When ‘Free at Sea’ is not Free at At Sea

[yakcruiser]

Give it a break people! You can either save up a few extra dollars like DCGuy64 or just don't drink. The world is not coming to an end either way. Talk about 1st world problems!

[graphicguy]

2 minutes ago, yakcruiser said:

Give it a break people! You can either save up a few extra dollars like DCGuy64 or just don't drink. The world is not coming to an end either way. Talk about 1st world problems!

True…some are getting themselves tied up like a pretzel because of the VAT being charged.  Pay it.  Make Spain happy.  

[insidecabin]

 

 

1 hour ago, graphicguy said:

If that’s the case, using your logic, then European ports can charge  VAT on the buffet, or the toilet paper, or the ice, etc.

That's the point any applicable VAT/taxes are  applied at the point of purchase of the cruise so there is no VAT on the consumption of included items at point of consumption as they have no charge.

 

Any prepaid product/services should be treated the same.

 

The free cocktail at the latitude party is no different to a free drink as part of free at sea pre purchased package which is then part of the cruise fare.

[Asawi]

4 minutes ago, graphicguy said:

True…some are getting themselves tied up like a pretzel because of the VAT being charged.  Pay it.  Make Spain happy.  

Or rather France in this case...  

[insidecabin]

57 minutes ago, DCGuy64 said:

Interestingly, I found this thread by using the search function and the keywords NCL and VAT: https://boards.cruisecritic.co.uk/topic/2493526-10-spanish-vat-on-bar-charges-at-ncl/ It's from January 2018, well over 5 years ago. I think some people have mistakenly assumed this is a new issue, but obviously it isn't. Also, the possibility of VAT being added is in NCL's literature like on this flyer. It IS in small print, but it's there.

https://www.ncl.com/sites/default/files/790164-BEV_Package_Flyer_UOBP_PPBP Update_V7_no_crops.pdf

Spain and tax goes back as far as at least 2010.

 

I suspect (not had time to look*) that NCL has been planning this for some time with changes to wordings in the T&C to include the new VAT terminology, would not surprise me UK drinkgate was wrapped up in this plan as well but they got it wrong and had to back out.

 

They tried the new tax rules on that one but were very evasive when ask what law refused to answer.

 

* Need to dig out some old docs

 

 

[Captain-John]

NCL should pay it to Spain without charging passengers more, end of story.

[graphicguy]

1 minute ago, Captain-John said:

NCL should pay it to Spain without charging passengers more, end of story.

I'm all for that.  But, then the fare would be increased, like Royal does.  And, I don't want to pay a blanket fee on the entire drink package just to cover the few drinks I do order.

 

Just as an example, Royal charges 2x and more for their drink package that NCL does.  I don't want that.

[Stevio]

11 minutes ago, Phoenixon said:

 

Except that the VAT law in the EU requires a chargeable event which occurs at the time of supply of the good/service. In this case, it is the "purchase" (or supply) of the beverage, whether or not it is discounted 100% because of FAS. My understanding is the reason this is not charged on included consumables (e.g. buffet) is because there is no chargeable event (i.e. transaction - your card is not swiped). Other consumables (e.g. Specialty Dining) are likely not being passed on (as of now). Somewhat like the fuel subsidies which NCL has the right to levy per the contracts but chooses not to. 

 

 

 

Then the question is....Why didn't NCL charge "French tax" in the past & why is NCL the only cruise line to charge it on drinks packages now?

 

Lets face it if the situation is as shown this is a clear case of "DRINKSGATE II"

Someone at head office has dropped the ball once again and decided to reinterpret long standing VAT rules through the NCL filter..... 

There will be multiple complaints at end of cruise, refunds and £100 apologies issued to all and the next cruise it will all be forgotten and back to normal.

[Captain-John]

2 minutes ago, graphicguy said:

I'm all for that.  But, then the fare would be increased, like Royal does.  And, I don't want to pay a blanket fee on the entire drink package just to cover the few drinks I do order.

 

Just as an example, Royal charges 2x and more for their drink package that NCL does.  I don't want that.

 

I personally am of the belief that an extra $50-$100 on the headline fare to 'absorb' issues such as this, or other 'nickel and diming' examples goes down far better. It's optics and it's messaging.

 

Obviously NCL and some cruisers really make a decision to cruise one line or another based on that kind of marginal difference or the cruise lines wouldn't play games with headline fares, DSC, drinks package add-ons, 'Free at Sea' bundles etc.

 

If we get into the weeds of cross-subsidy, someone not using the MDR but the buffet instead is arguably paying over the odds for a seated table service they aren't getting. I'm not meaning to be difficult, but in one way or another we are ALL paying for facilities that we may or may not use.

For example, I don't have children but many ships I'm on have a kids' club facility.

 

I appreciate your example of the RC package being double the cost of NCL isn't the same as what I'm saying. But for NCL to pay the VAT to Spain in this case, they wouldn't need to double the cost - we're talking a few bucks per passenger averaged out over the whole ship.

[RocketMan275]

4 minutes ago, Captain-John said:

I appreciate your example of the RC package being double the cost of NCL isn't the same as what I'm saying. But for NCL to pay the VAT to Spain in this case, they wouldn't need to double the cost - we're talking a few bucks per passenger averaged out over the whole ship.

Since it's only a 'few bucks per passegner' why are some passengers make such a big deal over this?

[DCGuy64]

15 minutes ago, Captain-John said:

NCL should pay it to Spain without charging passengers more, end of story.

And if they don't?

[Captain-John]

5 minutes ago, RocketMan275 said:

Since it's only a 'few bucks per passegner' why are some passengers make such a big deal over this?

Optics. 

[Captain-John]

8 minutes ago, DCGuy64 said:

And if they don't?

 

They aren't and look at all the bad sentiment. 

 

 

Edited September 28, 2023 by Captain-John

[DCGuy64]

35 minutes ago, Phoenixon said:

In this case, it is the "purchase" (or supply) of the beverage, whether or not it is discounted 100% because of FAS. My understanding is the reason this is not charged on included consumables (e.g. buffet) is because there is no chargeable event (i.e. transaction - your card is not swiped).

Correct. Some people, it seems, are forgetting that folks who've paid for the unlimited drinks package still have to hand over their cruise cards to be swiped whenever they get a drink. The same isn't true when you go to the main dining room, the gym, the shows, the Garden Café, ask for ice or towels from your steward, or any other thing that is included with your cruise fare. Drinks are different. They get rung up every single time, yes, even if you've paid for them. Doesn't matter. And that's why VAT can be added on top of your "free" drinks. You've paid for the drinks and the gratuities, NOT any applicable government taxes. Which is what VAT is.

[Phoenixon]

2 minutes ago, Stevio said:

Then the question is....Why didn't NCL charge "French tax" in the past & why is NCL the only cruise line to charge it on drinks packages now?

 

Lets face it if the situation is as shown this is a clear case of "DRINKSGATE II"

Someone at head office has dropped the ball once again and decided to reinterpret long standing VAT rules through the NCL filter..... 

There will be multiple complaints at end of cruise, refunds and £100 apologies issued to all and the next cruise it will all be forgotten and back to normal.

We can really only speculate in the absence of an official statement from NCL. My guess, and it's at best a guess, is that this could be a test case to evaluate the guest reception to a policy/procedural change like this. Could also be a measure to meet revenue targets but again, you can only speculate. 

[DCGuy64]

Just now, Captain-John said:

 

They aren't and look at all the and sentiment. 

 

 

So I'll ask again, if NCL doesn't take your advice and pay Spain the VAT, what are you going to do about it? I'm not sure what "...look at all the and sentiment" means. 🤷‍♂️

[graphicguy]

14 minutes ago, Captain-John said:

 

I personally am of the belief that an extra $50-$100 on the headline fare to 'absorb' issues such as this, or other 'nickel and diming' examples goes down far better. It's optics and it's messaging.

 

Obviously NCL and some cruisers really make a decision to cruise one line or another based on that kind of marginal difference or the cruise lines wouldn't play games with headline fares, DSC, drinks package add-ons, 'Free at Sea' bundles etc.

 

If we get into the weeds of cross-subsidy, someone not using the MDR but the buffet instead is arguably paying over the odds for a seated table service they aren't getting. I'm not meaning to be difficult, but in one way or another we are ALL paying for facilities that we may or may not use.

For example, I don't have children but many ships I'm on have a kids' club facility.

 

I appreciate your example of the RC package being double the cost of NCL isn't the same as what I'm saying. But for NCL to pay the VAT to Spain in this case, they wouldn't need to double the cost - we're talking a few bucks per passenger averaged out over the whole ship.

I get it.  It's the optics of it more than anything else.

 

I don't get in the weeds too much when it comes to taxes.  They're paid.....one way or another..by the guests.  

 

I accept that as a way of life.  

 

Just spoke to NCL directly.  I have an upcoming cruise (next week) and am fortunate enough to be in the Haven.  As such, we have our own concierge for all our questions.  The Concierge said that Spain does indeed charge VAT on drinks while in their port(s) or in their waters.  The Concierge went on to say the port authorities are really at the crux of the issue, given some enforce it, some don't. 

 

But, at the bottom line of all this, if I'm paying an extra $50 for my enjoyment of drinks while on the ship in Spain, it's not going to make that much of a difference.

 

The cruise lines do the same when in some U.S. ports.  Although, those drink taxes aren't nearly as onerous as the ones the European countries charge.  Our in the U.S. are maybe ¼ of what the European VAT is.

 

 

[Captain-John]

Just now, DCGuy64 said:

So I'll ask again, if NCL doesn't take your advice and pay Spain the VAT, what are you going to do about it? I'm not sure what "...look at all the and sentiment" means. 🤷‍♂️

 

'All the *bad* sentiment' - I've edited it. Sorry but you are just picking a fight. 'What am I going to do about it'? Come on. Unless you personally are the person at NCL responsible for this decision, you're coming on way too strong. I didn't insult your mother.

 

You and I have disagreed on these boards before but I am starting to wonder why you so strongly and consistently defend NCL at every turn.

 

NCL must absolutely love a section of its passenger base. The ships can be in bad shape, the food can be lower quality than before, they can have underhand marketing tactics yet some just say 'more please.'  No wonder they keep pushing the boundaries when many are so permissive.

[DCGuy64]

1 minute ago, Captain-John said:

All the *bad* sentiment' - I've edited it. Sorry but you are just picking a fight. 'What am I going to do about it'? Come on. Unless you personally are the person at NCL responsible for this decision, you're coming on way too strong. I didn't insult your mother.

You've clearly misread my comments. You didn't insult my (late) mother, and I hardly think asking a blunt question like "what are you going to do about it" is, to use your words, "coming on too strong." I just find the pointless whinging over a few bucks a bit much coming from people who think nothing of dropping $1,000s of dollars on cruises, that's all.

 

3 minutes ago, Captain-John said:

You and I have disagreed on these boards before but I am starting to wonder why you so strongly and consistently defend NCL at every turn.

The reason I defend any cruise line's decision is twofold: 1. When I see a thread that looks like a bandwagon exercise where everybody grabs his pitchfork and starts hating on the cruise line, my penchant for seeing things from the other side kicks in and 2. I don't necessarily think the cruise line is in the wrong here. If people fail to read the T&C's stating there might be VAT added to purchases, then I'm calling them out on it. 

[RocketMan275]

18 minutes ago, Captain-John said:

Optics. 

It's alway optics when someone wants someone else to pay their freight.

[sansroof]

53 minutes ago, graphicguy said:

True…some are getting themselves tied up like a pretzel because of the VAT being charged.  Pay it.  Make Spain happy.  

I bet Spain would be pretty happy since the taxes are due to France.

[graphicguy]

Take all of this, throw it in a blender, and come out with the cost of my cruise.

 

I always look at the total out of pocket.  

 

If, as the example is being made, Royal charges 2x the drink package compared to NCL, that VAT line item doesn't even remotely come close to what it costs to drink on a Royal ship.  And, adding to the out of pocket, Royal's fares tend to be higher than NCL's as a general rule of thumb.

 

VAT doesn't matter as I'm better off financially with NCL than I am with Royal, Costa, even MSC's "Easy Package" is about 3X the price of FAS, but includes the VAT.  It only includes drinks up to $10 ea.  You want to move up the ladder?  It's 4X the FAS package cost.  Still not comparable by any stretch.

 

As mentioned, Costa forces you to buy drinks a la carte  and adds VAT on top of that.

 

I like the way NCL does it.

[IAcruising]

3 hours ago, HowardK said:

I got the drink package in 2018 and don't drink that often  -- I had NYC tax charges - about 8 or 9 of them. 

 

🤣🤣🤣

 

[RocketMan275]

15 minutes ago, graphicguy said:

But, at the bottom line of all this, if I'm paying an extra $50 for my enjoyment of drinks while on the ship in Spain, it's not going to make that much of a difference.

Now, multiple your $50 bucks by 2000 or so passengers.  After awhile your 'optics' become rather expensive.

[Captain-John]

16 minutes ago, DCGuy64 said:

You've clearly misread my comments. You didn't insult my (late) mother, and I hardly think asking a blunt question like "what are you going to do about it" is, to use your words, "coming on too strong." I just find the pointless whinging over a few bucks a bit much coming from people who think nothing of dropping $1,000s of dollars on cruises, that's all.

 

The reason I defend any cruise line's decision is twofold: 1. When I see a thread that looks like a bandwagon exercise where everybody grabs his pitchfork and starts hating on the cruise line, my penchant for seeing things from the other side kicks in and 2. I don't necessarily think the cruise line is in the wrong here. If people fail to read the T&C's stating there might be VAT added to purchases, then I'm calling them out on it. 

 

If we ever end up on the same sailing I'm sure we'd end up having a spirited debate or two. We might see the other side. This medium doesn't always make it easy.