Thread: Thoughts on this?

Originally Posted by berg243

if you take someone fishing with you and they pay for part of the fuel or supply food or fishing gear that is deemed a reward so can be classed as commercial.

So, if you go somewhere with your mates in your vehicle and they contribute to the fuel... it is then a commercial operation???

There's a big soft blob of arbitrary BS under my foot, nice and warm and coming up between my toes.

Originally Posted by Cordite

So, if you go somewhere with your mates in your vehicle and they contribute to the fuel... it is then a commercial operation???

There's a big soft blob of arbitrary BS under my foot, nice and warm and coming up between my toes.

Hope it is nice warm BS.

Originally Posted by Cordite

So, if you go somewhere with your mates in your vehicle and they contribute to the fuel... it is then a commercial operation???

There's a big soft blob of arbitrary BS under my foot, nice and warm and coming up between my toes.

I dunno it might not be all bad.....I could claim tax back on at least 20 grand loss last year If my boat was a business

Sent from my SM-G800Y using Tapatalk

In the Herald article the offical guy stated if you are recreational fishing and someone pays money towards fuel then it is NOT for reward and is not commercial.

Will I be able to claim all the costs my boat makes? Where do I sign? Chasing Apple would make more money?

Here is he link to the Herald article

Maritime NZ tells social media-savvy boatie he needs a commercial skipper's licence to operate - NZ Herald

I wonder if he has/ needs a concession to make commercial films on public land too?

Sent from my D5833 using Tapatalk

There needs to be a differentiation between operating a boat for the primary purpose of receiving a reward, and operating a boat for the primary purpose of recreation.
Realistically if a mate 'chips in' for the fuel you are still operating your boat at a loss and to me there isn't an actual financial gain being made as you are still out of pocket when a mate chucks you $20 for fuel.

He isn't offering his boat for financial reward, he is offering video footage of his actions, yes they are on a boat, but I guess that is where legal interpretation comes into play rather than morals and common sense?
Good to see on the article it is stated that
"The owner of a pleasure craft who uses it for recreational purposes can receive contributions for costs. The Maritime Transport Act specifically states that this is not reward, and it is therefore not commercial."

Originally Posted by Wildman

I wonder if he has/ needs a concession to make commercial films on public land too?

Sent from my D5833 using Tapatalk

So I need to pay to use my gopro when hunting ?

Originally Posted by Pengy

So I need to pay to use my gopro when hunting ?

If you're doing it for a living then I think you would have to?

To me it seems the fundamentals are that if you're doing it for a job, which Josh arguably is, then you have to jump through the hoops the same as any other business. I mean he doesn't put the boating videos up on his 'private' YouTube account, it's all on the same channel and it's still getting his face out there, which is in essence his product, the same as any other social media star...

Sent from my D5833 using Tapatalk

Originally Posted by stug

Here is he link to the Herald article

Maritime NZ tells social media-savvy boatie he needs a commercial skipper's licence to operate - NZ Herald

That clears things up thanks

Mostly I dont expect any contribution if I take someone fishing as generally the fuel use is pretty small and I was going anyway, the exception is a planned trip further afield with a mate and then we would both expect to pay our share of costs.....in my case bait and burly is usually more than fuel.

That fact that it is 'The Kiwi Bushman Ltd' indicates that it is a limited liability company, so yes, I think Maritime NZ would be correct.

Pecuniary gain is the term , fuckwits should leave the little guys alone I find it amazing how govt agencies seem to go out of there way shutting people down especially in rural communities where there arnt a lot of jobs .

Originally Posted by berg243

if they could get the big firms to pay their fare share of tax we would all pay less.

as much as I would like to believe this statement If I did then the tooth fairy would also exist. The biggest drain on us all is local councils wasting ratepayers money

Regardless of being 'the small guy" if its being used for commercial gain (not necessarily financial) then them's the rules

He could always take all the sponsors names off it just like any recreational boat and use it just like us then he might have a fair argument

Originally Posted by mikee

as much as I would like to believe this statement If I did then the tooth fairy would also exist. The biggest drain on us all is local councils wasting ratepayers money

Regardless of being 'the small guy" if its being used for commercial gain (not necessarily financial) then them's the rules

He could always take all the sponsors names off it just like any recreational boat and use it just like us then he might have a fair argument

I disagree.
I dont disagree our councils spend obscene amounts of our money on lost causes,bad art,poor infrastructure design etc.
But my rates are not even a drop in the ocean compared to my paye tax.
Big business dont pay tax(or as little as they can get away with) so the working man foots the bill as usual.