"Donate" has a very specific meaning, at least in the US, and comes with numerous accounting connotations, including the ability to write off the expense. As many people don't realize that "charitable donations" do /not/ include "donations" to purchase toys for children, it is misleading to use the term "donation" in this circumstance. Meanwhile, often the person /accepting/ the donations doesn't understand this eith…
More Paypal nonsense
81–90 of 257 posts
Re: More Paypal nonsense
#82"Donate" has a very specific meaning, at least in the US, and comes with numerous accounting connotations, including the ability to write off the expense. As many people don't realize that "charitable donations" do /not/ include "donations" to purchase toys for children, it is misleading to use the term "donation" in this circumstance. Meanwhile, often the person /accepting/ the donations doesn't understand this eith…
Only when PP blocked their use of the "Donate" button--which would have been acceptable for helping a sick cat??--did Regretsy resort to "reselling" already-purchased toys to recoup costs and continue the program. But again I cannot conceive of any reason that use tax would be due here...
Re: More Paypal nonsense
#83Earlier quoted context omitted.
The money donated is used by the non-profit to purchase products that are then given away to needy kids. This is donation whichever way you look at it. Amazon will let you do this but people generally specify who they want the product to go to which makes it a gift purchased for friends/family. So it qualifies as a purchase there.
"used by the non-profit" <- I'm sorry, maybe I'm confused, but as far as I know there are no "non-profits" involved here; which entity are you speaking of here?
I agree it was a bad choice of words, though.
Re: More Paypal nonsense
#84I'm sorry that you don't realize what you are trying to do is nearly equivalent to a Nigerian scam, but in the eyes of a payment company, it is. So cut Paypal some slack.
Anyway, you are also factually incorrect; we deal with princes and inheritance, not children toys. :)
Re: More Paypal nonsense
#85I'll be looking at alternatives after receiving the friendly "We reviewed your account and determined that there's a relatively higher than average risk of future transaction issues" email that states they'll be holding my money for 21 days... I have never made a claim. I have never had a claim filed against me. My account receives maybe $500/year, tops. I send $500/year, tops. HUDGE risk of transaction issues.
What are you selling?
Re: More Paypal nonsense
#86Earlier quoted context omitted.
Any change in average processing volume and ticket size is a red flag at any payment processor. An individual/business suddenly getting a ton of "donations" is going to look suspicous. An individual/business that hasn't told their processor their plans, and gets a ton of "donations", is going to have to convince that processor the donations are really donations and are going to end up going towards what they said the…
The problem didn't seem to be that the volume/value of transactions suddenly went up. The Paypal representative didn't say that at any point in the conversation. Even if that was indeed the case, a simple investigation of the issue would have cleared things up. Businesses are supposed to work with customers , not fuck them over at the first sign of trouble.
I hate to come down on the side of Paypal, but it would be so easy to abuse the donation button by doing exactly this, and not sending out any gifts. There is no way paypal can test this.
Re: More Paypal nonsense
#87"Donate" has a very specific meaning, at least in the US, and comes with numerous accounting connotations, including the ability to write off the expense. As many people don't realize that "charitable donations" do /not/ include "donations" to purchase toys for children, it is misleading to use the term "donation" in this circumstance. Meanwhile, often the person /accepting/ the donations doesn't understand this eith…
What world do you live in, where "donate" necessarily implies some kind of accounting whargarbl? Unless there is some more complicated scheme afoot here that I have failed to comprehend, it appears the Regretsy folks were collecting money, 100% of which would be used for the benefit of needy people, without claiming to be a 501(c)(3) or anything of the like. Still sounds like a donation to a worthy cause. Only when P…
Regretsy is in the EU, not the US, but I don't believe that changes the point. In the EU, everything that is traded, whether it be a good or a service, is subject to a "value added tax". (Note: this applies to you even if you are not yourself living in the EU; if you sell products to EU customers online, you must collect and remit VAT if you are above their threshold.)
These taxes can be quite high: up to 25% of the receipt. You are only responsible for the "value added" (so you subtract your costs), but the way you subtract your costs is very similar to expense structure in the US: the cost you declare has to be to another VAT-registered organization, and you need to keep whatever receipts and documentation is required to defend the costs later.
I am simply having a very difficult time seeing how this specific setup was, in the eyes of the law, any different from Ikea selling chairs: they were selling products, and selling products is a highly regulated business with a large number of taxes that have to be considered. You cannot just throw up a website and willy-nilly throw money around.
Re: More Paypal nonsense
#88Earlier quoted context omitted.
Because in reality paypal is actually pretty awesome (note: I work for Etsy which uses paypal as a payment processor, so I guess I'm kind of biased). The cost for the business, compared to maintaining your own payments platform at scale, is pretty reasonable, and the failure rate is pretty miniscule when you consider the amount of potential fraud that goes through the platform. Paypal wasn't really designed to handle…
IIRC Paypal was originally designed for interpersonal payments.
Re: More Paypal nonsense
#89I've been sitting here for the last five minutes trying to make a point eloquently. I'm having a hard time with it. So I'll just put it like this: What else can we really expect from a product whose parent is eBay ? This company is a fucking fossil with all the hunger for customer satisfaction of a used tissue. Is it convenient for users? Yeah. Is it worth gambling your entire business on? Given the lack of accountab…
PayPal's customers are the people who use it. You, as a merchant, are not a customer of theirs, but a necessary evil to keep the customers coming. PayPal's customers love it. PayPal's merchants don't like it because PayPal has fraud prevention methods that are opaque and hamfistedly applied. That's a fine complaint, but this breathless "for the sake of the world don't ever use PayPal" garbage is pretty ridiculous.
If you want to do anything beyond selling tangible goods or simple subscriptions, you should probably reevaluate using PayPal to do that. PayPal isn't the best product for everything, and frankly, I'm sick of every merchant doing some crazy scheme (seriously, "give us money and maybe we'll send you a gift of some unspecified value in the future"? can you fucking spell "chargeback"?) bitching and moaning into the HN echo chamber whenever PayPal tells them to stop that.
Re: More Paypal nonsense
#90Earlier quoted context omitted.
I'd be curious to know how conversion rates vary when you have Paypal vs. a merchant account (or something like Stripe) vs. both. Anyone have any data?
I have several websites; some sell products, some monthly subscriptions, some target consumers, some businesses. Universally, on all of these sites, customers choose to pay with PayPal more often than credit card. For the most part, my payment pages are a secure credit card form with a "or Pay with PayPal" button to the right of the form. More people choose to click through to PayPal than to just put their card in to…