Mailboxes Unlimited won its battle with Government yesterday over customers having to pay a new higher 25-percent duty rate for goods imported to the Island throught the company.In a judgment handed down yesterday, Chief Justice Ian Kawaley ruled Mailboxes was a business and thus was entitled to so-called business end-use relief under a new law.As a result of the ruling, Government will have to pay half of Mailboxes’ court costs.Mailboxes owner Steve Thomson, who was represented by Alan Dunch, said he felt “vindicated” by the ruling.“Our driving motivation has always been to serve our customers to the best of our ability and keep costs as low as possible,” he said. “This decision will help our business and our customers in that process.”Premier and Finance Minister Paula Cox, commenting last night, said the Ministry will “carefully review the judgment and make any necessary changes in line with the judgment”.She noted the Court had ruled in favour of the Crown in refusing the other two declarations sought by Mailboxes, including its order that it be allowed to return to using one BCD per shipment.In an effort to “harmonise” duty rates, Government’s new legislation had raised duty to a flat 25 percent rate for all imported goods for personal use while goods imported for business use remained subject to generally lower duty rates, such as 6.5 percent for clothing and 8.5 percent for camera equipment.Mailboxes provides a US address for customers buying online for personal or business use, consolidates their purchases and has a courier ship them in to its Bermuda offices.The Collector of Customs contended Mailboxes was merely a shipper not a business, or importer, thus did not qualify for “business end-use relief” under “Customs Procedure Code 4000” .But the Chief Justice ruled “the interpretation contended for by the Crown would not just deprive the Applicant (Mailboxes) of business end-use relief. It would potentially deprive a wide array of businesses which the Customs Department itself has previously suggested are intended to benefit from CPC 4000 from entitlement to relief impacting on their tax burden in a significant way during a period of economic recession.”Mr Kawaley further said: “The main difficulty with the Respondent’s argument, as Mr Dunch pointed out, is that it flies in the face of the plain words of CPC 4000. CPC 4000 does not, as it easily might, limit the relief to a specific class of importers such as retailers. Nor indeed does the legislation exclude importers bringing in goods on behalf of third parties as opposed to on their own behalf. It expressly applies to ‘all importers’.”Mr Thomson said he remained concerned about delays in getting his customers’ goods cleared due to a new system requiring one Customs declaration for per item, rather than one BCD per shipment of consolidated goods required under the old system.He said it used to take hours to deliver landed goods, but under the new system they can take weeks to clear.Mailboxes had sought an order that it be allowed to use one BCD per shipment, but it appears the Chief Justice ruled that the Collector of Customs needed to deal with that point outside of the Court.The Chief Justice said in his judgment: “Businesses and the Collector have a shared interest in devising procedures which are sufficiently transparent to meet fiscal and public safety concerns while avoiding bureaucracy which is inconsistent with commercial efficiency.“Ideally any problems which arise should be resolved through negotiation in the first instance.“In the second instance they should be resolved through the review and statutory appeal procedure - assuming it is functional.”Mr Thomson said he looked forward to meeting with the Collector in the coming days to “iron out” the BCD issue and “determine how we best proceed in light of the Court’s ruling”.In a response last night, Premier Cox said: “The Court today released its judgment on a case involving Mailboxes Unlimited Ltd. -v- Collector of Customs which sought three declarations against Government, inter alia, as to whether or not Mailboxes were entitled to the business end-relief provided by the Customs Procedure Code 4000 (CPC 4000) contained in the Tariff Act 1970.“The relief was available to all importers who operated a business of importation for profit. The intent of the law was to maintain the same rate of tax for businesses and to have a different rate for private use. It was difficult to separate the two when one Courier imports goods for both business and private use. The Court recognized the difficulty and held that Mailboxes carried on a business of importation of goods irrespective of whether or not the goods were consigned for business or private use and that they were entitled to the lower rate of tax. The Court ruled in favour of the Crown in refusing the other two declarations sought.”She continued: “The main policy objective for the amendment was to assist the retail sector through duty relief and to provide an incentive to on-Island shopping. Revenue impact should not be material. This was never designed to be a major revenue raiser, even though any additional revenue is welcome.”