HOW THE HELL DO YOU...................

[Pinkbear (Julie)]

But the thing is Mark, as the VAT laws stand, the limit for compulsory VAT registration is around £60k, I believe. But there could be an appendix passed to make compulsory VAT registration limitless for the purposes of animal breeding.

And it would be beneficial to good breeders as they could then reclaim VAT paid on foodstuffs and vet care. They might even see a rebate cheque from the VATman! 

[Mark]

The VAT thing wouldn't work as you have to turn over a certain amount to be VAT registered (something like £75,000 a year). But there could be another type of licence number they could use. If pedigree breeds dying out is the price to pay for solving the problems, I think its the price that has to be paid. As lovely as they are to look at, they are no more special than any moggy.

[Pinkbear (Julie)]

For this idea to become policy, yes it would hurt. And cause short term chaos. Yes, pregnant animals would be dumped... but aren't they dumped now? If it became illegal to print or display an advert without printing the VAT number of the advertiser, or risk a £1000 fine for doing so, dog fighters wouldn't have a starting place to search. And yes, make it illegal to even give away a pet without the VAT number of it's breeder, unless signing it over to a rescue. Very, very painful on the rescues. But no more unwanted litters. A small adjustment to the advertising and VAT and taxation laws is all it would take. And before you ask, it costs very little to register for VAT.

BTW, when I said 'make money', I meant 'accept money' - not make a profit. If good breeders are giving pedigree kittens away for free please tell me 'cos I want a British Blue! 

But none of this will ever be implimented because too many people in society think it's morally wrong to interfere with an animals right to breed for a variety of reasons. And all that can be achieved in trying to reason with them is the passing of an awful lot of hot air. Which is why i'm not down parliament square with a placard. You can't reason with people's morals.

Hey, ho... 

[Susanne (urbantigers)]

Anyone that sells animals for whatever purpose is deemed to be making money from it.

But good breeders do not make money - that's the problem.  Making it more costly would put those people out of "business" and allow the back yard breeders to flourish.  Good breeders would play by the rules but there would be plenty others who ignore them, and unless the scheme had lots of funding I doubt they'd be caught.  And if it was illegal to sell animals wouldn't that just mean people giving them away?  Free to good home ads are scoured by those who want animals for dog fighting etc. which is why it's always a good idea to ask for a small amount.  Most rescues will insist any kittens they rehome are neutered when old enough, but most aren't in a position to check this is carried out and many owners "forget" or just don't get around to it.  Would an individual who's cat got pregnant accidentally (say through ignorance - not realising a female can get pregnant from 4months old) be considered a breeder?  Would they dump the pregnant cat somewhere to avoid getting caught without a licence?  And what about someone who took in a pregnant stray?

I'm just thinking aloud here so probably not being very coherent.  I'd like to think it could work but I'm just not sure.  I suppose like everything, there would be loopholes and disadvantages.  The success of such a scheme would depend very much on how it was run and monitored, and how much money was put into it. 

[Pinkbear (Julie)]

Susanne

A pet trading licence need have nothing to do with standards. The only concern here would be to reduce the amount of unwanted animals. And it need not cost a lot to administer.

Anyone that sells animals for whatever purpose is deemed to be making money from it. And to be making money, you need to be registered for VAT. If it became illegal to advertise a pet for sale without a VAT number, back street trade stops. If it became illegal to buy a pet without being able to supply the VAT number (or registered charity number) of the supplyer, the pet could be removed. If it was found that a companion pet had been sold without making provision for it's neutering, the VAT number could be removed. Trade stops. And if the only reason to have an unneutered animal is to breed from it, you'd need to be registered for VAT. Unwanted breeding stops.

Many charities only let kittens go if people either pre-pay for neutering, or give vouchers to ensure kittens are neutered later. By using the VAT regs, it could be made simple to enforce this outside the charity sphere.

The downside would be that rescues would be swamped with folks who let their queen have an unwanted litter and suddenly found they couldn't home them. But that would only happen once. After that, every kitten would be a wanted kitten. And wouldn't that be nice.... 

I can do politics, me! 

[Susanne (urbantigers)]

I agree in principle with breeders needing a licence, but in practice I'm not sure how it would work.  If you charge people a substantial sum then good breeders can't afford it as they don't make a profit out of breeding (quite the opposite - it's an expensive hobby) and the only ones who can are the backstreet breeders who make a profit by not looking after their cats properly.  And if it's a small amount, then it ends up costing more to collect than it brings in (remember the dog licence?).  And if it's not about money but that the breeder has to be up to a certain standard to get a licence, who decides what that standard is?  A registering body such as the GCCF?  The government?  The RSPCA?  How are breeders monitored?  Again, I think the backstreet breeders would find a way around this or just not bother.  After all, many sell pedigree cats that aren't registered and that doesn't seem to put off prospective purchasers so I doubt their lack of a licence would. 

I do wish the rcvs would get behind early spaying and neutering so that most kittens could be neutered before they went to their new homes.  Then we wouldn't have to rely on people actually getting them neutered at 6 months and it would be much harder to actually own an intact cat.

[Mark]

I'm surprised the government don't make an issue of it - from their point of view, it would be an excellent stealth tax, given how much money they will lose from cigarette sales. Call me a cynic - I am 

The irony of it all is the people that breed (not talking about proper breeders here) are the people least able or willing to take the animals welfare into consideration.

[Pinkbear (Julie)]

We could end all this on one go by making it illegal to sell animals without a licence. Anyone wanting to get that licence would have to prove that animals sold for companion pet purposes where rendered infertile.

There's been a lobby for such a thing for a while, now. Why it hasn't happened baffles me. Or, maybe certain factions believing in freedom from state say it would be just another means to control us all?

Big thoughts... 

[MBll]

Educate a HALFWIT?


On another site a poster is selling kittens & sees nothing wrong in breeding?   Now this lassie states that shes worked in RESCUE & should BLOODY well know not to...the reson shes breeding is because of rescues attutuide....not rehoming on things like..........home to small/kids to young etc or as shes puts it  blah blah.


The ones that have replyed are all ......moaning do gooders