Harleyman Posted November 16, 2012 Share Posted November 16, 2012 You think so? Or will they restructure anyway, to avoid retrospective legislation? Restructuring voluntarily would have a PR advantage too. I guess we will just have to wait and see.[/QUOTE] Dont hold your breath on that one. I've yet to hear from anyone that the tax affairs of Starbucks has become a cause celebre world wide and I hardly think that a corporation the size of Starbucks is going to "restructure voluntarily" (whatever that's supposed to mean) just to satisfy the agendas of a few in one of the many corners of the earth where they sell coffee drinks Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
poppins Posted November 16, 2012 Share Posted November 16, 2012 Boycotting Starbucks won't change my routine at all- I can honestly say that I've never bought from a Starbucks or a Costa in my life. Overrated anyhow, people just feel posh saying they go to Starbucks. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lotusflower Posted November 16, 2012 Share Posted November 16, 2012 Oh sure go ahead if you think it will do any good. Reality is that Starbucks dont give a tuppennny damn if you choose not to spend your daily five quid or so on their products. Tilting at windmills is a waste of time. Lobby your elected member of parliament to raise the question of why big corporations are not putting anything back into the coumtry they make so much profit from. That's what he or she was elected to do in the first place.... address the concerns of his/her constituents to Parliament Re my bold. It doesn't work like that in practice though does it. Once elected they follow the dictates of the whips and party machine irrespective of the wishes of the people who elected them. Let's not forget the professional lobbyists either because experience clearly shows more notice is taken of them than the electorate. Politics is a strife of interests masquerading as a conflict of principles. The pursuit of public affairs for private advantage. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
tinfoilhat Posted November 16, 2012 Share Posted November 16, 2012 You mean about the die hard Trotskys? It's a no brainer So, if I don't like the fact that mega company A pays a lot less tax than mega company B I'm a Trotsky ? Are you heavily medicated ? Let's review. Starbucks don't pay corporation tax. They do that using tax avoidance schemes that, I think, are available to all their competitors, certainly other big foreign business. If all other big companies, foreign and domestic, did this we'd be a) royally skint and b)this wouldn't be news. Starbucks in their own website state they have paid £160m in vat (which really only collect for the government) business rates (750 outlets over 3 years ??? I dread to think what central rates are alone for that period) and paye. It's sod all. This why it's news. A company turning over 8.6bn and, at best breaking even over three years would see its value plummet. Heads would roll. That isn't the case. It's making profit. We all know it. Hmrc know it. Shareholders and investors know it. It's avoiding paying tax, quite legally and it's clear the government isnt going to do anything about it except sending teams from hmrc to ASK them not to do it. Not to close loopholes, oh no. Ask them nicely. If consumers don't make a stand Nero, costa, O2 etc will suddenly think: "let's do what the other guys are doing !!" can we afford that as a country ? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
regatta Posted November 16, 2012 Share Posted November 16, 2012 Overrated anyhow, people just feel posh saying they go to Starbucks. Over rated and over priced, even Dick Turpin wore a mask. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Harleyman Posted November 16, 2012 Share Posted November 16, 2012 One of the finest coffee houses in England was that of Lloyds of London back somewhere in the late 18th century. The coffee they enjoyed was of the the best That was before Camp Coffee and Lyons Corner Houses came along Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
regatta Posted November 16, 2012 Share Posted November 16, 2012 One of the finest coffee houses in England was that of Lloyds of London back somewhere in the late 18th century. The coffee they enjoyed was of the the best That was before Camp Coffee and Lyons Corner Houses came along[/quote Better than the greasy spoons in Tinsley. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Harleyman Posted November 16, 2012 Share Posted November 16, 2012 So, if I don't like the fact that mega company A pays a lot less tax than mega company B I'm a Trotsky ? Are you heavily medicated ? Let's review. Starbucks don't pay corporation tax. They do that using tax avoidance schemes that, I think, are available to all their competitors, certainly other big foreign business. If all other big companies, foreign and domestic, did this we'd be a) royally skint and b)this wouldn't be news. Starbucks in their own website state they have paid £160m in vat (which really only collect for the government) business rates (750 outlets over 3 years ??? I dread to think what central rates are alone for that period) and paye. It's sod all. This why it's news. A company turning over 8.6bn and, at best breaking even over three years would see its value plummet. Heads would roll. That isn't the case. It's making profit. We all know it. Hmrc know it. Shareholders and investors know it. It's avoiding paying tax, quite legally and it's clear the government isnt going to do anything about it except sending teams from hmrc to ASK them not to do it. Not to close loopholes, oh no. Ask them nicely. If consumers don't make a stand Nero, costa, O2 etc will suddenly think: "let's do what the other guys are doing !!" can we afford that as a country ? How do you know that company A pays less than company B? Do you have an encyclopedic knowledege on who pays what and how much? I certainly dont. They may all be conducting their tax affairs just the same as Starbucks for all I know. What about McDonalds and the Ford Motor Company? If they're doing it legally there's no cause to say that they're doing anything wrong. Reality check ! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lotusflower Posted November 16, 2012 Share Posted November 16, 2012 One of the finest coffee houses in England was that of Lloyds of London back somewhere in the late 18th century. The coffee they enjoyed was of the the best That was before Camp Coffee and Lyons Corner Houses came along Re my bold. That would be the 17th century old bean. (See what I did there ) It opened in 1688 in Tower Street. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
regatta Posted November 16, 2012 Share Posted November 16, 2012 How do you know that company A pays less than company B? Do you have an encyclopedic knowledege on who pays what and how much? I certainly dont. They may all be conducting their tax affairs just the same as Starbucks for all I know. What about McDonalds and the Ford Motor Company? If they're doing it legally there's no cause to say that they're doing anything wrong. Reality check ! Ford motors are doing something wrong, they should stick to making cars not burgers.:hihi: Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now