Rob

Talking about too much material in official hands, I was talking to someone at York who catalogued a 19th century hoard for a museum about a decade ago. When he called them recently to have a look at it, they denied all knowledge of having it and certainly couldn't/didn't want to find it. As far as they were concerned it didn't exist, despite the cataloguer knowing what he had done in the past. They simply have too much material and not enough interest to look after it responsibly on behalf of the public who are the ulimate beneficiaries.

But that still doesn't explain why coins in UK auctions that are sold by non-EU residents attract the 5% VAT instead of 20%. As I said before, the 5% rule was in force last December, so barring a change in the law over Christmas/New Year, this should still apply. I still suspect that someone somewhere in customs or their agents doesn't realise that coins are taxed at a reduced rate. I vaguely remember someone saying it is something to do with them being classed as collectables or artefacts, but can't think where I read it.

That's even muddier than it was before. At least the 5% for coins was easy to understand

A Wikipedia of coins, great stuff....But what a task!! Anyone got the time or will!? In the US its the third party grading companies that do it (and of course they benefit from it), perhaps CGS would over here? Though I guess it might drive prices up... CGS have already inflated their slab prices to double or more that of a raw coin to reflect the "added value". A Wiki of coins if it ran concurrent with a census would only serve to drive prices down. No more would some believe that there is only a handful of Charles Darwin £2s left on this planet.

Yes. The price guide I would choose is Spink simply because it has more information. If the reference you buy is only going to be an approximate guide which ever one you get, it may as well be comprehensive at the same time.

It applies to coins imported from outside the EU, but there may be other categories that are also favourably treated. Most goods are 20%, but books are zero rated in the UK for example. It also depends on the country into which it is imported. Once VAT has been charged at the appliciable rate in a specific country, it is deemed to have been paid throughout the EU. Chris does this with books which are sold from the UK where they attract 0% VAT as opposed to what the going rate is in Germany. I charge my customers UK VAT if our rate is below that of their country. If our rate is above that of the recipient's I will export VAT free against a VAT number and let them pay their home rate of import VAT. The only difference is the amount changes in two boxes on your VAT return. It may only be a percent or two to the end user, but any reduction in money available to p*** against the wall by the snouts in troughs is to be welcomed.

I doubt it would be misleading, it came froma large US dealer and i doubt he'd do that. I'm gonna call my buddy tomorrow and tell him to hang fire and not pay until this is cleared up If still at the PO, you could question why the excessive charge at the desk. If the description says coin, then the RM have screwed up, but if the description is misleading, then the RM are perfectly entitled to charge what would be the appropriate rate. The application of 20% vat suggests the value inserted on the customs form is correct, so the description is also likely to be correct. I'm going for the shared brain cell making a balls up. And you only have a finite time to challange it before the package is returned. It will be held until the correct tax is paid. Time is of the essence. 20 days. My buddy is'nt the sharpest tool in the box though, so either he's gonna have to give the paper to my brother-in-law or i'm gonna challenge it from here. Will perhaps start morning If it has been paid already, you will have to apply to HMRC for a refund, but will need all the documentation including invoices and proof of payment. I don't know which department you would call, but there will be some means of reimbursement. Just be aware of it for the future. Whilst we all like import tax free goods that get through the system unchecked, we also like the process to be painless and efficient with the correct tax paid if applied. Probably a case of be careful what you wish for. Sometimes the fully legit route is not as bad as the alternatives.

I doubt it would be misleading, it came froma large US dealer and i doubt he'd do that. I'm gonna call my buddy tomorrow and tell him to hang fire and not pay until this is cleared up, although saying that, i phoned my brother-in-law earlier (he's an accountant) and he said 20% applies, so i'm fooked if i know right now. Also if you look at the wording in the 1st picture, it states that parcelforce are unable to enter disputes............ Coins imported from outside the EU attract 5% import VAT. That is the same 5% charge applying to imported lots in auctions such as Spink or DNW. e.g lot 107 in Spink's last sale (13/12/2011) was marked with an x, signifying VAT of 5% would be applied to the hammer price and 20% to the buyers premium because the coin was imported into the EU under temporary import rules, but the buyers premium was incurred entirely within the EU. Unless the rules have changed since the middle of December, the 5% rule should still apply. Parcelforce collects the VAT for HMRC, but a mechanism still exists to challenge incorrect taxation. Go to the PO counter and get it sorted - quickly because it might take a few days and the parcel will only be held for a week or two at the most.

I doubt it would be misleading, it came froma large US dealer and i doubt he'd do that. I'm gonna call my buddy tomorrow and tell him to hang fire and not pay until this is cleared up If still at the PO, you could question why the excessive charge at the desk. If the description says coin, then the RM have screwed up, but if the description is misleading, then the RM are perfectly entitled to charge what would be the appropriate rate. The application of 20% vat suggests the value inserted on the customs form is correct, so the description is also likely to be correct. I'm going for the shared brain cell making a balls up. And you only have a finite time to challange it before the package is returned. It will be held until the correct tax is paid. Time is of the essence.

So they have charged import vat at 20% instead of 5%. This is what needed to be challenged. If a misleading description was put on the customs form though, the 20% could apply. Attempting to mislead would be thieves by replacing coin with cuddly toy in the description would backfire on the VAT front.

This isn't elitist, rather common sense. Buying blind is the easiest way to make purchases you later regret. For all its benefits, eBay is also the repository for most of the people on this planet who are incapable of grading, or at times even identifying what it is they are selling. Good pictures are a must if you are going to make a purchase on eBay and as an aside, the prices realised are frequently too high for the item bought. Many times you can buy at a proper auction much cheaper than on eBay with quite a lot of the former items being sold on the latter site almost immediately after the auction because there are sufficient numbers of people willing to pay over the odds out there to make it feasible. Well I won't disagree with you Rob, you have been at it far longer than I ever will be, but having read a number of magazines and articles, buying blind may not be so bad or with blurred pictures etc if the fact that a number of rare or incorrectly attributed coins have been purchased for peanuts on ebay by sellers not knowing what they had, so someone is getting lucky if not me, likewise if you have a run of the mill ordinary coin worth no more than 20p and you put it on ebay, you and we al know you stuff the title with rareor hard to get and someone like me will part with silly wads of cash to get it from you. Maybe elitist was an incorrect description, maybe I should of said intelligent or a knowing collector knows that going to a decent shop whose expertise in coins is probably the best way to buy what you want, how you want, or the reverse, at a price you accept as reasonable. Most of what I have is what you may call run of the mill, and therefore I use ebay for prices, also because as you say, I can shove it straight back on if unhappy with it. I have now lost the plot and train of thought, so will be quiet before I dig the hole any bigger, not bad for a untrained monkey ! Most rarities obtained cheaply on eBay will have been identifiable to the expert as a rare type even if a positive attribution was impossible and probably with a sufficiently blurred image to deter the casual bidder. There are people out there who can identify Tealby pennies for example and tie a coin down to a particular die pair on the basis of just a small amount of detail by matching the unknown to their databases. You stand no chance in competing at this level. The problem with ebay is that the tat achieves prices way over what it should, yet quality frequently sells for under fair value. That is why so much dross ends up there starting at low prices and the expensive things are overpriced to begin with to allow for eBay and Paypal fees.

I attendeed as always (one of the few salerooms within relatively easy striking distance for me). Bidding was the usual bloodbath but I managed to pick up 12 lots. I was underbidder on your 1662 Crown, it went in the room. The engraving kind of killed it but I thought it was worth a punt as it was the rarer inverted die axis type (en medaille rather than coin alignment). Inverted die axis is coin alignment.

The actual rate of import VAT is only 5% compared to the normal rate of 20%, so if they charge 20% refuse to pay it and get them to recalculate. As David says, it is the RM admin fee that bumps the price up. Until you are talking a couple of hundred pounds in value, the admin fee exceeds the tax, but at this point the effective rate is about 10%.

Database or spreadsheet, either should be ok. It is probably easier to make your own customised inventory because as has been noted earlier in the thread, any existing template will almost certainly have a missing field that you would insert if starting from scratch. The fields I use are as follows: Collection reference number Denomination Date Short Description (including grade) Acquisition date Cost Bought from Current book price Peck, Freeman, Spink etc reference The collection reference number links to a word file of the same name containing the coin's description together with any feature worth noting, details of acquisition, cost, seller, any other provenance, weight, images of the coin and any associated tickets etc. In the case of a coin being unrecorded, or if it is proof that a reference can be corrected, then this info is noted in the same file. This all fits onto a single A4 page at the most.

This isn't elitist, rather common sense. Buying blind is the easiest way to make purchases you later regret. For all its benefits, eBay is also the repository for most of the people on this planet who are incapable of grading, or at times even identifying what it is they are selling. Good pictures are a must if you are going to make a purchase on eBay and as an aside, the prices realised are frequently too high for the item bought. Many times you can buy at a proper auction much cheaper than on eBay with quite a lot of the former items being sold on the latter site almost immediately after the auction because there are sufficient numbers of people willing to pay over the odds out there to make it feasible.

One of these

Sorry, not paying attention to the question. The only things listed in ESC for 1812 are a 26 acorn reverse with the first obverse and the illustrated reverse which doesn't indicate the number of acorns but is classed as reverse 2 as opposed to 12 and paired with the second obverse. Given that all references are incomplete, it would not be surprising to find an unlisted variety because 4 wreath punches were used in 1811 and so for the 1812 first bust coins, once you have more than 1 reverse die, any of the previous year's punches could come into play. The biggest problem is likely to be the lack of previously published research because the series isn't popular.

All editions are an improvement on the previous ones and 1992 is the last printed, but anything in the 1971 would still be valid. Alan Rayner died a few years ago, so there will be no 6th edition. Like all reference material, it has omissions and many rarity values are demonstrably incorrect, but it is still a valuable addition to the library, listing as it does a reasonably comprehensive summary of the milled silver coins. It doesn't go into as much detail as Davies, but covers a longer period.

You need a copy of ESC. The number of acorns varies between 24 and 27 and there are also variations in laurel wreath pointing.

Should and does know better. The first is outside the 95% confidence limit for the "normal" Gaussian distribution of ebay grading, which is saying something. The second is closer.

Possibly true, but proofs obviously have less of a following than currency issues, not least because they are less accessible to collectors. If collecting patterns and proofs that were not intended for circulation, you would therefore want to pick up coins in as perfect preservation as possible. Sometimes this is not an option and you must make do with what is frequently unique or nearly so, but if you are aware of better you will tend to wait for it to turn up. On the whole, only quoting FDC prices isn't a problem because collectors of these pieces usually have a good handle on how many there are and in what grades. Bloodbaths rarely occur, but when they do it is for a very good reason. Most collectors of proofs wouldn't use eBay as their primary source, which, by default would be Spink, Baldwins or similar as they are the only suppliers of decent quantities of material. And, although they take a lot of stick on this forum, I find Spink quite reasonable pricewise for said items because the prices charged in the shop or in the Circular are usually not far removed from the tome price. Rarities within the general type can therefore be obtained at good prices.

Not seen an 1826, only an 1825 for which the R7 rating in ESC is silly on this score as I've seen more than half a dozen of the 1 or 2 known. Could be an error, but bearing in mind that the last digit was may have been entered at a later stage, it is possible that unfinished 182 dies with a Roman I were produced. Thanks Rob, I have kept it penciled in as a 'possibly exists' variety. I agree the 1825 is less rare as the books state. I was the underbidder on the first one I encountered and was pretty p'd when I lost out, but I bought the next one I seen and have seen a few more since. Dave Craddock had one on his list in 2003 or 2004(?) as BU for £2300. It had gone by the time I enquired, but suggests there is at least one in good grade.

I think you are all missing an important point. BIN prices on ebay are inflated above Spink prices to cover ebay's 25% or whatever take on every sale. If a Spink price is £100, then the BIN is £120 or £125. That's just common sense by the seller, and in most cases equal stupidity by the buyer. There is one set at £1100, but others at £850. Knock 25% off the latter and you get £637.50 against a Spink list of £650. You regularly see items listed on ebay that are available on the seller's website for significantly less. I'd do exactly the same if selling on ebay because so many people treat it as the only place to buy, so persuading them to pay over the odds is not difficult, whilst ensuring you get a full price after listing costs and fees seems sensible. The extras cost is achievable because so many people are too lazy to search. If people did their homework, ebay sales would diminish somewhat and dealers could make a better living.

The fields have a strange texture. Is it nickel? It's easy enough to check.

Yep, Ferric Sulphate, Fe2SO4 also known as Copperas. I too am not 100% certain, but wasn't this collected in former days as dog's no.2s? Not if Copperas is correct. If the latter, it would be called grrrass. Or if sheep's no 2s, woolas, with apologies to the not so honourable former member for Oldham and Saddleworth. Remind us who that was, Rob? Phil Woolas - former MP banned from office for 3 years as a result of election irregularities ditto on all counts.