how can you tax the buyer? when they are getting the item?
Sellers get info on how much gold they'll be getting post tax. Buyers can get a price that factors their end of the tax and shows how much is going to the other player. In both cases, the players need to manually adjust from the default listing if they find they're giving/receiving more or less gold than they want for the item. 1% or 0.5% button would also help players adjust prices more closely to the tax change than the current method of spamming 5% and calling it a day.
How to block a forum user
Mel 624
said
:
Tenebri
said
:
how would that even work?
how can you tax the buyer? when they are getting the item?
Sellers get info on how much gold they'll be getting post tax. Buyers can get a price that factors their end of the tax and shows how much is going to the other player. In both cases, the players need to manually adjust from the default listing if they find they're giving/receiving more or less gold than they want for the item. 1% or 0.5% button would also help players adjust prices more closely to the tax change than the current method of spamming 5% and calling it a day.
sounds a lot more confusing that it needs to be, especially when with what it sounds like its still the seller thats getting taxed overall
. so like i said how is the buyer being taxed here?
PrblyMyFault
said
:
How about not charging players to play a game that they are already paying to play?
Mel 624
said
:
Tenebri
said
:
how would that even work?
how can you tax the buyer? when they are getting the item?
Sellers get info on how much gold they'll be getting post tax. Buyers can get a price that factors their end of the tax and shows how much is going to the other player. In both cases, the players need to manually adjust from the default listing if they find they're giving/receiving more or less gold than they want for the item. 1% or 0.5% button would also help players adjust prices more closely to the tax change than the current method of spamming 5% and calling it a day.
Let's do the maths.
An item worth 100k is posted on the GE by the "seller".
The "buyer" puts the equal 100k buy offer in the GE for this same item.
Buyer:
Loses 100k GP
Seller:
Gains 98k GP
GE Tax:
2k GP
In this example, it is not noted how much tax the buyer has paid, nor how much tax the seller has paid. It simply shows that there is a 2% difference between buyer and seller. It does not matter if the buyer contributes 25%, 50% or 99% of the tax, it is still the same overall calculation.
As for the adjusting the prices of items by +1-2% to account for the tax, the number of players doing this will be negligible compared to the total community. The only people who would be doing this are those who have never clicked those -5% / -20% buttons.
The tax is negligible. Only GE flippers will notice any difference, and they will make far more money than this tax regardless.
I disagree that the people using 1% or 2% options wouldn't be among the ones using 5%. I've seen multiple people so far say they've resorted to using +5% because it was too much trouble to calculate the tax manually to set their prices accordingly. The issue I'm trying to address is the added pressure for sellers to raise prices to compensate for the tax. Doing that while keeping the tax would require putting part of the tax calculation on the buyer's side too and making it so that the post tax value is evenly between the two.
While the taxed amount for low value items may be negligible, it can add up pretty quickly. The 2% was estimated to remove 86B from the game per day. 1.5% would've been 64.4B, while 1% was 43.07B. They said their target was removing 56B to cover the death cost reduction, not the entire 88B gold deficit. They also said that they rejected the other options they mentioned because they couldn't singlehandedly cover 56B of gold reduction with no mention of how viable adding up multiple options would be.
There are several issues with the overall existence and use of the GE tax. Options are limited for making it more serviceable but that's in part because they shouldn't have gone about the gold generation issue the way they did in the first place. The new death costs aren't balanced and shifted that burden to the GE tax. We have no indication they're actually going to do anything about alchemy directly. The whole thing's a mess.
How to block a forum user