Register | Sign In


Understanding through Discussion


EvC Forum active members: 66 (9164 total)
6 online now:
Newest Member: ChatGPT
Post Volume: Total: 916,477 Year: 3,734/9,624 Month: 605/974 Week: 218/276 Day: 58/34 Hour: 1/3


Thread  Details

Email This Thread
Newer Topic | Older Topic
  
Author Topic:   Corporate Tax Evasion
Tangle
Member
Posts: 9504
From: UK
Joined: 10-07-2011
Member Rating: 4.8


(2)
Message 76 of 100 (681971)
11-29-2012 9:21 AM


To get back on topic.
Starbucks here in the UK buys its coffee beans from that well known coffee growing country Switzerland.......
The fact is that Starbucks is competing unfairly with independent UK coffee shops because they pay sod all tax here. Stabucks can't afford not to be in the UK no matter what the tax rate is and UK wouldn't miss them for a blink of the eye if they did leave.
Amazon is the same, though Google may be rather more difficult to sort out.

Life, don't talk to me about life - Marvin the Paranoid Android

  
Tangle
Member
Posts: 9504
From: UK
Joined: 10-07-2011
Member Rating: 4.8


(1)
Message 79 of 100 (681980)
11-29-2012 11:00 AM
Reply to: Message 78 by vimesey
11-29-2012 10:39 AM


Abbreviated to SFA (which, of course, can have rather different words but the same acronym and meaning)
And, btw, 'fanny' has quite a different meaning here too.

Life, don't talk to me about life - Marvin the Paranoid Android

This message is a reply to:
 Message 78 by vimesey, posted 11-29-2012 10:39 AM vimesey has not replied

  
Tangle
Member
Posts: 9504
From: UK
Joined: 10-07-2011
Member Rating: 4.8


(3)
Message 85 of 100 (682532)
12-03-2012 1:19 PM
Reply to: Message 84 by Panda
12-03-2012 1:06 PM


Re: Starbucks to "review" UK tax arrangements
They're in a right old two 'n eight........
Nice little blog over at Political Scrapbook
Historic claims made by Starbucks executives in little-scrutinised briefings to analysts and shareholders laid the way for the company to be slammed in a report by MPs today. The multinational is accused by the Public Accounts Committee of conniving to avoid corporation tax by pretending to be unprofitable in the UK — ‘exporting’ the real profits to jurisdictions with lower tax rates:
Starbucks told us that it has made a loss for 14 of the 15 years it has been operating in the UK, but in 2006 it made a small profit.
Starbucks claimed to the committee that it has been difficult for us to make a profit in the UK. Indeed, 2007 was ninth year in ten that the company filed losses in the UK. Strange, then, given that annual reports singled out the UK as one of the company’s cash cows:
In particular, our Canada, Japan, UK, and China MBUs account for a significant portion of the net revenue and earnings Annual Report 2011
Revenues from countries other than the US consist primarily of revenues from Canada and the UK, which together account for approximately 66% of net revenues Annual report 2009
But it was phonecall briefings to analysts from this period in which Starbucks really screwed themselves over:
On the release of quarterly earnings figures in 2007, then Chief Operating Officer Martin Coles told analysts that the profits from the UK were being used to pay for expansion in foreign markets
CEO Howard Schultz claimed that Starbucks’ UK arm was so successful that he would adapt lessons learned here for the American market
Again in 2007, then-Chief Financial Officer Peter Bocian claimed Starbucks UK had pulled in profits margins of nearly 15 percent almost 50m
Despite that impressive roster of duplicitous statements, it would take something to top claims made in respect of 2011, where Starbucks’ accounts department would have us believe the UK business made losses of 33m. At the time, executive John Culver told investors:
We are very pleased with the performance in the UK.
But CFO Troy Alstead told the select committee:
We are not at all pleased about our financial performance [in the UK].

Life, don't talk to me about life - Marvin the Paranoid Android

This message is a reply to:
 Message 84 by Panda, posted 12-03-2012 1:06 PM Panda has not replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 86 by Straggler, posted 12-04-2012 6:35 AM Tangle has not replied

  
Tangle
Member
Posts: 9504
From: UK
Joined: 10-07-2011
Member Rating: 4.8


(3)
Message 88 of 100 (682877)
12-05-2012 6:36 PM
Reply to: Message 87 by petrophysics1
12-05-2012 2:50 PM


Re: Let's up the cost of Starbucks to 2.30
If Starbucks thought it could charge 2.30 instead of 2.10, it would do it today - tax or not.

Life, don't talk to me about life - Marvin the Paranoid Android

This message is a reply to:
 Message 87 by petrophysics1, posted 12-05-2012 2:50 PM petrophysics1 has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 89 by petrophysics1, posted 12-05-2012 8:11 PM Tangle has replied

  
Tangle
Member
Posts: 9504
From: UK
Joined: 10-07-2011
Member Rating: 4.8


(4)
Message 91 of 100 (682935)
12-06-2012 4:31 AM
Reply to: Message 89 by petrophysics1
12-05-2012 8:11 PM


Re: Let's up the cost of Starbucks to 2.30
petrophysiics1 writes:
Ok, so Starbucks doesn't think it can charge 2.30 without losing business and more importantly without making less money.
Charge more sell less, charge less sell more. Somewhere there is a price which brings in the maximum amount of money. I am quite confident that Starbucks has looked at that and came up with a price arround 2.10.
Now if you increase Starbucks cost of doing business they will make less money, less return on investment. If they can raise the price and do the same volumne they will do that. That is highly unlikely as if that were so the price would be higher right now.
You've forgotten competition. Starbucks has Costa Coffee next door to it. Costa is a UK company paying UK taxes. Let's assume that both Starbucks and Costa charge 2.10 for a coffee and that Starbuck's cost of doing business is only lower that Costa because they don't pay as much tax.
If they both now pay the same tax, Starbucks will not increase it's price unless it believes Costa will follow - but Costa has no reason to follow because it's profitable at the old price and senses blood......and so on.
But if prices rise, I don't give a hoot anyway - I'd rather they paid their fair share than have bad coffee 20p cheaper.
ABE
And in breaking news, Starbucks goes a little bit soppy.
Coffee chain Starbucks has agreed to pay more UK corporation tax, after a public outcry over how little it pays.
Kris Engskov, managing director of Starbucks UK, announced that the company would pay "a significant amount of tax during 2013 and 2014 regardless of whether the company is profitable during these years".
The extra tax could amount to 20m over the next two years, he said.
"We know we are not perfect", the boss of the coffee chain added.
The company admitted that the degree of anger and emotion surrounding the tax issue had "taken us a bit by surprise" and that the move was an attempt to rebuild trust with its customers.
"Since we started doing business here, we have always organised our tax affairs according to the letter of the law," said Mr Engskov.
But he maintained that the company had found it difficult to make profits in the UK, which has "the most competitive espresso market in the world", despite "two million customers visiting us each week in hundreds of stores across the UK".
Companies pay corporation tax on any profit they make in the UK, not their revenue or takings. Hence allegations that multinationals move money to other countries to reduce how much tax they pay in the UK.
The extra tax payments will be funded by not claiming "tax deductions for royalties or payments related to our intercompany charges", Mr Engskov said.
Starbucks has 760 outlets across the UK and says it contributes "300m to the UK economy" each year.
Edited by Tangle, : News update

Life, don't talk to me about life - Marvin the Paranoid Android

This message is a reply to:
 Message 89 by petrophysics1, posted 12-05-2012 8:11 PM petrophysics1 has not replied

  
Tangle
Member
Posts: 9504
From: UK
Joined: 10-07-2011
Member Rating: 4.8


Message 93 of 100 (683094)
12-07-2012 1:21 PM


They're just proving what we all know; for multinational corporations, paying tax is voluntary.

Life, don't talk to me about life - Marvin the Paranoid Android

Replies to this message:
 Message 94 by Straggler, posted 12-07-2012 1:26 PM Tangle has not replied

  
Newer Topic | Older Topic
Jump to:


Copyright 2001-2023 by EvC Forum, All Rights Reserved

™ Version 4.2
Innovative software from Qwixotic © 2024