... ask MNers to boycott Starbucks?

[legoballoon]

Personally, I won't be spending any money there again.

When I read the 'we pay our fair share of tax' statement, I almost choked on my (home made) hot chocolate. It's one law for the rich, another for us now is it?!

I think we should support small, UK-based independent coffee shops. Let's support businesses that generate wealth that is shared by local people.

I'm in

hmm well I agree totally with whoever said that if they genuinely weren't making a profit in the UK they wouldn't be selling coffee in the UK. The whole paying for the brand thing is an obvious tax avoidance move and I will certainly join the boycott.

And I actually go a lot so not an entirely empty gesture.

Their coffee is vile anyway, so I promise not to go there again.

"But they are more than a bit hypocritical. With all their fair trade coffee adverts. No word about avoiding paying any tax in the UK. Why don't they advertise that."

Because they don't avoid UK tax*. They are abiding by letter of the law, the spirit of the law and the policy inherent in the drafting of the law! What more can they do?

*or at least aren't doing so in respect of their transfer pricing/business model. I don't have knowledge of their other tax affairs so can't say categorically that they're not avoiding tax. But I could say the same about every other poster on this thread, so don't read too much into it.

Oh c'mon Vivienne, who makes an advert about their tax policies?

surely we should be lobbying our mp's to change the taxation law.

not staying away from one company that is doing this many many more international companies doing the same.

boycotting yhem all would be a pita

"if they genuinely weren't making a profit in the UK they wouldn't be selling coffee in the UK"

They would if they think that the recession is driving down business in a luxury good for now, but that it's worth trading through until the economic situation improves.

The bit of taxation law that has recently changed and will make it worse - thank you Gideon (wallpaper) Osborne - is about controlled foreign companies and the ability to transfer price just about everything to the lowest taxed domicile

something that the IRS has not fallen for (yet - wait for a Romney win for that)

Mrsbucket
Boycotting all of them is not that much of a Pita, just a change in mindset...

I love the fact that there are NO Starbucks in Italy

So, if I've read this right, we've to boycott Starbucks because their coffee is shit?

nothing to stop us lobbying our MPs as well/as part of the campaign. But a boycott of Starbucks is attention-grabbing in a way that a letter to your MP is not.

Yadda yadda yadda to all this 'it's within the rules'. That's what the bankers said. The rules need changing when they allow wealthy corporations to escape paying their fair share, leaving ordinary taxpayers to pick up the bill. Fiddling the Libor rate was apparently 'within the rules'. Bringing down the world economy by playing silly beggars with the financial system was 'within the rules'. That is no excuse!

Ok TheDoctrineofSnatch. You've got a point!

its a fine line with these companies who employ thousands of people.

make it harder to trade and they bugger off leaving us in a worse state than we are now,

btw i dont drink bought coffee way to expensive.

they should scrap corperation tax altogether, support businesses, however big or small they are.

cin I just found an article stating that in 2011 (after the point they have apparently stopped making a profit in the UK:

"Starbucks coffee chain plans to create 5,000 UK jobs

Starbucks jobs plans add to the thousands of other new service sector jobs announced this week.The company intends to increase the number of drive-through coffee outlets, typically found at motorway service stations, from nine to 200. It also plans to open another 100 High Street coffee shops."

So in your considered opinion, it is normal to respond to a recession by opening 300 odd new outlets? In a country in which your business is not profitable?

Not read everything. I try to support our local coffee shop, but it is impossible to take a pram in there (old burgage plot) and they only take cash, which I find is a huge frustration with many small businesses tbh. We have a Costa, which I go to quite a bit, they do gingerbread latte all year round! I stopped going to Starbucks when they started asking for my name and misheard it every single bloody time.

I do solemnly swear that I will NEVER eat or drink in Starbucks again. Tax-dodging bastards. Having said that, it's (successive) Governments we should be angry with too for not creating water-tight tax laws.

cin sorry I lost a ) and also the phrase "bullshit is it" off the end.

Noone opens 300 new outlets in a country in which they are not making a profit selling coffee.

So erm fuck em basically.

starbucks cant beat my local coffee houses cakes any way.

edam
fiddling Libor was NOT within the rules. Prosecutions are ongoing and the American regulators are looking to Jail people (our Fundamentally Supine Authority will not)

"So in your considered opinion, it is normal to respond to a recession by opening 300 odd new outlets? In a country in which your business is not profitable?"

Yes, if you honestly think that you'll start making profits again in the near future. Then, it's a sensible business strategy. For all we know, in 2011 their 5 year business plan might have forecast megabucks by the end of 2012.

I don't know whether their strategy has changed since.

It might just be that the UK board are shit at forecasting....

I already do.

I have never ever ever understood people posting about how they were in or been to star bucks or whatever was so great about it?

I have already been supporting small independant places and try to in whatever I buy.

I am glad they have been outed as tax dodgers.

plus maybe the opening of new shops ate into any profit they had, with shopfitting business rates etc.

you cant say without seeing at least five years of figures.

Actually, I totally get your frustration with the 'it's within the letter of the law' arguments.

Jimmy Carr was within the letter of the law. Didn't make it any less egregious.

The reason why I'm defending Starbucks is because I truly believe, based on 16 years of experience, that they haven't done anything wrong. Not morally, not ethically, not technically. All they're doing is operating a global business.

Someone said upthread that they were uncomfortable with the (hypothetical) idea of an Irish company managing a global brand, and buying advertising space in the UK, but not paying tax here. My view is that the person who should pay UK tax in that scenario is the person selling the advertising space. The Irish company is (hypothetically) also buying advertising space in Japan, and the US, and Germany, and South Africa - and all its activities are based in the UK. Why should the UK have primary taxing rights ahead of Ireland or any of the other jurisdictions? And why shouldn't the UK coffee seller pay for the benefit it receives in terms of improved brand recognition (and not having to pay for advertising space itself)?

Boycotted already.

You know girls, making a latte at home is so easy. Low fat milk in microwave and heat. Douwe Egberts (it MUST be Douwe Egberts) - 1/1/2 tspoon into an expresso cup pour a small measure of boiling water on. Add coffee to hot (but not boiling) milk.

Add vanilla sugar (a pod in a jar of sugar) to taste. Voila!