Meet the Other Phone. A phone that grows with your child.

Meet the Other Phone.
A phone that grows with your child.

Buy now

Please or to access all these features

AIBU?

Share your dilemmas and get honest opinions from other Mumsnetters.

To be horrified by this article about Starbucks?

117 replies

PropertyNightmare · 16/10/2012 12:14

I love Starbucks. I can't wait for the red cups.
Now I am gutted to learn that the corporation has not paid any UK income tax since 2009. Despite making 1.2 billion in that period in the UK. Apparently there is nothing 'illegal' about the tax arrangements which allow them to do this. AIBU to feel let down and a bit of a mug? The NHS and schools would have found sOme extra cash handy....

Starbucks, I am shocked and feel like you have let me down Sad

www.taxresearch.org.uk/Blog/2012/10/15/starbucks-brewing-up-more-than-coffee-when-it-comes-to-tax-avoidance/

OP posts:
SkippyYourFriendEverTrue · 17/10/2012 00:25

I think I'd rather watch paint dry.

Toombs · 17/10/2012 00:30

I'd stay in your comfort zone if I were you, don't seek out anything to disturb your nicely prejudiced world.

SkippyYourFriendEverTrue · 17/10/2012 00:38

Don't worry, I won't, now where's my rope, I've got some company directors to hang.

garlicbaguette · 17/10/2012 01:00

legal remedy by public outrage

Just to quickly ask, Toombs (I'm supposed to be asleep), do you not think public opinion has any effect on the law and its execution? Do you think HMRC would have bothered trying to clean up its act if not for a barrage of public pressure?

While I may be despondent about our leaders' recognition of the fact, we employ them and they are answerable to us. As long as this is a democracy we're not passive recipients of policy; our views shape it.

justbogoffnow · 17/10/2012 01:05

I've always felt ripped off by Starbucks purely on the basis of the quality of their coffee (and nondescript cakes), so don't bother with them unless friends insist of meeting there in which case I'll put up with tea. Thankfully a fantastic independent cafe has opened up a few doors down, where the coffee and cakes are superb and my kids are in awe of the array of patterns the baristas can make atop coffees. We go there for a great once a month and it feels like a treat (Starbucks decor is shit too).

TheDoctrineOfSnatch · 17/10/2012 01:08

Regardless of tax issues, I think "death penalty for shit coffee" could be a vote winner Grin

ravenAK · 17/10/2012 01:13

It's a call for a boycott, Toombs.

Frankly, if they were that effective, we wouldn't still have Nestle.

FredFredGeorge · 17/10/2012 08:28

Starbucks global profits were 200million in the first 3 months of the year, the tax on that (which of course would mostly go to the US where the business was created and still does lots of business) wouldn't be noticeable even if it all came to the UK, let alone any amount that could be morally argued.

The revenue numbers in the figures are just made to make starbucks look bad and sell newspapers. They're nothing like the profits.

Redline · 17/10/2012 08:31

YANBU - It's just wrong that they do that & get away with it but doesn't surprise me in today's "business friendly" Tory Haven that is Cameron's Britain. Hmm

charlottehere · 17/10/2012 08:36

There coffee is yuk and over priced. I love costa they are probably as bad.

Acumens100 · 17/10/2012 08:40

Yeah, I won't buy there again. Where I live it's easy to just choose the next coffee shop - they cluster.

(Have also, this month, edited my Amazon wishlist to link to external stores wherever possible. That's a pretty easy change too.)

TheDoctrineOfSnatch · 17/10/2012 09:14

That's noble of you re the wish list but it will increase your postage costs, won't it?

maillotjaune · 17/10/2012 09:21

Tombs this is not comparable with ISAs. These are tax free to incentivise individuals to save.

Companies already have many tax reliefs not available to individuals (think: no tax on dividends received, no tax on the sale of shares from a substantial shareholding - to name just 2) so it is not unreasonable to expect that a successful business will have some trading profits being taxed.

If they genuinely don't make profits - fine. If they are manipulating profits using arbitrary transfer prices etc - not fine at all. Both HMRC and businesses yo blame.

ecto · 17/10/2012 09:24

I don't buy their coffee anyway but I think they are being unfairly villified.

They have done nothing illegal, they are a business accountable to their shareholders and they have an efficient tax set up. Govt/HMRC need to look to themselves to sort this out, not accuse Starbucks of foul play.

aldiwhore · 17/10/2012 09:29

I don't have an issue with any corporation that acts legally to avoid taxes... even though it's completely wrong that they don't. I didn't have an issue with Jimmy Carr either.

I have a massive issue with the fact their tax avoidance is legal. It's a government issue that desperately needs resolving.

MoreBeta · 17/10/2012 09:48

Exactly, it is the Govt/HMRC that needs to look at how it levies tax more efficiently. For a kick off, simplifying the tax system dramatically would leave far fewer loopholes. The UK corporate tax system really needs major reform it is a complete mess. It is massively complex and costly to administer for small and medium sized businesses and ineffective at collecting tax from large business. It is at least 50 years out of date.

In reality, it is nearly impossible to collect significant amounts of UK corporation tax from global multinationals now and the advent of the internet and especially virtual and online businesses that have no physical bricks and mortar makes it even harder.

It is not a new problem, for example, a major part of the global shipping industry has resided in the UK for decades and pays very little tax here because all the ships are registered and owned out of Liberia and other low tax countries. Ships move around the planet and hence do not reside in the UK. The Govt and HMRC accepted a long time ago that it cannot tax this industry like a normal bricks and mortar business but took the sensible approach of making sure the industry stayed in the UK and the wealth it brings in the form of jobs is taxed.

I used to work for such a business that paid virtuall no UK corporation tax at all. It had around 500 staff here and transacted well over $1 billion every year and that was in the 1980s. It broke no laws and paid all the tax that was due - which was the income tax and NI on staff wages as well as VAT on goods and services it bought and business rates on its offices. Those were the things that it had to use in the UK and the only things it could not move or do offshore.

Pendeen · 17/10/2012 11:00

From the OP: "AIBU to feel let down and a bit of a mug? "

Very good!

Grin
New posts on this thread. Refresh page
Swipe left for the next trending thread