy an expensive guitar and fly back to SA: Does that mean I have to declare it and pay customs at every stop on my way back ? Surely the only customs officials it should concern are on the Belgium side?
She went through customs and so was intending to enter into Germany. It doesn't matter where she lives, where she was coming from or what her eventual destination was. She went through customs and into Germany - therefore what she's carrying is very much the business of the customs officials in Germany.

Some years ago I was travelling from the USA back to SA. I stopped at Amsterdam, and I had a wait of about 8 hours. I could have just stayed in the transit lounge, but I was carrying an EU passport and so I needed no visa to go through customs and catch a train into Amsterdam itself and have a look at some of the sights. Which I did. Holland was not my destination, but I crossed the border into that country and their officials thus had a right to question me. It's as simple as that.

If I'd been carrying a rare guitar with me, I might have had to declare it Amsterdam if I was trying to cross the border into Holland. If I was not entering that country then I would not have had to declare it to Dutch officials.

Thinking about it, there was a further stop on that trip - Nairobi. Theoretically I could have gone through customs and into Nairobi, but there wasn't much time and I was pretty tired so I just sat in the lounge until we got called for the flight to Johannesburg. Again, if I'd actually decided to go see Nairobi I'd have been entering into Kenya and the Kenyan authorities would have had the right to question me, check my baggage and so on.

So say at that time you were wearing a 40k fancy watch you didn't declare leaving SA. It is yours, maybe a gift from someone. It is well taken care of and can be mistaken as new. So what happens if you enter Amsterdam? You declare it and they tax you on your own watch?
What if it's under your jacket and they happen to notice it and you didn't declare it? Now some foreign country finds it ok to tax you on your watch or confiscate it?

domhatch

Reinhard wrote
X-rated Bob wrote
Reinhard wrote I still don't see why it is a German problem if she is returning to Belgium. If I go to Japan, buy an expensive guitar and fly back to SA: Does that mean I have to declare it and pay customs at every stop on my way back ? Surely the only customs officials it should concern are on the Belgium side?
She went through customs and so was intending to enter into Germany. It doesn't matter where she lives, where she was coming from or what her eventual destination was. She went through customs and into Germany - therefore what she's carrying is very much the business of the customs officials in Germany.

Some years ago I was travelling from the USA back to SA. I stopped at Amsterdam, and I had a wait of about 8 hours. I could have just stayed in the transit lounge, but I was carrying an EU passport and so I needed no visa to go through customs and catch a train into Amsterdam itself and have a look at some of the sights. Which I did. Holland was not my destination, but I crossed the border into that country and their officials thus had a right to question me. It's as simple as that.

If I'd been carrying a rare guitar with me, I might have had to declare it Amsterdam if I was trying to cross the border into Holland. If I was not entering that country then I would not have had to declare it to Dutch officials.

Thinking about it, there was a further stop on that trip - Nairobi. Theoretically I could have gone through customs and into Nairobi, but there wasn't much time and I was pretty tired so I just sat in the lounge until we got called for the flight to Johannesburg. Again, if I'd actually decided to go see Nairobi I'd have been entering into Kenya and the Kenyan authorities would have had the right to question me, check my baggage and so on.

So say at that time you were wearing a 40k fancy watch you didn't declare leaving SA. It is yours, maybe a gift from someone. It is well taken care of and can be mistaken as new. So what happens if you enter Amsterdam? You declare it and they tax you on your own watch?
What if it's under your jacket and they happen to notice it and you didn't declare it? Now some foreign country finds it ok to tax you on your watch or confiscate it?

shit. that's the last time i take my seamaster overseas with me.

Bob-Dubery

Reinhard wrote So say at that time you were wearing a 40k fancy watch you didn't declare leaving SA. It is yours, maybe a gift from someone. It is well taken care of and can be mistaken as new. So what happens if you enter Amsterdam? You declare it and they tax you on your own watch?
What if it's under your jacket and they happen to notice it and you didn't declare it? Now some foreign country finds it ok to tax you on your watch or confiscate it?

OK... I'm no expert on international law but I note that she departed from Japan and disembarked in Germany. So this is her entry point into the EU. EU law works in ways we don't always anticipate because it's the EU and there are treaties implied in that. See the case of the guy who supposedly took a fat bribe from Bernie Ecclestone. He was a German national, and the money in question was deposited in Austria, but the German feds still could (and did) bust him for tax evasion.

Generally once you're in the EU then moving from one EU country to another is pretty simple, it's the point at which you ENTER the EU that you are likely to be checked, have questions asked and so on.

Finally, knowing what I know, I hope I'd have done the prudent thing and declared that watch on my way out of SA, because forgetting all other countries, the SA officials might get interested in it on my way back in.

domhatch

X-rated Bob wrote
Reinhard wrote So say at that time you were wearing a 40k fancy watch you didn't declare leaving SA. It is yours, maybe a gift from someone. It is well taken care of and can be mistaken as new. So what happens if you enter Amsterdam? You declare it and they tax you on your own watch?
What if it's under your jacket and they happen to notice it and you didn't declare it? Now some foreign country finds it ok to tax you on your watch or confiscate it?
OK... I'm no expert on international law but I note that she departed from Japan and disembarked in Germany. So this is her entry point into the EU. EU law works in ways we don't always anticipate because it's the EU and there are treaties implied in that. See the case of the guy who supposedly took a fat bribe from Bernie Ecclestone. He was a German national, and the money in question was deposited in Austria, but the German feds still could (and did) bust him for tax evasion.

Generally once you're in the EU then moving from one EU country to another is pretty simple, it's the point at which you ENTER the EU that you are likely to be checked, have questions asked and so on.

Finally, knowing what I know, I hope I'd have done the prudent thing and declared that watch on my way out of SA, because forgetting all other countries, the SA officials might get interested in it on my way back in.

prudence. never fails. having (er) watched a few episodes of that aussie customs series, and having been through aussie customs on a few occasions, it's always better just to be a little anticipative about what might happen in the worst case scenario, rather than ending up in the worst case scenario, and bitching and moaning about it.

seems to make sense to me
dh

kapepper

domhatch wrote
Reinhard wrote
X-rated Bob wrote
Reinhard wrote I still don't see why it is a German problem if she is returning to Belgium. If I go to Japan, buy an expensive guitar and fly back to SA: Does that mean I have to declare it and pay customs at every stop on my way back ? Surely the only customs officials it should concern are on the Belgium side?
She went through customs and so was intending to enter into Germany. It doesn't matter where she lives, where she was coming from or what her eventual destination was. She went through customs and into Germany - therefore what she's carrying is very much the business of the customs officials in Germany.

Some years ago I was travelling from the USA back to SA. I stopped at Amsterdam, and I had a wait of about 8 hours. I could have just stayed in the transit lounge, but I was carrying an EU passport and so I needed no visa to go through customs and catch a train into Amsterdam itself and have a look at some of the sights. Which I did. Holland was not my destination, but I crossed the border into that country and their officials thus had a right to question me. It's as simple as that.

If I'd been carrying a rare guitar with me, I might have had to declare it Amsterdam if I was trying to cross the border into Holland. If I was not entering that country then I would not have had to declare it to Dutch officials.

Thinking about it, there was a further stop on that trip - Nairobi. Theoretically I could have gone through customs and into Nairobi, but there wasn't much time and I was pretty tired so I just sat in the lounge until we got called for the flight to Johannesburg. Again, if I'd actually decided to go see Nairobi I'd have been entering into Kenya and the Kenyan authorities would have had the right to question me, check my baggage and so on.

So say at that time you were wearing a 40k fancy watch you didn't declare leaving SA. It is yours, maybe a gift from someone. It is well taken care of and can be mistaken as new. So what happens if you enter Amsterdam? You declare it and they tax you on your own watch?
What if it's under your jacket and they happen to notice it and you didn't declare it? Now some foreign country finds it ok to tax you on your watch or confiscate it?

shit. that's the last time i take my seamaster overseas with me.

Or your cellphone/ipad/ipod for that matter

I already called customs and they said, always keep your receipts with you, also if they are clearly used then it is alo not a problem

and you can take up to 430 euro in merchandise other then cigarettes and liquour with you without paying importduties....

So, vintage guitarwise to europe, as long as it is not les paul 58, or a 57 strat I would not worry to much about it...

« Previous Page