4 ms·

The pudding was the same price before and after the promotion, so the barcode was worth zero cents. He claimed back tax on the non-barcode value.

• aaron695 13y ago
  It's a bit a stretch that any judge/anyone would believe that he was buying pudding. Or that he went to all that effort to keep something of zero value.
  • nmeofthestate 13y ago
    In the UK, any promotional 'tokens' like this have to have a monetary value on them - normally it's something like 0.0001p. IANAL but perhaps this minute monetary value is the legal value (i.e. effectively nothing)?
  • vidarh 13y ago
    They wouldn't need to believe he was buying it for just the pudding. They would need to believe that the donated pudding had a certain monetary value, that this guy then donated. And that value would be natural to assess against the cost of acquiring the pudding when the donation was made to someone for the benefit of the food.. That he could extract additional value through the work of removing the bar code does not implicitly reduce the value of the pudding itself. It is not unusual for it to be possible to extract more value by splitting up a product and selling or taking advantage of parts separately. A lot of businesses are even built on buying lots and separating them to extract value as people are often willing to pay over the odds for a smaller part, or parts of the lots may have been undervalued (as clearly was the case here).
  • pm90 13y ago
    Does it matter? Free pudding was given to Salvo. Salvo had no idea what to do with the barcodes.