woodmally Posted October 16, 2012 Share Posted October 16, 2012 Blame the Inland Revenue Service. It's their job to see that businesses pay taxes. They must be a sloppy lot if they let Starbucks get away with it. I agree if someone was allowed to get away with a crime the CPS would be slammed. So its the regulator (in this case Inland Revenue) that should be slammed not the individual companies. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
green Posted October 16, 2012 Share Posted October 16, 2012 Past & present governments seem incapable of setting simple tax rules. Mandarins from HMRC go to work for big business and show them the loops. Have a read of Private Eye any fortnight and see many examples of this. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
robcalder Posted October 16, 2012 Share Posted October 16, 2012 I agree if someone was allowed to get away with a crime the CPS would be slammed. So its the regulator (in this case Inland Revenue) that should be slammed not the individual companies. It is the duty of any business to conduct itself in an honest manner. This includes paying tax. In the same period that Starbucks has avoided paying tax Costa has paid £15million. In view of the situation we are "all in together" boycott Starbucks. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
woodmally Posted October 16, 2012 Share Posted October 16, 2012 It is the duty of any business to conduct itself in an honest manner. This includes paying tax. In the same period that Starbucks has avoided paying tax Costa has paid £15million. In view of the situation we are "all in together" boycott Starbucks. However if it wasnt then its up to our government to deal with it. The same way the police should deal with criminals. So my view is the government is at fault for not checking them. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
discodown Posted October 16, 2012 Share Posted October 16, 2012 There are already other coffee shops in competition with Starbucks, but people like Starbucks, I don't use any other coffee shop other than Starbucks, if Starbucks didn't exist I wouldn't spend my money, if there are enough people like me then jobs would be lost and there would also be less competition so prices would rise.That seems an excessively loyal stance to take. Coffee is coffee isn't it? Why are you so exceptionally overly attached to Starbucks? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
robcalder Posted October 16, 2012 Share Posted October 16, 2012 Past & present governments seem incapable of setting simple tax rules. Mandarins from HMRC go to work for big business and show them the loops. Have a read of Private Eye any fortnight and see many examples of this. The fact that "mandarins" go into private business when they retire from public service strengthens the ability of business to understand the workings of govenment organisations and benefit acordingly this can include changing cultures so that a company can conduct itself ethically. Just because Private Eye places these stories in the most prurient way possible does not mean that we should automatically assume that such arrangements are not in the public interest. Private Eye is in the business of selling its magazine not telling the whole truth. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
robcalder Posted October 16, 2012 Share Posted October 16, 2012 However if it wasnt then its up to our government to deal with it. The same way the police should deal with criminals. So my view is the government is at fault for not checking them. They should conduct thier business ethically, not employ wide boy accountants to evade paying thier tax. They may well act within the law, they should act to the letter, and the spirit, of the law. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
maxmaximus Posted October 16, 2012 Share Posted October 16, 2012 That seems an excessively loyal stance to take. Coffee is coffee isn't it? Why are you so exceptionally overly attached to Starbucks? It’s got nothing to do with loyalty, and everything to do with selling what I enjoy at the price that I'm happy to pay. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
discodown Posted October 16, 2012 Share Posted October 16, 2012 It’s got nothing to do with loyalty, and everything to do with selling what I enjoy at the price that I'm happy to pay.Thats fair enough. Its your money after all. It was this bit I don't use any other coffee shop other than Starbucks, if Starbucks didn't exist I wouldn't spend my money that caught my attention. Would you really give up drinking coffee away from home if Starbucks weren't there? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
green Posted October 16, 2012 Share Posted October 16, 2012 The fact that "mandarins" go into private business when they retire from public service strengthens the ability of business to understand the workings of govenment organisations and benefit acordingly this can include changing cultures so that a company can conduct itself ethically. Just because Private Eye places these stories in the most prurient way possible does not mean that we should automatically assume that such arrangements are not in the public interest. Private Eye is in the business of selling its magazine not telling the whole truth. Oh Rob, your not getting away with that so easily. These mandarins are at the top of the civil service, and leave and retire after receiving nice fat wages & pensions from us little tax payers. Going off to big business afterwards is not about, big business understanding the workings of government organisations, its about pulling the wool over the eyes of the rest of us. Watching Dave Hartnett waltzing around the globe discussing tax affairs with big business cost the UK dearly. 50 posts hey? Are they paying you well? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.