The Auswine Forum

Phil is spot on !

The government is interested in such activity and your customs form that you sign requires a declaration .

You would be an idiot not to declare .

What 8 dozen you bringing back ?

Years ago I did a hike with some Aussie customs guys .

The abuse of the TRS was flabbergasting. A Brisbane restaurant owner, would get his Grange inspected and TRS paperwork stamped and instead of checking it in to take abroad , customs staff saw him loading up his car again .

Real abuse was jewellery . Claim TRS but return it for refund evidently .

Not usually

Though I have ordered 6x Kumeu River Hunting Hill Chardonnay for NZ$33 a bottle to collect on my next trip

That's a tidy saving

JamieBahrain wrote:I want a retirement drinking Piedmont wine amongst local favourites

Let me know where you’re planning to retire to, I’ll buy the house next door

shauno wrote:

JamieBahrain wrote:I want a retirement drinking Piedmont wine amongst local favourites

Let me know where you’re planning to retire to, I’ll buy the house next door

Hard to know these days. Was going to be ADL but gee, the wine scene can be a bit out there! Hipsters making wine from the Adelaide hIlls and wanting $10 a glass at the local pub!

I took 24 bottles of Australian classics back to HKG in my check in yesterday. And low and behold, Duty Free had a buy two Henschke's get 15% off. So I took a handful of their whites for summer drinking- serve a Henschke sav blanc and the reaction of some is as if you are pouring Mt Ed .

Some Pikes sem-sav blanc too. $AUD is so low I buy as much Aussie produce as I can get home.

If you pre-order online you can get a 20% discount out of Brisbane, Canberra & Darwin.

Last time I flew into Brisbane (February this year) I purchased:
Henschke Mt Edelstone for $148
Wynns John Riddock for $92
Leeuwin Estate Art Series Chardonnay for $76

I think compared to normal retail prices, that is a bargain. I have also had other deals such as buy 2 and get half price of the second (lower priced bottle). I think at the time I just bought 2 bottles of Cullen DM which worked out to be $75 each.

A strange experience. We took 3 bottles of Oz chardonnay from Oz duty free (Perth) into Dubai and onto Italy - no drama and no delays or scans.

We took 2 bottles of Amarone from Venice duty free (we already had a few wines in the check in luggage) and in Dubai - 3 X-ray scans, and the wine removed and packaged up for collection (and available with all the other luggage on the carousel).

Is this standard practice? WTF?

Waiters Friend wrote:A strange experience. We took 3 bottles of Oz chardonnay from Oz duty free (Perth) into Dubai and onto Italy - no drama and no delays or scans.

We took 2 bottles of Amarone from Venice duty free (we already had a few wines in the check in luggage) and in Dubai - 3 X-ray scans, and the wine removed and packaged up for collection (and available with all the other luggage on the carousel).

Is this standard practice? WTF?

If I understand things correctly, you hand carried your duty free wines and transitted Dubai where you were allowed to hand carry them onto your flight to Venice. However, on your return journey, the same Dubai airport wouldn't allow you to transit with the hand carried wine. Instead they packaged the wine for you and sent it as check-in luggage.

Two things come to mind. First, many airports will not allow hand carried wine and spirits through transit. That is why I will only take duty free liquor through transit if I can check in my carry on case. Secondly, if hand carried liquor is not allowed through transit, standard practise is confiscation (I still remember once seeing a warning sign just prior to entering security at the Hong Kong airport where there was a display cabinet of confiscated items including a bottle of XO cognac). I think you were very lucky that they packaged the wine for you and sent it through.

I do wonder though how the same airport could allow you to transit with the hand carried wine on one occasion but not another. Strange.

Mahmoud.

Could be a specific security threat on Australian bound flights out of the Middle East. A couple of Sydneysiders wanted to blow up an Eithad flight to Australia a few years ago. The tip-off was from Mossad I think?

The shoe bomber tactics and results of interrogations of a prominent A-Q thug in Guantanamo revealed a direct threat against US airliners flying trans-Pacific about 15 years ago. This threat was extended to Australia and for years you could not carry liquids onto Australian bound flights. You can now. Though security is obviously dynamic.

Sorry, nothing to do with Guantanamo, where torture, euphemistically called "interrogation", generally provided nothing of significant value. In fact it was British Police who uncovered a plot to bomb transatlantic flights out of Heathrow using liquid explosives that led to the ban on liquids.


Mahmoud.

Actually, stricter liquid carry-on restrictions for Australian and US bound flights, for about six years, were threat specific and emerged after the UK plot. It goes back to the earlier Bojinka plot, new intelligence and I suspect concerns with staff security at many Asian airports.

Liquid items purchased after passing aircraft security were confiscated. The ban has been lifted at most airports. That it's still the case at Dubai could be bureaucratic confusion, officious local security or an unpublished threat.

Cry me a river on AQ bombers and Guantanomo.

JamieBahrain wrote:
Cry me a river on AQ bombers and Guantanomo.

Ok, not wine related, but really?

Glad to know you are comfortable that "the ends justifies the means" and it is perfectly fine that a government undertakes extra-judicial kidnapping, imprisonment and torture in the hope that at least some of the "worst of the worst" dragged up by the net might actually be bad hombres.

Or is it only fine because it was happening to people from the Middle East who aren't like you?

The reason we have checks and balances in the system is to prevent abuse. This is why we have the rule of law (in Australia, in the UK, in the US) and we do not allow the state to subject us to arbitrary detention nor to cruel and unusual punishment. It is because, as a society, we do not believe it is right to punish 10 people because 1 of them might be guilty.

But it is also because these techniques are not effective. The US government provided sizeable cash bounties for people to turn in their neighbours. Lo and behold - people did. If you beat someone long enough, starve them, deprive them of light and sleep, you can bet they will confess to whatever you want them to.

There seems today no question that many of the detainees were effectively or entirely innocent, and suffered this as collateral damage. It is also true that some of them were guilty, although according to Human Rights Watch out of 780 detainees, 731 were ultimately released without charges.

And there is no question it was torture...
"A Senate inquiry reported: "Military working dogs had been used against Qahtani. He had also been deprived of adequate sleep for weeks on end, stripped naked, subjected to loud music and made to wear a leash and perform dog tricks." During his 20-hour continuous interrogations, which were repeated for 48 days, he was also chained in stress positions, screamed at, had water dripped on his head and was chilled using air conditioning."
(source: The Guardian).

So no, I will not "cry you a river"

Well said Sam, thanks.

By the way, apropos of this and another wine thread on Wynn's Cabernet, it was the duty free in Melbourne that alerted me to the value of Wynn's cabernet in my home town. The Wynn's Cabernet had arrived in town, for the first time, and I recall reflecting on cellaring a few. It was the 1996 vintage and I knew it was a good one. I hadn't got around to buying any when I left on a visit to Australia. The Malaysian Airways flight to Sydney went via Melbourne and the duty free had the Wynn's Cabernet selling in the mid-$20s whereas I knew I saw it selling at home for $13.50 (the Aussie and Canadian dollar are usually on par of fairly close). Needless to say I got my mother to pick up a few bottles of the '96 for me.

Since then I've bought the '97, '98, 01' and '05, all for under $15, though it has now breached the $30 mark.

Mahmoud.

No Sam, I specifically referenced an AQ bomber and an AQ plot on a specific security procedure that sees peoples' duty free confiscated. And I've no problems with what that thug had coming his way.

"Or is it only fine because it was happening to people from the Middle East who aren't like you? "

Actually, in my experience, the savagery of the Middle East is inflicted by neighbour upon neighbour. Grows from there.

I've done my wine tours there. Lebanon, Jordan, Egypt. Looking forward to a month in Israel this year. Beautiful country. Great wines but even better food. Can't wait!

JamieBahrain wrote:Actually, stricter liquid carry-on restrictions for Australian and US bound flights, for about six years, were threat specific and emerged after the UK plot. It goes back to the earlier Bojinka plot, new intelligence and I suspect concerns with staff security at many Asian airports.

Liquid items purchased after passing aircraft security were confiscated. The ban has been lifted at most airports. That it's still the case at Dubai could be bureaucratic confusion, officious local security or an unpublished threat.

Cry me a river on AQ bombers and Guantanomo.

Hi Jamie,

Is it allow to buy from Hong Kong airport duty free and bring it back to Australia?i remember I got denied back in 2012/13, they checked my boarding pass and said no alcohol carry on for sydney(Australia)

Ddavew wrote:

JamieBahrain wrote:Actually, stricter liquid carry-on restrictions for Australian and US bound flights, for about six years, were threat specific and emerged after the UK plot. It goes back to the earlier Bojinka plot, new intelligence and I suspect concerns with staff security at many Asian airports.

Liquid items purchased after passing aircraft security were confiscated. The ban has been lifted at most airports. That it's still the case at Dubai could be bureaucratic confusion, officious local security or an unpublished threat.

Cry me a river on AQ bombers and Guantanomo.

Hi Jamie,

Is it allow to buy from Hong Kong airport duty free and bring it back to Australia?i remember I got denied back in 2012/13, they checked my boarding pass and said no alcohol carry on for sydney(Australia)

I'm going to have the same situation travelling Osaka Singapore Brisbane in a few months, also interested in whether I can bring duty free in my carry on from there,

Andrew

JamieBahrain wrote:The shoe bomber tactics and results of interrogations of a prominent A-Q thug in Guantanamo revealed a direct threat against US airliners flying trans-Pacific about 15 years ago. This threat was extended to Australia and for years you could not carry liquids onto Australian bound flights.

Again, nothing to do with Guantanamo or the interrogations there. The threat was discovered by British Police in 2006. The plot was directed at planes heading to the United States. The liquid bans stemmed directly from the police raids that led to the arrest of 24 people. According to Wikipedia:

"Immediately following the raids, no hand luggage was allowed except for essentials such as travel documents and wallets. Limited hand baggage was reintroduced at some smaller airports on 14 August, but was not permitted at Heathrow and Gatwick Airports until 15 August. Some restrictions were relaxed in September 2006, and on 6 November 2006 restrictions were again relaxed to allow limited volumes of liquids to be carried into the cabin."

There were no threats to Australia. This is clear from the Wikipedia entry on Australian measures.

"Qantas began to implement tighter security checks, which would initially only apply to flights heading to the US and the UK, but Prime Minister John Howard mentioned that it could lead to a permanent ban of certain hand luggage in the near future."

JamieBahrain wrote:Actually, stricter liquid carry-on restrictions for Australian and US bound flights, for about six years, were threat specific and emerged after the UK plot. It goes back to the earlier Bojinka plot, new intelligence and I suspect concerns with staff security at many Asian airports.

Liquid items purchased after passing aircraft security were confiscated. The ban has been lifted at most airports. That it's still the case at Dubai could be bureaucratic confusion, officious local security or an unpublished threat.

Liquid bans were implemented in the immediate wake of the 2006 threats and not the result of any subsequent threats that may have been identified. The Bojinka plot was in 1995 and had nothing to do with the liquid ban.

Hong Kong is an unusual exception, as discussed before, in that duty free sales are not allowed for passengers travelling to Australia and the United States. However, if the Australian government is concerned with local security at Asian airports then clearly Hong Kong airport security must be suspect.

Not so Singapore airport because as the Singapore Airlines website explains quite clearly the procedure in place for travellers to Australia:

- If you’re flying from Singapore to Australia, duty-free liquids, aerosols and gels are allowed provided they’re purchased on board your flight or delivered by the airport’s duty-free personnel to the gate-hold room in a transparent, sealed plastic bag, which includes the original receipt(s).
- If you’re changing planes in Singapore on your way to Australia, you cannot carry duty-free items purchased from another sector of your journey.

Your second paragraph is misleading. Confiscation is not the policy per se but rather it stems from a breach of allowable limits. You may not take over 100ml amounts through airport security nor aircraft security prior to boarding. However, you may take much more if it is purchased in a duty free store within the departure area. Most airport duty free stores seal the items in a clear plastic bag.

JamieBahrain wrote:No Sam, I specifically referenced an AQ bomber and an AQ plot on a specific security procedure that sees peoples' duty free confiscated. And I've no problems with what that thug had coming his way.

Again, your specific reference to an Al Qaida bomber interrogated in Guantanamo is incorrect. Also, the threat was not against a "specific security procedure". It was plan to concoct a combustible substance by combining a couple of substances and adding orange crystals to disguise it. I suppose at a stretch the plot did breach the security provision of "No bombs allowed". And really, no duty free items, purchased at the departing airport is confiscated. Neither are duty free items purchased at other airports provided it is in your check-in luggage. Only duty free items purchased in another airport is confiscated if hand carried through transit.

Mahmoud.

Wizz wrote:I'm going to have the same situation travelling Osaka Singapore Brisbane in a few months, also interested in whether I can bring duty free in my carry on from there.

In my post above, in the Singapore Airlines exerpt, is the answer to your question.

Basically, if you buy items in Osaka and pack them in your check-in luggage you are good to go. If you buy at Osaka duty free and hand carry, it will not be allowed on your flight from Singapore to Brisbane. However if you buy duty free in Singapore it will be allowed. Just make sure you make your purchase early enough so that there is enough time for staff to deliver your sealed purchase to the departure gate.

To be on the safe side make inquiries at the duty free on your outward journey.

Mahmoud.

One more thing, this from Australia's Border Security, there is a difference between domestic and international flights. Here is what they say:

- If you are flying within Australia on a domestic flight, there are no restrictions on how much powders, liquids, aerosols and gels you can carry onboard.
- If you are travelling domestically, but departing from an international terminal, there are limits on powders, liquids, aerosols and gels. All aerosol containers must have a fitted cap, or locking device.

Correct me if I'm wrong but I take this to mean that if a person buys duty free in Singapore, hand carries it, and the transfers to a domestic flight at the international airport, the liquid limits will come into play and the hand carry will not be allowed.

If this is indeed the case, what are the rules regarding the duty free purchases made on arrival and subsequently boarding a domestic flight from the same airport/terminal? I assume that a person leaving the international airport and departing from another airport will be in the clear regarding the carry on purchases.

Mahmoud.

Dave

Yes. This restriction has now been lifted. It’s been the case for about two years. Your duty free will not be confiscated between the boarding gate and the aircraft by security personnel without the ability to reclaim.

This was threat specific . Why it’s gone I don’t know but I will ask out of personal interest next month when I have an annual security briefing . But honestly , at my pay grade, if I were to be told why, it would already be on Wikipedia ... yawn .

Mahmoud Ali wrote:
Correct me if I'm wrong but I take this to mean that if a person buys duty free in Singapore, hand carries it, and the transfers to a domestic flight at the international airport, the liquid limits will come into play and the hand carry will not be allowed.

Mahmoud.

In theory yes, however very few domestic flights if any depart from the international terminals.
Normally you clear customs and immigration and then transfer to a domestic terminal for the onward travel. Security for the domestic terminals does not restrict liquids.

Hong Kong Duty Free is now a different company and the deals poor. I’d suggest you use your allocation on retail buys in the city .

sjw_11 wrote:

Mahmoud Ali wrote:
Correct me if I'm wrong but I take this to mean that if a person buys duty free in Singapore, hand carries it, and the transfers to a domestic flight at the international airport, the liquid limits will come into play and the hand carry will not be allowed.

In theory yes, however very few domestic flights if any depart from the international terminals.
Normally you clear customs and immigration and then transfer to a domestic terminal for the onward travel. Security for the domestic terminals does not restrict liquids.

Thanks Sam, glad for the information.

Mahmoud.

JamieBahrain wrote:Dave

Yes. This restriction has now been lifted. It’s been the case for about two years. Your duty free will not be confiscated between the boarding gate and the aircraft by security personnel without the ability to reclaim.

This was threat specific . Why it’s gone I don’t know but I will ask out of personal interest next month when I have an annual security briefing . But honestly , at my pay grade, if I were to be told why, it would already be on Wikipedia ... yawn .

thanks jamie, i have been offered a bottle as a gift but i always denied/rejected because i knew i can't hand carry that bottle onto the flight. i usually checkin my luggages at the Kowloon station first thing in the morning so any alcohol i have it will be packed on the night before.

Ddavew wrote: … i have been offered a bottle as a gift but i always denied/rejected because i knew i can't hand carry that bottle onto the flight. i usually checkin my luggages at the Kowloon station first thing in the morning so any alcohol i have it will be packed on the night before.

Hi Dave,

Your post suggests that you "denied/rejected" the gift bottle because you would have had to hand carry it through airport sucurity. As you mentioned any alcohol packed the night before departure would be in your check-in luggage. The rule for taking in more than 100ml through airport security, prior to entering the departure area has not changed. Do not hand carry the gift bottle into the airport. Duty free items properly sealed are allowed through the boarding gate security prior to boarding. The gift bottle, if received prior to check-in must be in your luggage. A gift bottle bought at the airport duty free and given to you should be okay.

Mahmoud.

Mahmoud Ali wrote:

Ddavew wrote: … i have been offered a bottle as a gift but i always denied/rejected because i knew i can't hand carry that bottle onto the flight. i usually checkin my luggages at the Kowloon station first thing in the morning so any alcohol i have it will be packed on the night before.

Hi Dave,

Your post suggests that you "denied/rejected" the gift bottle because you would have had to hand carry it through airport sucurity. As you mentioned any alcohol packed the night before departure would be in your check-in luggage. The rule for taking in more than 100ml through airport security, prior to entering the departure area has not changed. Do not hand carry the gift bottle into the airport. Duty free items properly sealed are allowed through the boarding gate security prior to boarding. The gift bottle, if received prior to check-in must be in your luggage. A gift bottle bought at the airport duty free and given to you should be okay.

Mahmoud.

i totally forgot about that, i was too excited too see the duty free alcohol are lifted. thanks for the heads up.

I’ll reply with more detail later about the secondary security screening when I have energy and time but just to make sure you aren’t confused .

There is no security at the boarding gate . There is no requirement to seal your alcohol purchase on an Australian flight. And if you purchase duty free in Hong Kong airport “you should be OK “ is bullshit . You are at the current security level fully entitled!

I work at HKG airport . I’ve just simulated a purchase of three bottles of Dom Perignon - Australia bound-with a DF manager so Mr Know It All doesn’t waste folks’ time with his Google detective work .

I transited Dubai from South Africa and bought some booze duty free in Dubai. At gate I had it in a duty free bag and I also had a backpack. They said I had to throw it out you cant take liquids on the plane. Instead i said I would come back in 10mins after tasting some then throwing it out and return when boarding was almost finished. Instead I moved it from the duty free bag with load signage to my backpack and boarded without trouble.

Also on that trip in Harare I had a candle in my backpack carryon. The security woman took it from me as it was flammable. I protested but to no avail. A shopowner watching past security was pissing himself laughing at me. When I was through security I asked him what was so funny. He said, the security woman probably just liked the look of my candle. How do you know, says I? He laughed and then tried to sell me a candle.

JamieBahrain wrote:Actually, in my experience, the savagery of the Middle East is inflicted by neighbour upon neighbour. Grows from there.

The "savagery" in the Middle East, if you want to call it that, stems from foreign interference (read the US, UK, France, and their allies). Going back to the Second World War you can also include Germany and Italy.

- The Second World War brought military savagery all across North Africa and the Middle East.
- Subsequent to the war, the Algerians had to fight the French to gain independence while the Libyans had to fight the Italians.
- If you include Iran in the Middle East then the Anglo-US plot to overthrow democracy in Iran in 1955 and replace it with the Shah counts as interference that led to long term consequences.
- The duplicitous British and French policy of promising the Arabs independence if they fought the Ottoman Turks while promising European Jews a homeland is the seed that led to numerous conflicts, including the Lebanese civil war.
- The US virtually goaded Saddam Hussain into breaking a treaty and launching a territorial war against Iran. The US, Britain, France, and Germany also supplied chemical weapons to the Iraqis while US special forces aided in the targeting of Iranian troops with those weapons.
- Later the US took the opposite position on Saddam Hussain. The US Ambassador, when consulted, effectively told Saddam Hussain that they had no stakes in how Iraq wanted to address his grievances with the Kuwaitis, one of them being repaid for the war against Iran. Completely fake testimony from the daughter of the Kuwaiti Ambassador to the US, and therefore not an eyewitness, about incubators and babies left to die was all that was needed to convince the public that more "savagery" was needed to be conducted in the Middle East.
- By now we all know about the contrived reasons for the US and their allies to invade Iraq: forged letter on yellow cake, non-existent links to Al Qaida, and false accusation of having WMD.
- France, the US, and NATO destruction of Libya which is now a "failed state".
- The US and Britain's successful plan to overthrow the Syrian government by way of funding and arming terrorist groups (including foreigners) to fight a war against the government. For those in doubt do an internet search of the Timber-Sycamore project of the CIA.
- And for the past few years the US appears hell bent on destabilizing Iran through illegal sanctions and trying to provoke a war.

It seems pretty clear where savagery in the Middle East comes from but that will almost never be acknowledged.

Mahmoud.


PS: Sorry for the political aspect but sometimes misconceptions and stereotypes need to be addressed.

JamieBahrain wrote:I’ll reply with more detail later about the secondary security screening when I have energy and time but just to make sure you aren’t confused .

There is no security at the boarding gate . There is no requirement to seal your alcohol purchase on an Australian flight. And if you purchase duty free in Hong Kong airport “you should be OK “ is bullshit . You are at the current security level fully entitled!

I work at HKG airport . I’ve just simulated a purchase of three bottles of Dom Perignon - Australia bound-with a DF manager so Mr Know It All doesn’t waste folks’ time with his Google detective work .

It is indeed true that there are some airports where there is no screening at the boarding gate. At others there are, and at some there may be security when entering seperate terminals. At the old airport in Qatar I went through security right after disembarking onto the tarmac only several hundred meters from the terminal. I haven't been there in a while but at Heathrow, while in transit, I had to go through security when entering a different international terminal. Things change all the time and a traveller who wants to travel with wine or spirits must keep themselves appraised. Naturally one who is on the ground will be best informed. I am only trying to help someone who asked a question on this thread. Nothing more. Perhaps I shouldn't have said "you should be okay" but it was conversational. In an earlier post I think I said something like "you're good to go". Also, when I talked about liquor being sealed it should have been obvious that I was referring to the sealed purchases from duty free (usually with receipt therein or taped to the outside) and not something sealed by the passenger.

Just one question, what is secondary security? I am not familiar with the term.

In this whole thread there has been talk of buying at duty free, bringing duty free products into Australia, and transiting with duty free from a previous airport on the way to Australia. Each circumstance requires consideration and sometimes there is confusion between the different circumstances and what protocols are in place, and I am subject to that as much as anyone. Now, with regard to Hong Kong, it has been known that passengers in transit going through security were not allowed to take duty free purchased at another airport, and that passengers on their way to Australia were not allowed to purchase at Hong Kong duty free. Of course, over time, regulations change. For the benefit of everyone here is what the Civil Aviation Department in Hong Kong has to say about LAG (liquids, aerosols, and gels) and it is current to July, 2019:

Can passengers bring LAG items purchased at HKIA onto their departing flight?
Yes, passengers can bring LAG items purchased at shops located beyond the security screening check points at HKIA on board their departing flight.
However, if such passengers have to transfer to another flight at the next port of call, they should check with their airlines on the requirements at the transferring airports for carriage of LAG purchases.
Can transfer passengers bring their LAG items purchased at other airports or on board aircraft through the transfer security screening check point at HKIA?
Yes, if such items are in containers no larger than 100 ml and placed with other LAGs in a clear re-sealable plastic bag with maximum capacity of 1 litre.
LAG purchases that are in excess of 100ml may be allowed through the security screening check point at HKIA upon satisfactory checks if they meet the following requirements:
i. purchased from airports which have implemented similar security controls on LAGs; or
ii. purchased on board Hong Kong registered aircraft; or
iii. purchased on board non-Hong Kong registered aircraft whose previous port of call is an airport which has implemented similar security controls on LAGs; and
iv. LAG purchases are packed in a sealed plastic bag that is both tamper-evident and display satisfactory proof of purchase on the day(s) of the journey.

Please note the requirement that the product be properly sealed.

By the way I am not trying to be difficult, just helpful to posters who are about to travel and their very real concerns.

Mahmoud.