Maybe... maybe not. If he was negotiating an out the door price it's up to the dealer to back out all of the numbers ahead of time. If the dealer just forgot the $900 during the negotiations then the dealer should chalk it up to experience and move on.

If he was only netotiating on the price of the car and the tax, tag, and title were to be added in the finance office then, yeah, the buyer should probably pay. However, I think the dealer should take some responsibility for this error.

My question remains: What entity is charging the luxury tax. To the best of my knowledge this tax was phased out a few years ago.

dealers can't negotiate tax, that is against the law. Now go slap a liberal for creating the luxury tax which is a federal tax:mad: What is really funny is that a liberal who has on other threads talked about spending tax money it trying NOT to pay it because of a mistake:eek:

MSRP is north of 40k.

Lets assume you get the car for 40k even. $900 is 4.5% tax.

At 4.5% if you got the car at a deep discount and paid 30k your tax is still $700.

Dealer should make a concession but asking him to break the law is not right.

Remember, he suggested the dealer IGNORE it, not that the dealer should pay it.

There are avenues for recourse. He can always file a consumer complaint against the dealer.

What he advocated is not morally correct. He needs to seek compensation from the dealer who made the mistake. Not try to break the law.

I'm no lawyer but in addition to Tax Evasion he could also be hit with a Conspiracy charge.

The hell with morals. YOU owe the money.

Pay it. It is not a tip, and it is not your money. If you couldn't afford to pay the tax, why did you buy the car ?

Don't get me wrong. I have a good accountant, and I pay him well because he saves me money. However, in this case, I know what he would say. PAY UP.

BTW, I would rather be looking at pictures of your new car. How can I say nice going when you post something like this ? Laws are made to keep honest people honest. Are you a crook ? Cause if you have to ask...

Thanks for all the feedback guys. I will take it all on board - except the moral indignation - and let you know what happens on Monday.

FYI - I did negotiate an out-of-the-door price INCLUSIVE of all taxes and extra charges - and that is the price on the Bill of Sale that I paid.

dealers can't negotiate tax, that is against the law. Now go slap a liberal for creating the luxury tax which is a federal tax:mad: What is really funny is that a liberal who has on other threads talked about spending tax money it trying NOT to pay it because of a mistake:eek:

Apparently I am a minority here but I would not pay. A big assumption is that the sob story is correct, and as we all know, car salesman are not the most trust-worthy individuals. Who is to say that the sales manager directed the salesman to use this ploy on you to simply get an additional $900 - they have been known to pull similar schemes.

I always do the 'out the door price'. During the time when we were purchasing my wife's Honda we went through something like this. Between arriving at the final 'out the door' price and picking up the car the next day, we were greeted by a shocking phone call from the dealership that they had given us the wrong price (and to think, this is their profession...). We said forget the deal and guess what, they reluctantly said that we could have it at that price originally agreed upon.

This is what they do for a living. If indeed they messed up, this purported tax that is owed can come from their profit. I would either return the car or refuse to pay. This is my opinion and although many of you may disagree it is still what I would do. Further, I do not consider this to be a moral dilemma. It sounds as if they are breaking the contract - if you had buyer's remorse they would be giving you much more of a fit than you are giving them.

I just went and shared Dottore’s situation with my wife (who has incredibly strong morale values) and she too agreed that the dealership screwed up and are accountable for his mistake. The negotiated Bill of Sales for the ‘out the door’ price is the contract. Previously someone at her company had misquoted a part. The sales price was considerably less that the cost of manufacturing cost. The company was bound contractually to make this negative margin product for at least one year. It doesn’t matter if the ‘forgotten’ element was a tax or floor mats – the dealership is responsible for their own incompetence.

Finally, talk to a lawyer before visiting the dealership.

This is what I thought too. Read the interesting link below:

http://www.taxtrimmers.com/taxfaq/bmw.shtml

I agree with Daryl: you owe them nothing.
I sold cars for almost 10 years. After the first 2 years I became a born again Christian ("not that there's anything wrong with that")and was an honest one from then on. Even car sales people make mistakes but you negotiated a deal, they accepted it, you paid what was agreed, and you have paperwork to document it. They probably made an honest mistake but that is the cost of doing business and they need to suck it up and take the hit. I understand why they called, I don't blame them for asking but you have no moral obligation. It would be different if you didn't pay what was quoted and they wanted to go back to the original agreement. The sales manager is probably telling the salesman that they are cutting his commission if they don't recoup the extra money. Should you feel bad? Did they feel bad when you didn't negotiate the deal very much and they thought they were making a ton of profit?

Sorry but not true, or at least it may vary in different states.

Have a friend who took her car in for service. While there a salesman talked her into taking a drive in a "new" used car, one about 5 years newer than hers.

When she got back he had the paperwork done and talked her into just trading cars and they would "take care" of the rest. Two days later she got ahold of us and told us the story about the car, price and salesman.

She took the car back the 3rd day and demanded her car back and to stop the deal. Owner of the dealership said not a problem and she now has her car back (fixed) and is not out a penny for the supposed sale. This was 10 days ago.

This law does apply when the buyer goes to a dealership.

In that case I'd politely tell them I was not going to pay another dime. If they worked from the bottom line backwards it was their responsibility to make sure all the items were covered. They might as well be telling you they forgot to add in the profit and be asking you to please pay a little extra. If they'd left off the documentation fee would they expect you to pay? I don't think so. They may have genuinely made a mistake backing the numbers onto their worksheet, but I don't see that as being your problem. They may have to reduce their profit on the car to cover the tax, but I promise you they're still making money off of the deal.

I'd still like to know who's the taxing entity.

Unfortunately, the three day rule does not apply to car sales. If your friend got out of the deal it was due to the dealer's goodwill.
http://www.azag.gov/consumer/threeday.html

This was not in Arizona and the three day rule DOES APPLY where she lives. How many times do I have to say it?

That is a different situation from this.

The 1st statement leads me to think there is no reason for the dealer to "look for" a way to 'squeeze" a few extra bucks out of you.

The second statement puts the error squarely on his shoulders.

You might have opted to drop an option due to the price differential.

If that is true that's how I would play it.

"Your error factored into the TOTAL amount that I was looking to pay."

"I would have forgone option (pick one close to $900 that can not be removed from the car)"

"This can certainly be perceived as an upsell tactic and I intend to speak with consumer affairs"

Moral dilemma, I don't see no stinking moral dilemma
 

What "moral dilemma", a tax on your vehicle was not paid. I would be surprised if it could be licensed if all taxes, state and federal were not paid. I would also be surprised if these taxes were the dealer's responsibility.

I also thought luxury tax ended in 2002!
 

Dottore, are you in the USA? Because After 3 minutes with my friend Google, I'd call BS. BS. BS. BS. Tell him to suck rocks.

http://moneycentral.msn.com/content/P65067.asp

http://taxguide.completetax.com/text/Q13_2811.asp

http://www.sptimes.com/2003/01/03/Business/Luxury_car_buyers_get.shtml

http://www.taxtrimmers.com/luxury.shtml

I don't know why you are asking the PPBB what to do in this situation. You have already stated it's a moral dilemma, do what you think is right and be done with it. You have to live with the decision and no one else.

The real question is "is it a legal issue"? If they actually did not charge the luxury tax and it is due, then it is a legal obligation on you to pay the tax. They may tell the state/fed that you are refusing to pay the tax, then what will you do?

Not paying the tax because you already think you pay too much tax is no excuse, try that with the IRS when you are $900 light on your taxes due. I think they would take a very dim view of that idea.

If you can afford a MB 320, then you can afford the tax should also know you have luxury tax due, that is a pretty obvious mistake.

If the tax is due (and you should talk to the tax authorities to establish this), then pay it.
If the tax is not due - point this out to the dealer and ask him why he thinks its due (they are in the business and should know!)
If he still says its due - return the car.
If the tax is due and you dont pay it - get the car serviced somewhere else - because they will make sure they get the tax back on your service bills.

NO! He negotiated an OUT THE DOOR price. That means he and the dealer decided/negotiated what the total amount he would pay would be INCLUSIVE of all taxes and fees. This means the dealer has to take that final, bottom line (ie bottom line on the worksheet) number that they agreed to and work backwards to make sure he's covered the car, any documentation fees, title fees, and any and all TAXES. The benefit of negotiating this way (in theory) is that you don't have to deal with any surprises when you show up in the finance office. If there's a line item on their worksheet for $500 for undercoating it doesn't matter. It's already been taken into consideration.

The number he negotiated is the amount he would write the check for. Having the dealer come back and say we forgot to enter a certain amount on a certain line when working backwards from the drive out price would be akin to the buyer showing up two days later and saying he thinks he paid too much and should now get a $900 refund.

Just to be clear: I walked in to this dealership knowing what I wanted. I knew the model and the options that I wanted. I had a trade in, and knew the black book value for the trade in. I took almost none of the salesman's time and said: this is what I want, tell me your best price inclusive of all taxes and charges. I even added something like: I'm a car guy, and don't like BS - so please make this your best price.

He then disappeared, and he and his manager ran the numbers and came out with a long printed form that had all the calculations, options, add ons etc. included.

I looked at this, mulled it over and said, fine we have a deal. I then signed the Sales Agreement. He then ordered the car from the storage lot and I picked it up three days later and paid the agreed price with a cheque.

I am quite sure that the salesman's commission is several times the luxury tax allegedly payable. I'm also sure the luxury tax is legit here in Vancouver.

I appreciate the views that have been expressed. I ran the question at lunch with six friends - only two of whom are liberals. Four said I would be stupid if I paid the $900.- Two said I should tell the dealer I would split it 50/50.

The two that said I should split it 50/50 were the liberals.

That said Racerbvd: coming as they are from one of the more astute, intellectual and sensitive men on this forum, I shall certainly take your comments to heart.

I really don't care what he does nor do I care what your interpretation is (no disrespect to you), as I said in my opening comment, it is a moral dilemma and he has to live with the decision, no one else.

My quote seems to be missing the part about whether it is a legal issue. You seem to believe it isn't, that is your prerogative.