... 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.

My DM cleaned her oven last week, first time since my DParents moved house four years ago, and was thrilled to discover an oven light.

I'll post about the tax gap tomorrow morning. Something fun to write on the tube into work.

Haha, I am reminded of Apple's latest new product: the 'iDodge'

(Was a skit on tax dodging, but then who isn't at it?)

Seriously, watch this short vid, it is hilarious:

so do you use your idodge in starexempt whilst wearing a topexiledodge with a flu remedy from bootydodge

I have boycotted my hoover (actually my mum's ex-Dyson and all other vaccum cleaners) as a protest against US imperialism as well.

However, I a supporter of German companies, hence agreeing to allow a Bosch dishwasher in my house.

Apparently people went in to the Apple store to buy the product thinking that it was a genuine article. The mind boggles.

I dunno Teacakes, I wouldn't be surprised. There seems to be an ap for pretty much everything.

I wonder is there and iTidy, where you could plug an ipod into a teenager's room and miraculously clean it?

Toasted Teacakes, loved the iDodge!

iDodge is great.

All these people saying it's fine for multi-billion pound corporations to dodge taxes -you do realise that you, me, and all the other ordinary taxpayers are picking up the slack? These firms are ripping us off.

Shout it from the roof tops, Edam!

I live on a street which, 10 years ago had a butcher, several bakers, a fishmonger and two greengrocers. Ten years ago. Now, in that same space (one and a half miles) we have a Tesco, a Waitrose, a Marks and Sparks and two Sainsburies. We have no butcher, no fishmonger. We have lots of charity shops and banks and every other building is a takeaway, cafe or restaurant, which seem to be doing very well, I'm glad to say.

One of the reasons for this, I believe, is that the rents are so high. Only the global companies can afford to pay them (and the charities are exempt). Then of course the smaller butcher and fishmonger just couldn't compete. But the main problem is that the Scottish government are actively encouraging companies to 'invest in Scotland'. They want the globals, because they say they bring jobs (no argument there) and - you've guessed it - taxes. But they don't, do they?

And the smaller shops also employ people. But they pay their taxes. Plus they don't clog up the roads at 7 o'clock in the morning with their huge lorries. Plus the council doesn't have to send enormous rubbish vans round every five minutes to take away the absolutely astounding amount of waste they seem to create.

Spot the difference.

I really want to be clear on this one point.

I'm not saying it's OK for anyone to dodge their taxes.

I am saying the there's no evidence that Starbucks are dodging their taxes.

The tax gap of £35bn is overwhelmingly attributed to individuals and small companies. I'll explain about that tomorrow.

But not to the Government? Isn't that the point of tax? It goes to the Government, not to individuals and small companies. Or am I missing something?

No evidence?

That's not the case now is it.

Their annual report notes:

"The lower [tax] rate in fiscal 2011 was primarily due to a benefit from the Switzerland and Austria transaction"

Other pieces of evidence include the rate at which Starbucks UK is lent money by Starbucks US - much higher than the rate at which Starbucks is able to borrow money from the market, millions of dollars flowing from Starbucks UK to Starbucks US without any tangible return (royalties, logo rights, etc.). The fact that they make tax losses is in itself suspicious.

Obviously if there is evidence that X killed Y that doesn't necessarily mean X killed Y, but that doesn't negate the fact that the evidence exists.

Are Starbucks being illegal - or is the UK tax system at fault for not tightening up on the wheezes that are available to the very rich businesses and individuals.

Well that depends really. Caged hens are not illegal, non-fair-trade coffee is not illegal, but business still make a point of saying how they avoid these items because consumers view them as unethical.

Likewise tax jurisdiction shopping is not illegal, but that doesn't mean consumers will view it as ethical.

I didn't think anyone was accusing these companies of doing anything illegal. The scandal is that the government is prepared to allow them to avoid tax for the privilege of having them come to the UK to rip us all off do business here.

Good points Skippy re the interest rate - or is anyone going to tell me that the law compels poor old Starbucks to lend between subsidiaries at unrealistic rates.

And to counter the 'what does a boycott achieve, it will just cost jobs' argument, it has already achieved a media frenzy, renewed political debate on the topic, and most likely heightened questioning from Starbucks' investors about their UK business. That's a pretty good day's work, I'd say, and without any job losses.

It's maybe also worth pointing out that other companies have been targetted in this way, notably Arcadia - I seem to recall a sit- in at Top Shop, so it is not just knee jerk anti-Americanism.

Also, it was Reuters that picked up on this, and it would be extremely interesting to know who pointed them in this direction and who they talked to about it. After the whole Tesco/ Guardian business they would not have wanted to take any risks in their reporting, especially given that the City is such a massive part of their customer base.

YANBU!

I loathe Starbucks and most other coffee places- will do Costa if pushed, their coffee is best of the bunch. However, on balance I would rather not pay over the odds for piss poor coffee in a cardboard cup.

"I'll explain about that tomorrow". My heart sinks...

For the zillionth time it's a moral not a legal issue. We know it's legal - that is precisely why it is so shocking. There are national coffee shops who DO pay full tax and international ones who are in direct competition who don't and are sucking money out of the economy.

It's wrongs like this that tend to be the starting point for the creation of Laws to close loopholes.

They are not liable for any tax in this country, why is this so hard to understand. Starbucks repatriated their profit and paid tax on it in the USA. They have paid tax, just not in this country.

God, the UK is such a depressing place to live at the moment...

But we want them to pay it here.

They owe it to us, because we pay for the roads that they use for their lorries. We pay for the rubbish collections, the street lights. We pay the unemployment benefits to the people who can't work, to make sure they have enough money to go to Tesco's and buy a loaf of bread. We pay for the hospitals their employees go to when they're ill. We pay for the schools they send their kids to.

They owe us.

Solopower1, the reason why these local traders have disappeared from our high streets is because we stopped using them. We all go to out of town Tesburys and don't buy locally. My butcher despairs, he does fantastic meat very reasonably but only really makes money at christmas, everyone says he's good but still buy their meat on the weekly shop at the supermarket. It's more convenient.

You might well want them to pay it here, they are an international company and pay tax in the country where they are headquartered. They owe us nothing although they inject a large amount of cash indirectly by paying employees who are then taxed. Rubbish collections and street lights are local issues paid for from council tax not general taxation.

I pay Council Tax too. Toombs, they come here because they benefit from what is still a pretty good standard of living for everyone, which we all contribute to. Except for them.

OK then. If they don't want to pay tax, why don't they build us a few schools, or sports centres, or hospitals? I just mean pay to build them, not have any say at all in how they are run. Why don't they offer to pay for the road-widening or new road signs that are put up when a new superstore opens? Why don't they donate what they owe us in tax to local charities?