I've not used DomainEasy.com, but on their website they state:
DomainEasy - Build and grow your domain business
"Similarly, if you are a seller,
We will purchase the domain name from you and sell it directly to the buyer. No transactions whether they be purchases or leases are conducted directly between Users of Our Site. All transactions are conducted exclusively between Us and a seller or buyer, as applicable." (emphasis added)
Since they're based in Toronto, doesn't that mean that If the seller is Canadian, they should be paying HST?
So, on a $100,000 USD sale to them (where they're buying it from you), shouldn't you be getting USD $113,000 USD, inclusive of 13% HST (if you're in Ontario)? (assuming zero commissions)
Yes, that is precisely the way I would insist on conducting a transaction through Dynadot as well. Price plus 13% HST since the buyer (dynadot) is in Ontario.
However, Godaddy brokerage insists on billing through their US offices. But considering that Godaddy is incorporated in Canada and has an office and employees here, at first glance that seems like tax evasion. However, I also don't know if a multi-national corp can say that their broker offices are only in the U.S. and therefore those specific services get billed out of that office. Would be an interesting question for CRA - not that I want to be the guy who asks it.
For what its worth, I had a large sale this year through a godaddy broker where I insisted that since I knew the buyer was from Canada that I would have to collect HST - otherwise I would need something in writing from Godaddy saying that
they would take liability for handling any GST or HST due, if applicable. Godaddy didn't want to do that, so they talked to the buyer and they agreed to reveal their billing information and pay the taxes AFTER the godaddy transaction went through. So it took some trust on my part, the buyer did, I invoiced them for the HST due and they paid it directly to me. Very weird. This is one of the reasons why I don't really like dealing with godaddy brokers, it seems like there is no consistency in handling taxes, nor do they have any written policy on how taxes are handled. Most of they time they actually tell me they are trying to do what Dynadot is saying, they buy, then they sell. But when I said put that in writing that you're taking liability for the taxation, they chose the other route instead.
While I appreciate the fact that Dynadot has some clarity on their role (buy then sell), and that it maintains anonymity for both parties, to me, I don't think that fits the definition of a broker.
A broker negotiates a transaction and may use escrow or trust account to pass funds through, but should never actually takes ownership of the funds or product. The broker would bill their commission separately to the buyer and/or seller (with any applicable taxes only on the commission). So in theory, taxes should be paid to the seller from the buyer on the purchase price (if applicable). Two separate transactions.
So the definition and role of a broker has evolved this way for a reason - to prevent brokers from doing unscrupulous things, like, taking more than their agreed to commission. So I wonder, do people care? Do you trust companies acting as a pseudo broker and not a true broker? I highly doubt the real estate world would stand for this scenario, why is it OK in domaining?
Does anyone else have thoughts on this?
@BillSweetman
@GeorgeK