silversky

1 hour ago, Guybrush said:

Great video BYB

I voted remain (by proxy, enough on that for now but my vote was remain)  Then after the vote was in I was all for Brexit, thats how democracy works.

But ...

These VAT issues are not a Brexit issue, this is something our corrupt government has done for us.  Removal of the £15 threshold, our government.  Forcing external businesses to register for VAT our government.

I think its unfair to put that of the people who voted Brexit but I completely get what your saying this friction-less free trade we was promised is not being provided by our own government.  HMRC is just seeing Brexit as a cash grab to line the coffers again.

I voted to leave an empire run by unelected technocrats with dangerous imperialistic ambitions.  I wish the same good fortune for all of the peoples of Europe to be free of that undemocratic tyranny.

What I didn't vote for was a VAT grab by this tired left wing Tory government.  In fact I didn't vote for the Tories at all precisely because of their left wing progressive social policies but that's beside the point!  They were never Brexiteers and have actually been the greatest obstacle to Brexit ever happening.  They're just political thieves who stole Brexit from the libertarian party (UKIP) to use as a way to hold onto power.   Going all in over the VAT on small transactions is rather silly of them.  It will very likely make the barrier to entry too high for a number of businesses which will really annoy the electorate as they're told "sorry we don't sell to the UK because of VAT administration".  Eventually the chancellor will probably have to deal with it somehow in a budget with a bit of complex red tape relief but at least our chancellor now has that ability again!

The positive to take away from all of this is that we can now blame our own government again.  Yay!!!  The further we get into clear waters, the less our politicians and civil servants can use the EU as an excuse to weasel their way out of living up to promises.  The blame can now be laid firmly at their feet once again, where it should always have belonged, and this makes them much more accountable to us as a result.  This really is a good thing long term.

2 hours ago, Pete said:

With reference to your quote in bold type.
There was no VAT on these silver coins and the RM sold a £20 face value silver coin for £20 including free delivery.
As the £20 coin contained only 0.5 oz of silver that meant you were paying £40 per ounce when spot was around £14.
Similar high silver price for the £50 and £100 coins.

Yes.  These are the high face value, low metal value variants which the Royal Mint has muddied the waters with.  I seem to remember a newspaper article detailing someone's complaint about a tesco petrol station refusing to accept the £20 coin.  It was this that alerted me to these odd hybrids that the RM created to confuse. 

Traditionally the royal mint make all sorts of commemorative coins however they don't tend to have high face values printed on them as if they're banknotes.  They also don't charge such large amounts for them either.  Selling £100 coins which have little value other than as a piece of art is a bit too much in my opinion for the issuer of our official currency to be doing.  If they made them spendable (even only at the BoE) then I would be completely fine with them and even look forward to these types of commemorative coins.  No one wants to spend them anyway so there wouldn't be a large number of different types of coin in general circulation confusing the public.  The mint have done that themselves anyway with both the 50p's and the £2 coins so it's a moot point.  The real reason is that they're selling old rope for big money and calling it money when it's not.

Anyway, it is these coins that I believe the mint is referring to as collectible rather than the 10oz silver coins which also have higher face values on them.  This means that it will likely be harder to convince HMRC that the 10oz silver coins could be imported at only 5% VAT 9because they are collectible) rather than the full 20% as was suggested earlier in the thread.

1 minute ago, BackyardBullion said:

Only orders under £135 would trigger the European dealer charging VAT on the sale.

True

1 minute ago, SilverHoarder said:

You don't pay the seller VAT.  VAT is paid to HMRC at the port of import into the UK (from the EU as far as I can tell).  Your second "chapter" doesn't make any sense.  Anyway a bit of a moot point.  I tried to order from the European Mint today and low and behold,... there is no shipping option for the UK.  You have to arrange your own pickup at an additional cost of 15 Euros to the European Mint.

If you try another German dealer maybe you will get one that will send to the UK.

This is a link to a comparison site of lots of German dealers.  You can search for the coin you want and it will give you a list of dealers offering it and their prices.  It's a pretty good site.

https://www.gold.de/kaufen/silbermuenzen/the-queens-beast-silber/

They way it looks now is that a European dealer should be charging you the 20% VAT at the point of sale (supply side) on behalf or HMRC (and then sending it to HMRC) which is probably why the European mint isn't doing it yet until they've sorted out the details.  My slightly flippant point was only that potentially if you can prove that all coins are numismatic then you could fill in a claim with HMRC to only pay 5% by reclaiming the rest back from HMRC.

@SilverHoarder I'm looking forward to hearing that you've bought a 10oz coin in Europe and paid the seller VAT at 20% and then reclaimed 15% from HMRC.  You might need to go to court though and prove that the dictionary says that all coins are numismatic and that all collectors of coins are numismatists and therefore coins of numismatic interest are of interest to numismatists and are therefore included in their relief from full VAT.  phew.

Edit: paid VAT on arrival at 20% and...

Technically we're all numismatists!! 

3 minutes ago, BackyardBullion said:

I just don't think they will fall in the same category just because they are 2 oz or 10 oz. They are not of numismatic interest

Technically I'm not sure that numismatic interest means anything other than interest in coins.

From Merriam Webster

https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/numismatic

The first metal coins are believed to have been used as currency by the Lydians, a people of Asia Minor, during the 7th century B.C.E., and it is likely that folks began collecting coins not long after that. The name that we give to the collection of coins today is numismatics, a word that also encompasses the collection of paper money and of medals. The noun numismatics and the adjective numismatic came to English (via French numismatique) from Latin and Greek nomisma, meaning "coin." Nomisma in turn derives from the Greek verb nomizein ("to use") and ultimately from the noun nomos ("custom" or "usage"). From these roots we also get numismatist, referring to a person who collects coins, medals, or paper money.

3 minutes ago, SilverHoarder said:

Quantity isn't an issue.  If the Royal Mint says the coins are collectible, then that is the VAT code that should be applied. For all HMRC know you could be a reseller on ebay or a High Street shop.  It doesn't matter what the end purpose is, it's the imported goods that matter and RM states they are collectibles i.e. 5% VAT on imports.

I like your thinking but I think there might be a hitch.  I think the RM were actually referring to their legal tender special edition coins like the Britannia £50 face value 1 oz coin etc.  I seem to remember that there was an issue with the coins they made that were higher face value than the silver contained.  Banks and shops weren't keen to accept the £20 coin if I remember correctly.  There was some clarification and confusion created by the definition of legal tender not having to be circulating legal tender and a definition of circulating legal tender coins went up to £2.  These other higher face value (non circulating) legal tender coins were being designated slightly differently and called collectible as some sort of justification for them whilst allowing shops etc not to accept them.  I don't remember the full details other than that these high face value coins were a con.

Sounds like HMRC are going to win a few popularity contests around the world!

Clearly the post office are the big losers here.  No more £8 handling charge for them.  A foreign agent will now take that charge instead for the privilege of applying VAT on everything.  Sweet deal.  Are Serco involved by any chance? 

35 minutes ago, AppleZippoandMetronome said:

The only likely solution I can see for this is brokers setting up in the various countries to handle the administrative burden. Not too dissimilar to the way you can now bid on items all over the world and have a broker handle the export for you - it would be a good way for them to expand their business. Of course - as has already been suggested - it'll just mean everything an individual, small business, etc imports will be more expensive.

The ebay global shipping program is expensive.  If all small trade ends up using an equivalent type of middlemen it'll be a really retrograde step.  I bet there are some people celebrating tonight at the billions they stand to gain for administering this SME charge.  Government wonks just love to come up with new and inventive ways to outsource their duties.  There will be a bunch of sharks right now seeking approval to carry out this work digitally for small sellers.  All for a nice fee of course.  The loser is the consumer who has to pay both the government and the middleman industry.  There better be another half to this plan (as yet unrevealed) or there'll be a lot of pissed of people.

1 hour ago, BackyardBullion said:

So, the problem with all of this is that yes, it probably wouldn't be hard to go to Europe and bring back silver/platinum and get through the border in the UK without being stopped, checked and taxed. If fact, I would argue it will be very easy.

The problem is that it is illegal and can get you in some significant hot water if caught in or after the fact.

That's no way to do business let alone go about buying silver.

Hot water AND all of your silver confiscated!!!  

1 hour ago, Silverman2U said:

Yep, not exact the best way to build a business model. lol

Everyone will be in the same boat, its trying to find the work around. There will be one.

A while back there was someone trying to use the code for collectors coins on import which appeared to carry a lower VAT rate with the revenue.  Apparently though, even when the code was assigned clearly on the parcel documents, the guys at the border or post office just applied 20% anyway.  There then followed a long battle to point out that the consolidated shipping code actually has a reduced rate of VAT and they needed a refund.  I believe it was something to do with having numismatic value rather than just being bullion.  I didn't hear what the outcome was.  Clearly coins in sets will have some numismatic value because they are collectors items and not just investment, however, what the revenue considers numismatic may not include the like of the QB's and its a grey area as always. I think the lower VAT rate was 5% if my memory serves me correctly.  Perhaps if you're reading this and you were the person who was trying this approach you might be kind enough to share the details with us and how it all ended up?  Many thanks.

1 minute ago, sixgun said:

Private sales are private sales. If you are not registered for VAT you don't charge VAT. 
Who the hell knows a private sale has happened most of the time anyway?
People will sell for what they can get - what the buyer is willing to pay.
At the moment UK buyers can get cheaper silver from the Continent. When that opportunity disappears i suspect selling prices will rise. People think in terms of the prices they can buy at elsewhere and if all those prices are only VAT included, then that will be the reference price.

Two days ago the reference price was in Europe for a delivery today.  Today the reference price is with a handful of bullion dealers in the UK who mostly deal in gold. Even if the German dealers get themselves registered with HMRC, they'll likely end up equal or more expensive than British dealers due to shipping and handling costs.  With time the second hand market will likely rise just because the supply of new silver has been artificially restricted.  It still might change in the next budget which will probably be huge.

24 minutes ago, BackyardBullion said:

Yep, I covered this earlier in the thread, it basically means any seller of any amount has to register with HMRC and pay quarterly returns. No way small companies will do this and it means they just won't bother to sell to the UK market.

The Tories are going to have to fix this stupidity and fast.  It's a bit of a blunder messing with imports from the rest of the world like this unless there's a surprise announcement coming very soon in the next budget.  Perhaps something else is planned to provide a load of relief and simplicity that hasn't been announced yet.  I can understand that there might be certain things they wouldn't want to share with us all yet until we've actually left because the EU has been so very keen to punish the UK for leaving.  Perhaps the full plans are being kept close to the chest for now until the UK is back in clear waters.  I give that about a 30% chance and 70% that they just haven't thought it through properly!

It certainly looks likely that VAT is going to be used as a short term windfall for now with not much thought being given to the long term choke that this restriction is going to cause.  The silly thing is that they could have kept it exactly as it was and still had a big windfall on the VAT.  There's no need to alienate small exporters from across the world with these new requirements.  The next budget really will be key.  There'll certainly be a number of things that are being changed and I guess we'll just have to wait until then to see if this government has any vision left.

10 minutes ago, BackyardBullion said:

This is the thing that I am most annoyed about - at a time when this country is facing the biggest crisis in history and suffering economically we are cutting ourselves off from the world, not just the EU. 

You are 100% right that international sellers will not bother to register and if they get some angry letters from HMRC about it they will just not bother to sell any more. 

All of this is for one thing - promoting buying British. I don't have a problem with this fundamental principal - but the problem is that for a lot of things in this world (lets face it we are not the manufacturing powerhouse we once were) we have very limited options in the UK. So buying British will often mean buying at a much higher price for goods than elsewhere in the world. 

Not to mention that this world is ever shrinking and the "global village" model is one that should inspire entrepreneurs into opening new businesses in new markets. 

The UK is essentially disincentivising international trade and that is not good in my book. 

I'm a fan of buying British, especially instead of buying from a massive global megacorp.  But the target here is small sales from abroad which is simply going to limit choice rather than reduce sales.  Amazon and large monopoly business won't have any trouble acting as tax collectors and bankers for HMRC.  All this will do is accelerate the trend towards a handful of multinational globalist behemoths.  Without getting too conspiratorial, it's a bit "great reset" sounding to me.  That reset nonsense from the world economic forum seems to be all about owning nothing and renting everything from super massive black holes.  A move such as this would accelerate their dream.

@Pete, I think you're correct that it will end up being a bit less than a 20% difference on top.  A few years ago, one dealer in Estonia was selling coins at the same price as others in Germany and Belgium despite the fact that Estonia had a genuine zero VAT regime and the others had to pay VAT at about 7% if I remember correctly.  There's a bit in the premium to play with and some dealers will do their best to reduce premiums and knock off the lower VAT rate.  It'll keep the UK market alive for a bit longer in the short term but everyone loses if British customers give up on silver as an investment and ultimately the RM will lose out through less sales overall.  The European dealers are the ones who stand to lose the most sales in my opinion.  Our British dealers already lost most of their silver market a long time ago but will experience a rise in buyers avoiding paying the post office handling charges.

Long term though, I'm not optimistic about the market continuing as before unless the government can be persuaded to abolish or align with the EU reduced VAT rates.  Let's not forget that the reason they supposedly weren't able to adjust this VAT rate before Brexit was because it was EU mandated VAT on silver (even though certain member states had an out in the open workaround allowed for their dealers).  Now that we are out and this excuse is no longer a valid way to deflect from the subject, (and with the recent commendable design effort put in by the RM) there is a small chance that fiscal conservatives will agree with the argument that it's an outrage that British Citizens are now being charged more than any other people anywhere in the rest of the world to own British legal tender!  It is outrageous and perhaps they'll see the logic of abolishing it to keep the RM in it's lucrative business.  I'm hoping that the RM will put forward a proposal to the chancellor in the coming months to request a review. If I was in charge I would certainly be using this moment to make the case.  After all, the chancellor got the mint to make a new 50p recently so perhaps they actually have a good working relationship with him.  This is where my hope lies.

Pretty much everyone who gets interested in silver learns quickly how not to pay the VAT(up to now at least).  Investment magazines such as Moneyweek have run many stories on how to buy silver at reduced or zero VAT and I'm pretty sure that it's not just astute forum members who've been aware of this.  I'd bet that the vast majority of Silver bought by UK buyers over the years has been purchased at the reduced VAT rates.  I certainly bought VAT free silver long before I ever heard about this forum and I'm sure that any large players will have been fully aware right from the start.

@BackyardBullion The abolition of the low value relief sounds like complete insanity to me.  And forcing foreign small businesses to register for UK VAT at source is fantasy.  If I was a small business exporting to the rest of the world and someone like New Zealand insisted that I fill out their special paperwork and register an account with them and collect taxes on their behalf and transfer them the money as well as keep quarterly accounts for them I know exactly what my response would be.  I'd just apologise to NZ customers and tell them that I can't sell to them any more.  If this idea comes into being as a long term solution by these Tory chumps it will cause hundreds of thousands of small businesses to refuse to export to us.  It's hardly surprising that these chumps have no vision.  They aren't the libertarians who came up with the Brexit plan in the first place and their views on tax don't align.  They simply stole Brexit and broke it.

30 minutes ago, Silverman2U said:

Arg. Very true. Just did a quick read up. It was Churchill that was for the EU idea, however Britain stood on the sidelines at the time as the ECSC was formed to deal initial with trading of steel,  the U.K. felt it would alienate them from trade with the commonwealth and believed that the pound was the global currency. Not sure that idea worked out well, probably about is good as Gordon Brown flogging the nations gold reserves for £200-300 an once in the early 2000’s. How many of us remember that ;).

In 1961 U.K. tried to get in France vetoed in twice over the next decade, then in around 69 they got a chance and by 71 they were in, Denmark shortly after. 

ECSC changed names and grew along the way going to EC and then to EU I believe. 

 

https://ukandeu.ac.uk/the-facts/why-did-the-united-kingdom-not-join-the-european-union-when-it-started/

"Says the BBC"  The BBC are the most Europhilic organisation in the nation, along with the Guardian newspaper of course, whose biggest buyer is actually the BBC!  I trust very little of what they have to say these days and their interpretation of Churchill's views is likely to be one that is cherry picked to back their strong remain stance.

My understanding of the early years during the birth of the ECSC is that there was at least one German character involved with a rather interesting background shall we say.  It was always destined to be an imperialistic venture and it has indeed become a Franco German empire with Germany at the helm.  It was just a softer and slower attempt than the previous two failed ones only a few short years earlier.

Margaret Thatcher was certainly in favour of the EEC as a trade organisation.  But she was also totally and completely opposed to it as a political union.

32 minutes ago, BackyardBullion said:

If you order something from a European seller and they charge you VAT then you can ask them to remove that and refund you the difference, they shouldn't charge it.

So, I disagree that it is a money maker, it will bring more revenue than before. Pre-brexit if you bought something from Europe you paid VAT to that countries tax system, the UK got nothing. 

Now that HMRC can collect VAT on imports from the EU it is just pure additional VAT revenue they were not getting before.

It will force buyers to buy British, which is a good thing - but from a competitive market point of view I think that this is a load of brown stuff because it might just be that UK prices are considerably more than other countries and us Brits end up paying over the odds for our goods.

It will work out in the end, but there is no doubt that HMRC will be taking a lot more VAT revenue compared to before brexit

 

Agreed regarding goods where both sides previously charged VAT.  It's a win for HMRC.  But... for silver bullion, NO ONE, ANYWHERE (except fools and the uninformed) has been paying 20% VAT.  NO ONE.  If HMRC imagine that there is a market to charge only British Citizens 20% on silver bullion they will find that they simply kill the market stone dead.  It will actually REDUCE the amount of overall sales that the Royal Mint make and even reduce their overall tax take as a result.  Europeans will still buy Royal mint silver but Brits wont.  Less trade equals less tax on profit.

4 minutes ago, BackyardBullion said:

From 1st January dealers in europe would zero rate the sale, meaning you pay 0% tax to them but when it arrives in the UK you pay the 20%.

They won't sort it out quickly, VAT is extremely complicated and any changes or harmonisation will take a long time to negotiate and or implement.

As to getting rid of it, no chance. It will change in name to "purchase tax" or something like that, but it won't change and the rates won't change, if anything they will go up and new taxes implemented on things like gold.

It's too much of a potential money maker for HMrC

I realise that European firms are supposed to remove the VAT for export but I suspect that they won't make the effort to remove these odd margin VAT scheme charges.  They will just sell it as they do to everyone and the UK will slap 20% on top.

I don't think that this is a potential money maker for the HMRC.  All of the Royal mint product goes abroad without VAT applied.  It then has dealer margins applied in Europe and the HMRC gets nothing.  If they think that all of the trade from UK buyers buying from Germany will continue in the UK and they can cream 20% off British citizens they are not thinking straight.  All they will do is kill the market.  The 20% doesn't exist for them and never has.  It's kind of like the cigarette duty that you hear them crying about losing billions of pounds over each year.  The hooky tobacco that enters the country is NOT lost duty for the revenue.  It is an imaginary market because many of those people who were paying half price for their tobacco simply can't pay full price (the UK duty) and would give up.

If the gov think they can tax 20% a small market and expect it to continue they are idiots.  Far better would be to abolish it and bring the centre for silver bullion trading back to the UK.  It was stolen by the Europeans years ago when VAT got applied selectively.  All trade moved to the VAT workaround zone and the bullion market in silver was lost.  Real idiots run governments because all revenue from it was lost.  Time to bring it back and promote our bullion dealers instead.  I think I will write to my MP pointing this out and suggest that now is the time to give our bullion industry a boost.  

It's actually quite complex when you consider the different VAT schemes in operation on silver in Europe.  Estonia had for a long time (and it may still be) a totally VAT free scheme.  Germany had a 7% VAT rate if I remember correctly and then also had a dealers margin scheme with VAT on the dealers profit only.  Quite how the UK HMRC would treat Silver that had had VAT applied in Germany at 7% I don't know.  Would they regard it as VAT paid? Or would they work out 13% that they would then collect?  Or would they slap a full 20% on it?

The UK government is going to have to get this part of these proceedings worked out fast.  There are plenty of other goods for which the VAT is mismatched and slapping full UK VAT on top would be like adding trade tariffs.

The truth of the matter is that the biggest trade tariffs from the USA to UK are usually the VAT.  Now that we don't have to play with this dreadful EU invented tax, lets just hope that the government chooses wisely to abandon it and to let the brakes off the economy.  Abolishing VAT now would be very bold and it would be a massive shake up.  It would certainly give people a lot more money in their pockets and give the whole economy an enormous boost.  The ability to act in this kind of bold way was the very reason for leaving in the first place.  I'm not sure if the Tories realised this when they took the policy off UKIP.

Just to add to my passenger allowance post.

Duty free for travellers is split into separate sections.  It gets broken down into the traditional perfume, tobacco and alcohol "allowances" as well as cash or monetary instruments (not bullion) and then "other goods".  There are more restrictive limits for different classes of people such as aircrew and maritime personnel or if arriving on a non commercial vessel.   

I imagine that the purpose is just a sensible compromise that allows passengers to buy a few baubles abroad without the administrative nightmare of opening everyone's bags and working out a few pence to charge on them.  It prevents passengers from engaging in business and subverting tax laws or money laundering whilst remaining pragmatic.

A box of 200 cigarettes can make you around £50 in savings if you're a smoker compared to buying them in the UK.  This is accepted at the border possibly as a perk to help the airports remain profitable (hence private entry having a lower rate) but also because there's a practical pragmatic limit for the customs guys to deal with efficiently.  Because of this there simply cannot be an intended zero limit to VAT on "personal possessions".  15 ounces of Silver souvenirs would save you almost exactly the same value as the cigarettes and so it's quite arguable that this is intentional despite the wording not being specific.

I've only travelled with metals a handful of times and I'm no expert but something you should definitely expect when travelling internationally with Silver is that you WILL be asked to open your bag on departure.  The density sets off the detectors and to save you from the quite sudden excitement and concern that they generate it's way better as a minimum to put them separately in the tray and if you get a chance to alert a staff member before it goes through the detector.  I just put mine separately in a soft bag in the tray maintaining some privacy but also being quite open about it.  They always asked to inspect them although in the arab world not much interest was paid to them after a quick look.  Different culture regarding real money.  I also carried receipts showing my rightful ownership and a print showing todays fix vs actual weight (in case of any arrival discussions).  I was never asked on arrival but I was asked once on departure to show ownership.  I was never near the UK limit and was confident that if I was stopped I could argue my case.

It's not much help for volume buyers, but for tourists, 15 ounces of silver "souvenirs" should be fine in my opinion.  

9 minutes ago, GoldStatue said:

Silver Britannia’s have a face value of £2, as it’s legal tender could you bring 195 of them back with you from Belgium? (mInus your carry on luggage value)

Read the link on metals across borders i posted.  There is a discussion there or on a link in the page that discusses this cash legal tender value rather than metal value.   It would appear that if declared as a monetary cash instrument you might get away with it but personally I doubt it.  It's very hard to determine what they mean by cash and financial instruments given that other items such as gold bullion have different and vague definitions.  It all goes round in circles and I think it's deliberate to be honest.  The legal tender argument only really works for circulating legal tender is my assessment but it would be great if that was different.  I wouldn't want to take the risk but if you do and it works out please do let us hear about it.  It would definitely result in a big discussion with customs and you'd need your legal case carefully laid out to demonstrate to them.

8 minutes ago, Michal said:

For post

https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/notice-143-a-guide-for-international-post-users/notice-143-a-guide-for-international-post-users

VAT on goods ( read bottom)

https://www.gov.uk/duty-free-goods/arrivals-from-outside-the-eu

The argument still stands regarding it being a passenger allowance.  It is traditionally a duty free allowance and is worded very badly as a result.  It has been a grey area like this for a very long time almost certainly deliberately.

If you're arriving from an area where VAT has not been paid, you will not have your bags opened and VAT applied to everything if your total value is found to be BELOW £390.  The reason is that every traveller with a laptop or a watch or a mobile phone that was newish looking would have to carry paperwork to demonstrate it's VAT payment.  It's not possible or sensible which is why a simple limit / perk is given to tourists who buy souvenirs etc without all of that hassle.  It would take a day to clear customs if they were to abolish the allowance.

The £390 should really go up with inflation because it's been £390 for at least 6 years and possibly many more than that before I explored it last.  A few silver coins below a total value of £390 including all of your personal effects should be fine imo.  It's basically not worth the ticket cost for people to go making a business out of it and small insignificant amounts are not worth them bothering with.

This page is old but may contain useful updated links.  I used it to investigate bringing metals across borders years ago on a plane.  Gold is no problem because it's zero rated and can just be declared if carrying more than 10,000 Euros worth into the UK.  (the euros value will change soon I guess)  Silver is not the same but it's arguable that you can bring £390 worth on your person as a traveller entering the UK as if it were just goods which you had bought abroad on your travels.  Essentially the duty free limits from the days of old are still in place and they are a perk of travelling.  It's an in person perk and not something you can get when shipping a parcel which will probably end up being about £29

https://preciousmetaltax.com/transporting-metals-internationally/#Customs_duty_import_taxes