On Friday 14 January 2005 11:35, frank theriault wrote: > On Wed, 12 Jan 2005 11:17:19 -0500, Luigi de Guzman <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > On Wednesday 12 January 2005 11:12, Graywolf wrote: > > > VAT? > > > > Again, unless the Iron Chancellor has made Canon DSLRs VAT-exempt, this > > wouldn't make a difference. Something else is going on. > > > > -Luigi > > It's like Peter said: Taxes and greed. > > Here in the Great White North, there's an incoming duty on all > photographic equipment, even used. Import duties are only supposed to > be in place to protect local industries. AFAIK, the only Canadian > manufacturer of photographic instruments is Leica in Midland, and > while I know they still make surveyors' equipment there, I'm not sure > if they still make camera lenses.
As far as I'm aware, E. Leitz Canada is now generally called ELCAN, and they make some pretty decent military-grade rifle scopes, as well. > Even if they do, I don't imagine > that Leica is losing any sales because I buy a 20 year old Pentax lens > from a list member. But if it comes up from the US (or in from > anywhere else, for that matter), it's subject to duty. Man. NAFTA was supposed to do away with that, wasn't it? > > Imagine how much money our gov't has made of this specious tax! > > That may have nothing to do with why Pentaxen are so expensive in the > UK, but I got that pet peeve off my chest, anyway... I'm coming back to my original point: EVERYBODY pays the tax. So why is Canon still cheaper in the UK by such a wide margin? -Luigi
