Canon Cinema EOS Camera & Lens Loyalty Discounts, Instant Rebates, & 0% Lease Offers

[Tom Roper]

What's bad about it though, is the 0% lease offer is very prominent and was used for marketing the product, yet the agreement to pay the personal property tax is buried in the fine print of the contract. And in Paul's case, he now has double taxation because he has to pay tangible personal property tax twice, once for Rhode Island, while also picking up the share owed by CFS to their state.

In other words, Paul hasn't really been given true 0% because they are forcing him to reimburse a personal property tax obligation owed by them, while also having to pay in his own state. 0% or "free" implies there was a promotional discount. CFS could have just financed an outright purchase on credit at 0% interest, and would have avoided incurring the personal property tax on the leased equipment. For a business, leasing equipment has an income tax benefit because they can expense the lease payment rather than depreciating it as a capital cost. So whether a lease is a tax benefit or a consequence has to be carefully considered, which is what Paul is saying, he wasn't able to because they couldn't tell him up front, or even after the fact just what that charge was going to amount to.

Tom
[sign_off]

[Chris Hurd]

Well, let's be fair. I wouldn't call Paragraph One "buried." Nor is the print under the Terms & Conditions any finer there than it is elsewhere (the entire page seems to be done in a very small font!). I think the tax has to be done at the assessed value, not the actual charge (or lack of charge), so I don't think a true 0% would affect that, but I could be mistaken.

[Paul Cronin]

Tom, please do not write what happen to me when you do not know all the facts.

I think it is best to let this sit and do as Chris asked, keep the thread live so people can learn. Not to bash Canon or any other manufacture.

[Sabyasachi Patra]

Originally Posted by Chris Hurd

Thanks Paul,

I've never been a fan of the "zero percent down" marketing strategy, whether it's for a camera or a car or a new set of living room furniture. There's always a catch or some associated cost or something. There has to be, since the capitalism model cannot thrive without profit. I'm fine with that, but don't call it free, because free has no value. Make it a good deal, and then call it a good deal.

In India we had many zero percent schemes and recently the Supreme Court of India banned all such zero percent schemes as those are not really zero.

[Terry Nixon]

Just a reminder that all Canon Cinema EOS Instant Rebates & 0% Lease Promotions will expire January 4.

Elf Director of Photography Gets His Shot with the Canon C100.

[Danny O'Neill]

A simple answer is... If you can't afford it, don't buy it :)

[Al Bergstein]

Maybe I'm still not clear of what I signed. 0% interest does not mean zero fees nor taxes. Here's the story as I understood it from Canon (and also from Terry). I live in WA, and we pay sales tax here. Terry's company is in Texas, but I'm actually leasing it from Canon out of Chicago (I believe). I pay sales tax on this to Canon, because they also do business in Washington state. So I end up paying about 8 or 9% more because of state sales (or use) tax. I assume this going in and would pay it regardless of what the *interest* rate is. If I leased it from the local Canon dealer (who unfortunately does not give the kind of service Terry does, nor has invested in the web presence of B&H) I would pay Canon the same tax per month. If I lived in Oregon, I would not pay sales tax on this, as I understand it. Washington most definitely expects me to file that I paid this sales tax, or not.

Not sure what additional costs I might end up paying to Canon, but going in I questioned this very phrase on their lease, and that's what I was told it covered (along with the spurious but cheap documentation fee).

So at this time I'm still a happy camper. I've got a camera and have a fully expensible lease payment rather than a depreciation expense. I think that I made a good choice, and don't feel that I've been cheated by Canon (at least yet). We'll see what the final closing costs are to buy out, but it looks to be $1. Not sure that's accurate, but probably close. I'd consider it again if I needed another camera. If it turns out they are looking to find a way to tack on 3 or 4% through fees, that is getting a bit of a grey area. But I've not seen that yet.