MicrostockGroup Sponsors


Show Posts

This section allows you to view all posts made by this member. Note that you can only see posts made in areas you currently have access to.


Messages - gbalex

Pages: 1 ... 57 58 59 60 61 [62] 63 64
1526
General Stock Discussion / Re: I have a gift for you :)
« on: January 05, 2010, 15:15 »
Thank you for your generosity, a very nice addition to my actions and scripts.


1527
Shutterstock.com / Re: Shutterstock Survey
« on: January 05, 2010, 15:09 »
A good deal of the questions seemed to be focused on exploring new revenue options for SS by way of potential business collaborations for software, keyword services, hardware etc. 

From a contributor and buyers perspective I would have like to see questions that focused more on our image needs, such as upgrading the site, providing better customer service, legal support, reducing forum spam, etc. 

1528
General Stock Discussion / Re: Whats New in Stock Photo
« on: November 25, 2009, 08:20 »

Shutterstocks forum is now available on the comedy channel.



 :D :D

Expect lots of adds.

1529
Shutterstock.com / Re: Shutterstock dropping ODs?
« on: November 03, 2009, 12:47 »
I buy on demand images from SS.  They are valid for a year after the date you purchase the OD subscription. So you have a year to download your images.  I just looked to see if OD subscriptions are available for purchase and they are.

If SS chooses to no longer offer OD subscriptions on SS, I will be buying more images from DT and Fotolia not BS!

1530
Shutterstock.com / Re: Shutterstock starts database cleanup?!
« on: November 03, 2009, 12:28 »
Long over due... makes you wonder what is going on behind the scenes.

1531
You were/are a good friend Todd.  He would like that his tutorials live on!

1532
Shutterstock.com / Re: SS sells mostly outside US?
« on: September 08, 2009, 20:06 »
Yes suwanneeredhead I think it does depend on the content of your port.

July: 71% US vs 29% F
Aug: 79% US vs 27% F

I expect the US result to drop this month of because labor day and a long weekend.  I would think people in the US are taking time to enjoy vacations with family before the kids need to be back in school. 

1533
General Stock Discussion / Re: The art of instructing models
« on: August 20, 2009, 15:38 »
Excellent topic and discussion Laflor.  Good information shared here.

1534
General Stock Discussion / Re: Did a Test at IStock
« on: August 20, 2009, 12:32 »
I'm sorry but I don't find that the OP is particular credible.

Initially he said the test was 10 images then 3.

What's to say it even happened at all?

And even if it did its highly unlikely it was the same inspector so one inspector rejected and another approved - thats not a big deal. This is a subjective process.

And bear in mind that non exclusives starting off sometimes get an easier inspection process so as to encourage them. But that is rarely mentioned.

His statement on SS says it all.  He feels entitled to lie to us if it facilitates his agenda for that day.  Just one in a long line of misleading stories.  

"I had a friend who is exclusive upload 3 of my images that were done in a way as to cause a rejection [ I said 10 in the post] so what!!."

1535
Off Topic / Re: Poll For Photoshop Users
« on: August 20, 2009, 00:23 »
Interesting a person who bragged to us that he had a pirated version of photoshop is now claiming to have purchased it. In fact he asked us for a copy of the full suite. I told him no.

1536
General Stock Discussion / Re: Did a Test at IStock
« on: August 19, 2009, 12:02 »
 I still don't know if the test actually took place, any idea who the other person is supposed to be? It's worse if it didn't because then it's bad mouthing the agency without any evidence. Either way, I think IStock can suspend an account for any reason they like, you're not an employee of the company.

What better reason then going out of your way to discredit their review process then posting the evidence all over contributor forums?

Just found the SS forum post from today where LR admits it was three images not ten (exaggeration surprise, surprise) and it was a year ago and the other guy deleted them straight away.
Not sure if this means:
A. I made this up and hope they can't trace the images from that long ago or may let me not name other "person"
or
B. This happened but I'm pointlessly trawling it up now and making it sound recent when what IStock was doing back then is totally irrelevant  just because I got a rejection

Also, pretty unwise to be further publicizing the incident on a competitor's website. Even if you are being contrite you are still saying IS reviews are inconsistent on the SS forum (and also still heralding yourself as a hero of the microstock community for exposing it quote "If any of you have read me, really read me, Im for US. Not them, I always will be and they will never shut me up... PERIOD.")

EDIT: just reread the first post in this thread "I'll just submit through him from now on" really? from a year ago?


Very few of us would intentionally mislead people and that is the very reason some people get away with doing so. We judge others based on who we are. In all fairness to IS we do not have a history of interactions between the person in question and their administration, reviewers etc. We do not have all the information they used to make their determination.

Business ethics and signed business agreements keep some of us from telling the rest of the story in regard to similar situations! However based on first hand experience with some of the methods employed, I can say that your questions and observations about this recent fiasco are completely in line with the modus operandi I have come to expect!

1537
General Stock Discussion / Re: Did a Test at IStock
« on: August 18, 2009, 23:57 »
of course he got himself suspended.  you try to show up the site, they are going to nail you in some way. 

I don't blame the site for doing it, and I hope they set a precedent because you can't have non-exclusives and exclusives doing that sort of stuff to completely tarnish whatever image remains to the buyers.


It is nice to know that IS is not easily manipulated or intimidated for that matter. Ethics are in short supply these days. IS made a wise choice, lets hope that they stick to their guns.  

Oh well, iStock will probably have something to say about it at some point, we may never hear about it though.  Regardless, I would take anything Rinder says with a grain of salt (or a cube, or a kilo) - but the proof for that kind of stuff is in previous threads  

Have a good one

Your are being generous. Does anyone actually read rinders posts?  I don't believe a word he posts 90% of the time, he contradicts himself within minutes or at best days. I think the majority of his responses are made up on the spot to facilitate his agenda.  Need I say more?  If you actually care about integrity do yourself a favor and spend some time looking at the inconsistency's in his relentless promotional spins.

1538
Off Topic / Re: Swine flu
« on: August 10, 2009, 11:16 »
In its present forum I do not think we have to worry much.  However it has shown a propensity to acquire new genes and its ability to easily infect large populations who have never been exposed to it, has the WHO ect. concerned about this new H1N1 virus.

This article pretty much sums it up their concerns.
http://tinyurl.com/logpw7

Comparing the mortality rate of ordinary influenza and H1N1, the mortality rate of both is aprox 0.004 per cent depending on where you live, which means four out of 1,000 patients die because of these diseases. The infectivity in case of H1N1 flu is more than the common flu because most people have not been exposed to it in their lifetimes and the complication rate is also higher. Older people may have more immunity because they were exposed to a similar H1N1 virus when they were young. The World Health Organization estimates that about two billion people could catch H1N1 influenza by the time the flu pandemic ends. http://www.reuters.com/article/asiaCrisis/idUSL4634663

I worry most about people who live in poor areas with crowded living conditions and have poor health due to meager food supply's and non existent health care.

1539
Veer / Re: Feature request
« on: July 30, 2009, 12:59 »
The ability to delete and or edit images in our pending area.

1540
Veer / Re: Approved files gone
« on: July 27, 2009, 10:14 »
Does anyone have an email to contact tech support

There also seems to be a problem with my account.

1541
Veer / Re: Setting up Veer
« on: July 26, 2009, 15:21 »
Is it live only for old SV contributors or for all!?

I am one of new and I can't find my images, also my portfolio still shows 0 approved photos (I have 180+)...

I am having the same issue.  When I go to the dashboard the images that showed up in the approved image tab are no longer there.  In fact the dashboard shows 0 for all of the tabs.

All of the images I submitted where accepted and it looks to me like all of the info for my account has been lost. It is like I never completed the approval process.

1542
SS has been making numerous policy changes.  It makes you wonder what is going on behind the scenes. 

Now a shift toward more natural feeling images.  It makes you consider just who is actually asking for these changes.

Personally I think they are headed in the right direction and as mentioned earlier in this thread; the addition of a higher quality collection would be a positive change.

1543
Thanks for the heads up.  I was half expecting this.... I am sure Florida will not be the last state to follow suit.

1544
Veer / Re: Is Veer more artsy then other micors?
« on: June 12, 2009, 15:42 »
My first ten were all accepted.  Eight of them had white backgrounds so it looks to me like quality and content are considerations.

1545
Shutterstock.com / Re: Solutions to the IRS problem
« on: June 03, 2009, 11:35 »
In reality, a withholding tax means that the government gets all the money you earn. They give you some of it after they take what they want.

If you live in a country other than the US and the IRS is 'withholding' tax, it means that the US gov actually gets all the money you earn from US companies. It is not your money, it is their money, and after seizing it, they give you some. For the time being. Maybe next year they will seize it all and give you nothing. If so, there will be nothing you can do about it except to stop earning money.


Yes, this is definitely not an SS problem.  It's an IRS problem.

They are sticking to the letter rather than the spirit of the treaties. They are the only tx department to do this.

How, as a Brit, can i complain to the US govt or the IRS? I can't  :D

Sure, it's the law and taxes are taxes. I fully support law and taxes.  But i also support fair play, and the reality of this is that we will face difficulties and costs both in the application process (ITIN can be refused for putting na instead of n/a) and in the return of rightful funds to avoid double taxation.

This is way beyond microstock. And the debate needs to move to a higher level. Especially for the non-treaty suppliers.

The truth of it all is starting to sink in :  US stock sites may all soon become less competitive because of the obstacles to legitimate business.

It is such a dilemma, because SS is by far my largest earner - although my port there is 10 times larger than anywhere else.

So, i am taking a long term approach. I shall start focussing my uploads on non-US sites until this can be resolved enough to make it worthwhile focussing on the US sites again.  and other plans... : D
x


If you really want to make a difference start working with the governments in the countries who have not completed tax treaty's and convince them to sign one.  Our governments have already agreed that implementing tax treaties is the best way for them to proceed.  They put the wheel in motion long ago and no amount of US or SS bashing is going to change your outcome.  

As far as your numerous comments that only the US implements it's tax collection rights as outlined in those tax treaties.  You are making a comment that is blatantly inaccurate.  The global music industry has been doing it for many years.

As far as requiring withholding's for royalties on stock images, Alamy in the UK has been requiring the documentation you are are all caterwauling about for some time, the UK does exercise its right to tax royalties on stock photos.  I am certain they are not the only macrostock company to require the documentation required from their tax offices to collect withholding's or grant exceptions as outlined in tax treaties.  

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Alamy

http://www.alamy.com/stock-photography-faqs-tax-non-uk.asp

# What is Withholding Tax (WHT)?
Withholding Tax (WHT) is a government's imposition of a tax on distributions being made to foreigners. The purpose of the tax is to allow the government to make sure it exacts its share of a taxable event before the wealth leaves its shores and moves beyond its control. Thus, in Alamy's case it is the tax Alamy has to deduct and account for to the UK government when it is making royalty payments for the use of images to providers of those images who are not tax resident in the UK. It will only apply to Contributors who are NOT tax resident in the United Kingdom and who are paid outside of the UK mainland.

# What do you mean by tax resident?
You will normally be tax resident in the country in which you pay your tax bills and where you submit your tax return. However, tax residence is a complex subject which is determined by local legislation and case law in each country. We therefore recommend that you obtain confirmation from your local tax authority if you are uncertain as to your tax residence status.

# What do you mean by UK mainland?
The United Kingdom mainland comprises England, Wales, Scotland and Northern Ireland but excludes the Channel Islands and the Isle of Man.

# How will this affect the payments made to me?
During registration you will be required to supply your tax details including an assurance regarding the country where you are registered for tax. Alamy will deduct withholding tax from your payment in line with the double tax treaty between the country you are tax resident in and the United Kingdom. This rate can vary from between 0% to 22%. For further details, please visit our Table of Treaty Rates.

If you do not answer the questions relating to Withholding Tax within My Alamy, then Alamy will deduct 22% of the net amount due to you in each payment run.

# What is the standard rate of WHT?
The standard rate of the tax in the UK is 22%. This is applicable for all payments relating to photographic royalties to all countries.

# Can I reduce the rate of WHT that I pay?
Yes. If there is a double tax treaty between the country you are resident in and the UK and you can assure Alamy that you are tax resident in that country then we can apply the treaty rate on all payments to you. The treaty rate in many cases, e.g. for the US and Canada reduces the rate of WHT from 22% to 0%.

1546
It is becoming increasing clear that people will believe what they want to believe.  However if you want to run your business from an informed perspective, it would take 30 seconds to read Article 12 of Canada's Tax Treaty.

1547
@gbalex

You seem to be completely correct.

Can only be a matter of time before this becomes more widespread and not just with US agencies.

That is my conclusion!

1548
@gbalex

I think that what creates the difference with the US and US companies has its roots in the way in which US citizens have a liability to be taxed on their international earnings whether or not they even live or are even domiciled in the US. Very few nations do that. From that follows a whole different approach to collecting taxes.

Govts apart from the US are not collecting taxes on photo royalties.

**** sorry - to add: apart from the taxes which the agencies actually pay. Which is a different matter.

That is not a mistake.

Sure it might change. I'm not arguing with you.


Spend a bit of time on Alamy's site... they are a UK company.

http://www.alamy.com/example-tax-payments.asp
"If you are not located in the following territories you need to review the Table of Treaty Rates which sets out the DTT (Double Tax Treaty) relief you may be eligible for. The table below assumes that you are eligible for the DTT relief.

Table of example payments for individual contributors"



http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Alamy


OK - In general i definitely would bow to your superior knowledge. But I want to ask this .

Are you absolutely certain that the page you have linked to is not actually about a VAT change rather than being about a tax on royalties? Is that page actually about something which is like the US withholding tax? I am not sure that it is.

That pages seems to relate to VAT. The table columns seem to be about VAT. VAT is what people in the US call 'sales tax'. Same as applies in most US states.

And that would make sense in the context of it being about a switch from Alamy Jersey to Alamy UK. Since Jersey is crown dependency but not part of the UK, makes its own regulation and does not levy VAT ( - or did not. IIRC I read that they are / might be introducing it). So moving from a relationship with Alamy Jersey to one with Alamy UK would involve dealing with UK VAT.

I could be completely wrong.


It outlines both Vat and the rates for withholding's taxes charged to to foreigners outside of the UK as outlined in the UK's tax treaty's

http://www.alamy.com/stock-photography-faqs-tax-non-uk.asp

# What is Withholding Tax (WHT)?
Withholding Tax (WHT) is a government's imposition of a tax on distributions being made to foreigners. The purpose of the tax is to allow the government to make sure it exacts its share of a taxable event before the wealth leaves its shores and moves beyond its control. Thus, in Alamy's case it is the tax Alamy has to deduct and account for to the UK government when it is making royalty payments for the use of images to providers of those images who are not tax resident in the UK. It will only apply to Contributors who are NOT tax resident in the United Kingdom and who are paid outside of the UK mainland.

# What do you mean by tax resident?
You will normally be tax resident in the country in which you pay your tax bills and where you submit your tax return. However, tax residence is a complex subject which is determined by local legislation and case law in each country. We therefore recommend that you obtain confirmation from your local tax authority if you are uncertain as to your tax residence status.

# What do you mean by UK mainland?
The United Kingdom mainland comprises England, Wales, Scotland and Northern Ireland but excludes the Channel Islands and the Isle of Man.

# How will this affect the payments made to me?
During registration you will be required to supply your tax details including an assurance regarding the country where you are registered for tax. Alamy will deduct withholding tax from your payment in line with the double tax treaty between the country you are tax resident in and the United Kingdom. This rate can vary from between 0% to 22%. For further details, please visit our Table of Treaty Rates.

If you do not answer the questions relating to Withholding Tax within My Alamy, then Alamy will deduct 22% of the net amount due to you in each payment run.

# What is the standard rate of WHT?
The standard rate of the tax in the UK is 22%. This is applicable for all payments relating to photographic royalties to all countries.

# Can I reduce the rate of WHT that I pay?
Yes. If there is a double tax treaty between the country you are resident in and the UK and you can assure Alamy that you are tax resident in that country then we can apply the treaty rate on all payments to you. The treaty rate in many cases, e.g. for the US and Canada reduces the rate of WHT from 22% to 0%.

# How I can inform you that I qualify for a reduced rate of WHT?
If you are already a registered Contributor then you need to provide details via the payment and tax details page. If you are a new contributor you need to answer the questions during the registration process.

# How will you deduct WHT from payments to me?
Alamy will deduct WHT at the applicable rate of tax from the net amount to be paid out to you after deduction of payment fees and any foreign exchange fees.

# How will I see WHT on my statement?
It will be a line item on your statement when a payment is made to you. It will appear after the payment and FX fees, but before the cheque sent/funds transfer line.

# What does Alamy do with the money deducted for WHT?
Alamy will pay over the money deducted to the proper government department responsible for the collection of this tax in the UK.
The money deducted is not our income and we do not benefit from deducting it.

# What do you mean by "Will you be making royalty payments to other photographers from the money you receive from Alamy"?
Do the images submitted by yourself as a Contributor include images that are not your own, i.e. you are representing these images on behalf of other photographers. If this is the case do you have to pay the respective photographers for their work dependent on your receipts from Alamy? For example, if you paid a one off price to another photographer to either own the rights to the image, or you have acquired the right to exploit the image, then you would answer no, but if you pay a percentage of any sales from that image to a photographer you would answer yes.

# I do not make royalty payments to other photographers but I do not understand the following statement:

    "Please confirm whether you are beneficially entitled to income you will receive from Alamy and that you meet the necessary conditions for the payment to be received gross under the relevant treaty between the country in which you are tax resident, and the United Kingdom"?

The statement asks whether you are beneficially entitled to the income, i.e. you should be beneficially entitled to the income as long as you legally own the rights to the images or you have acquired the right to exploit the image and underlying copyright from the legal owner. You will normally meet the necessary conditions for the payment to be received at the relevant treaty rate as long as you are tax resident in the country in which you have said you are resident. However, if you have any doubt as to your eligibility to benefit from the relevant double tax treaty then you should review the said tax treaty to ensure that you are not excluded by virtue of any specific terms of the treaty agreement.

# I make payments to other photographers but I do not know whether all my photographers are tax resident in the same country as I, what should I do?
You should continue to register or provide your details and finish the process by answering "No, not all 3 statements apply to me". You should then attempt to find out whether your photographers are tax resident in the same country as yourself, and if so, you can then come back and complete the details field again. If you find that not all of the photographers are tax resident in the same country as yourself then you should contact [email protected] with the breakdown of photographers. We can then contact you, as it is likely that we will need to find out more information from you.

# I make payments to other photographers who are all tax resident in the same country as myself but I do not understand the following statement:

    "That they, the beneficial owners of the income, meet the necessary conditions for the payment to be received gross under the relevant treaty between the country in which you are tax resident, and the United Kingdom."?

The statement asks whether the photographers you represent are beneficially entitled to the income, i.e. they should be entitled to the income as long as they legally own the rights to the images or they have acquired the right to exploit the image and underlying copyright from the legal owner. They will normally meet the necessary conditions for the payment to be received at the relevant treaty rate as long as they are tax resident in the country in which you have said they are resident. However, if you have any doubt as to their eligibility to benefit from the relevant double tax treaty then you should review the said tax treaty to ensure that you or them are not excluded by virtue of any specific terms of the treaty agreement.

# What do I do if my circumstances change?
You should update the Alamy website with your new details as soon as possible.

# How will I receive deduction certificates stating how much tax you have deducted?
Alamy will send out certificates every year. The certificates will state for each payment made to you how much tax was deducted in US$, the rate of tax, the date of payment and how much the gross payment was. The information will be in US$, as this is the currency your statement is in.

# What is the DTT rate for the territory I am tax resident in?
For further details, please visit our Table of Treaty Rates.

# Table of implications for WHT

1549
...


...


...


Milinz if you set up a stock company in Ireland you would find your new company in exactly the same predicament SS finds itself in now.

When the Irish tax authorities find out that you are paying royalties from your new stock photo firm they have the very same right to tax royalty income that arises and is payed by a company in their state AKA Ireland!

Below you will find the Tax Treaty agreement which Ireland has made with 50 countries.

Ireland's Tax Treaty agreement regarding ROYALTIES (which is what micro stock is covered under) is covered in (ARTICLE 12)

http://www.revenue.ie/en/practitioner/law/tax-treaties.html

Commentary on typical provisions of Irish tax treaties
http://www.revenue.ie/en/practitioner/law/commentary_irishtaxtreaties.pdf

"ROYALTIES (ARTICLE 12)

This article provides rules for the taxation of royalties. It limits the taxation in the source State of royalties paid to a resident of the other State. While the OECD model treaty grants full exemption from taxation in the source State, many Irish treaties allow for reduced rates of taxation of gross royalty payments.

The term royalties is defined in the article and covers payments in respect of copyright of literary, artistic or scientific work as well as patents and trademarks. Some treaties also cover leasing payments payments for the use of, or the right to use, industrial, commercial or scientific equipment which would otherwise normally come under Article 7 (Business Profits).

The source State retains the right to tax royalties attributable to a permanent establishment of the beneficial owner in that State. In that case, the provisions of Article 7 (Business Profits) will apply and the source State may tax the income at the normal business tax rate.

Royalties are deemed to arise in the Contracting State that the payer is a resident of or, if paid in connection with a permanent establishment in the Contracting State, in the State where the permanent establishment is situated.

In cases involving special relationships between the payer and beneficial owner of a royalty, the provisions of the article will only apply to the extent that the royalty does not exceed the amount that would have been paid between parties at arms length."




There is one little difference...

UK and Northern Ireland is mentioned somewhere in some other treaty I've found... So, I think it says 10% for most of listed countries.
In USA there is no list as well there is no way to legally ask from many other governmets that 30% to be calculated into domestic tax needed to pay ;-)

So be my guest and read this list with carefuly counting listed countries:

http://www.hmrc.gov.uk/international/in_force.htm

So, you will find there is 121 Country listed which is mere double than in USA list!


Ireland which is where you stated would be a good country to set up a micro stock company has entered into tax treaty agreements with 50 countries.  The US has entered into tax treaty agreements with 68 countries. 

The percentage of tax liability required varies for each country according to those agreements.

Here is an example for Australia

"Australian tax agreement rates

Australia has entered into tax agreements with over 40 countries. These agreements prevent double taxation, reduce opportunities for tax evasion, and foster cooperation between Australia and other international tax authorities in enforcing their respective tax laws.

Australias tax agreements provide different tax rates for particular payments. For countries marked with an asterisk in the table below, please see Notes following the table for an explanation of the different rates that apply to unfranked dividend and royalty payments. The notes also cover the interest withholding tax exemptions in the US and UK agreements."

http://www.ato.gov.au/businesses/content.asp?doc=/Content/50240.htm&page=15

1550
@gbalex

I think that what creates the difference with the US and US companies has its roots in the way in which US citizens have a liability to be taxed on their international earnings whether or not they even live or are even domiciled in the US. Very few nations do that. From that follows a whole different approach to collecting taxes.

Govts apart from the US are not collecting taxes on photo royalties.

**** sorry - to add: apart from the taxes which the agencies actually pay. Which is a different matter.

That is not a mistake.

Sure it might change. I'm not arguing with you.


Spend a bit of time on Alamy's site... they are a UK company.

http://www.alamy.com/example-tax-payments.asp
"If you are not located in the following territories you need to review the Table of Treaty Rates which sets out the DTT (Double Tax Treaty) relief you may be eligible for. The table below assumes that you are eligible for the DTT relief.

Table of example payments for individual contributors"



http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Alamy

Pages: 1 ... 57 58 59 60 61 [62] 63 64

Sponsors

Mega Bundle of 5,900+ Professional Lightroom Presets

Microstock Poll Results

Sponsors