I know of Boots, Vodaphone, and the Arcadia Group - Burton, Dorothy Perkins, Evans, Topshop, Miss Selfridge, Topman, Wallis, Outfit - but there are probably a few others too!
I was just at my godson's birthday party, and the father of one of his friends works for the tax department. He came up with the rather good analogy for tax avoidance of arms dealing- it's legal, yet a lot of people won't touch it with a bargepole because it's unethical.
(And he's not some hardline "WE WANT ALL YOUR MONEY" type guy- he doesn't believe in VAT at all, for example).
A couple of drinks later we came up with the idea of invading Liechtenstein for tax reasons due to it having no army, though, so it wasn't possibly the MOST indepth debate on the whole subject.
If you are the CFO of a major company isn't it your job to minimise your company's tax liability in any legal way possible?
Everyone does it, even The Guardian who like to moralise on subjects like this has offices in the Cayman Islands to avoid some tax.
That wasn't what the OP asked for, if you don't have an answer stay out of the thread.
And I believe it's the group who owns the Guardian who avoid taxes, not the Guardian itself. And if the Guardian are avoiding taxes then they should be made to pay them like any other company scamming the public, the fact that you rushed to bring them into it shows what really matters to people like you though.
That wasn't what the OP asked for, if you don't have an answer stay out of the thread.
And I believe it's the group who owns the Guardian who avoid taxes, not the Guardian itself. And if the Guardian are avoiding taxes then they should be made to pay them like any other company scamming the public, the fact that you rushed to bring them into it shows what really matters to people like you though.
Every efficient company will do everything then can to minimise the amount of tax they pay
That wasn't what the OP asked for, if you don't have an answer stay out of the thread.
I'm sorry. I didn't realise this was a formal question and answer session.
I didn't give a list as requested because the answer to the question is "every business who can afford a decent accountant". If there are loopholes in the law then business will take advantage of them.
And I believe it's the group who owns the Guardian who avoid taxes, not the Guardian itself. And if the Guardian are avoiding taxes then they should be made to pay them like any other company scamming the public, the fact that you rushed to bring them into it shows what really matters to people like you though.
And I believe it's the group who owns the Guardian who avoid taxes, not the Guardian itself. And if the Guardian are avoiding taxes then they should be made to pay them like any other company scamming the public, the fact that you rushed to bring them into it shows what really matters to people like you though.
Is that like how it is a major shareholder in the Arcadia Group who is avoiding taxes, rather than the Group itself or even all of its store brands?
The OP asked for a list of who is avoiding tax - the Guardian is (or at least the Guardian Media Group / Scott Trust). This is a valid answer - or is it only dirty capitalist privately owned companies that apply, instead of charitable trusts who own left wing newspapers?
Is that like how it is a major shareholder in the Arcadia Group who is avoiding taxes, rather than the Group itself or even all of its store brands?
The OP asked for a list of who is avoiding tax - the Guardian is (or at least the Guardian Media Group / Scott Trust). This is a valid answer - or is it only dirty capitalist privately owned companies that apply, instead of charitable trusts who own left wing newspapers?
To be fair, the OP asked for a list of tax avoiding shops.
And I believe it's the group who owns the Guardian who avoid taxes, not the Guardian itself. And if the Guardian are avoiding taxes then they should be made to pay them like any other company scamming the public, the fact that you rushed to bring them into it shows what really matters to people like you though.
They can't be "made to pay them" if they are avoiding within the current rules. There needs to be a change in tax legislation. It's not scamming, it's common sense. Using avoidance measures saves me a good few grand a year in tax. All perfectly legitimately.
They can't be "made to pay them" if they are avoiding within the current rules. There needs to be a change in tax legislation. It's not scamming, it's common sense. Using avoidance measures saves me a good few grand a year in tax. All perfectly legitimately.
Hundreds and thousands of ordinary people that work on a contract basis avoid tax, which is perfectly okay, as is the avoidance of tax for big companies too.
Ah, yes, that website is going to be an unbiased source of information isn't it?
So where should good socialists go to buy their underwear now that M&S has been shown to be just another evil capitalist organisation?
I just hope that none of these "UKuncut" protesters don't keep money sheltered in an ISA, buy goods from abroad or pay their builder in cash to avoid VAT. That would be very hypocritical of them.
Ah, yes, that website is going to be an unbiased source of information isn't it?
So where should good socialists go to buy their underwear now that M&S has been shown to be just another evil capitalist organisation?
I just hope that none of these "UKuncut" protesters don't keep money sheltered in an ISA, buy goods from abroad or pay their builder in cash to avoid VAT. That would be very hypocritical of them.
I provide the links only so that people can see what this group is saying, not to endorse anything - my views count for next to nothing on here anyway And detractors can go on there, pull off stuff, and doing their using ripping-up job
As for ISAs, my view is that no tax should be paid on interest. I don't get where the moral case is for charging interest on savings comes from - I must be a bit dim - although I've been told recently that most of my posts are "bollox" anyway. If you've paid tax on earning, when you put them in the bank I don't get the idea of paying more tax on the interest earned. But then I think the TV licence is unfair because it's a tax but not based on ability to pay, much the same with Council Tax, and as for Stamp Duty and VAT --- well ... don't ask. :eek:
As for ISAs, my view is that no tax should be paid on interest. I don't get where the moral case is for charging interest on savings comes from - I must be a bit dim - although I've been told recently that most of my posts are "bollox" anyway. If you've paid tax on earning, when you put them in the bank I don't get the idea of paying more tax on the interest earned. But then I think the TV licence is unfair because it's a tax but not based on ability to pay, much the same with Council Tax, and as for Stamp Duty and VAT --- well ... don't ask. :eek:
^---<<<--- this is probably all bollox too
I suppose the "moral" case is that interest from savings is unearned income so taxing this with income tax (but not NI) is a way of getting some tax money out of people living on the interest from a big pot of money in the bank. I'm sure that your suggestion of not taxing the income from savings would be most welcome by those evil bankers.
I wonder if I might rephrase the general gist of this thread.
If the law was tightened to prevent much of what is currently legal "tax minimising" would it actually increase the tax take?
Or do you think companies will simply move to lower tax countries like Switzerland?
And before you say we should limit their access to our markets if they do this, I'd point out we can't because we're in a single market with the EU. (I know the Swiss aren't technically in the EU but I imagine they are in the single market)
They can't be "made to pay them" if they are avoiding within the current rules. There needs to be a change in tax legislation. It's not scamming, it's common sense. Using avoidance measures saves me a good few grand a year in tax. All perfectly legitimately.
I seem to remember there being quite a public outcry when MPs were caught doing it though.
I just hope that none of these "UKuncut" protesters don't keep money sheltered in an ISA, buy goods from abroad or pay their builder in cash to avoid VAT. That would be very hypocritical of them.
Let's also hope that they don't buy from Amazon (certain items are sent from Jersey to avoid VAT) or Play.com (everything comes from Jersey).
Oh, and I trust that they will be waiting until January 4th to make their large purchases? Wouldn't want to pay only 17.5% VAT, when you can pay 20% - as is your moral duty.
In practice, it wouldn't surprise me if some of the UKuncut lot think that stuff like the above is fine. It's only bad when the "rich" do it.
The Guardian is owned by the Scott Trust, which is a non-profit organisation.
The Scott Trust is non-profit making but the Guardian Media Group which it owns likes to make money.
When then Guardian Media Group (GMG) bought businesses from publisher Emap, the deal was structured to avoid stamp duty by putting it through a new company incorporated in the Cayman Islands.
GMG made over £300m before tax but paid only £800,000 in tax last year
I have no real problem with GMG doing this - everyone else does it after all - it's when the Guardian goes on a huge moral crusade against other companies doing the same then it starts to smell.
Comments
Everyone does it, even The Guardian who like to moralise on subjects like this has offices in the Cayman Islands to avoid some tax.
(And he's not some hardline "WE WANT ALL YOUR MONEY" type guy- he doesn't believe in VAT at all, for example).
A couple of drinks later we came up with the idea of invading Liechtenstein for tax reasons due to it having no army, though, so it wasn't possibly the MOST indepth debate on the whole subject.
That wasn't what the OP asked for, if you don't have an answer stay out of the thread.
And I believe it's the group who owns the Guardian who avoid taxes, not the Guardian itself. And if the Guardian are avoiding taxes then they should be made to pay them like any other company scamming the public, the fact that you rushed to bring them into it shows what really matters to people like you though.
Every efficient company will do everything then can to minimise the amount of tax they pay
I'm sorry. I didn't realise this was a formal question and answer session.
I didn't give a list as requested because the answer to the question is "every business who can afford a decent accountant". If there are loopholes in the law then business will take advantage of them.
People like me?!
Is that like how it is a major shareholder in the Arcadia Group who is avoiding taxes, rather than the Group itself or even all of its store brands?
The OP asked for a list of who is avoiding tax - the Guardian is (or at least the Guardian Media Group / Scott Trust). This is a valid answer - or is it only dirty capitalist privately owned companies that apply, instead of charitable trusts who own left wing newspapers?
To be fair, the OP asked for a list of tax avoiding shops.
Perhaps - but the Guardian is still a product that you may not want to purchase if you disagree with tax avoidance.
Here's the UK Uncut web site: http://www.ukuncut.org.uk/
but I can't find a list.
facebook: http://www.facebook.com/ukuncut
twitter: http://twitter.com/ukuncut
HSBC might be in there too: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VdDjArPGMDo
http://ukuncut.org.uk/blog/press-release-ukuncut-target-hsbc-over-2billion-tax-avoidance
Here is Daniel Garvin (UKuncut) on Newsnight
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ODNbioL7UGg
(seems a very sensible young person)
They can't be "made to pay them" if they are avoiding within the current rules. There needs to be a change in tax legislation. It's not scamming, it's common sense. Using avoidance measures saves me a good few grand a year in tax. All perfectly legitimately.
Hundreds and thousands of ordinary people that work on a contract basis avoid tax, which is perfectly okay, as is the avoidance of tax for big companies too.
Ah, yes, that website is going to be an unbiased source of information isn't it?
So where should good socialists go to buy their underwear now that M&S has been shown to be just another evil capitalist organisation?
I just hope that none of these "UKuncut" protesters don't keep money sheltered in an ISA, buy goods from abroad or pay their builder in cash to avoid VAT. That would be very hypocritical of them.
I provide the links only so that people can see what this group is saying, not to endorse anything - my views count for next to nothing on here anyway And detractors can go on there, pull off stuff, and doing their using ripping-up job
As for ISAs, my view is that no tax should be paid on interest. I don't get where the moral case is for charging interest on savings comes from - I must be a bit dim - although I've been told recently that most of my posts are "bollox" anyway. If you've paid tax on earning, when you put them in the bank I don't get the idea of paying more tax on the interest earned. But then I think the TV licence is unfair because it's a tax but not based on ability to pay, much the same with Council Tax, and as for Stamp Duty and VAT --- well ... don't ask. :eek:
^---<<<--- this is probably all bollox too
The problem is with the law, not the companies that are doing what every tax-paying entity tries to do - pay as little as legally possible.
I suppose the "moral" case is that interest from savings is unearned income so taxing this with income tax (but not NI) is a way of getting some tax money out of people living on the interest from a big pot of money in the bank. I'm sure that your suggestion of not taxing the income from savings would be most welcome by those evil bankers.
If the law was tightened to prevent much of what is currently legal "tax minimising" would it actually increase the tax take?
Or do you think companies will simply move to lower tax countries like Switzerland?
And before you say we should limit their access to our markets if they do this, I'd point out we can't because we're in a single market with the EU. (I know the Swiss aren't technically in the EU but I imagine they are in the single market)
I seem to remember there being quite a public outcry when MPs were caught doing it though.
Let's also hope that they don't buy from Amazon (certain items are sent from Jersey to avoid VAT) or Play.com (everything comes from Jersey).
Oh, and I trust that they will be waiting until January 4th to make their large purchases? Wouldn't want to pay only 17.5% VAT, when you can pay 20% - as is your moral duty.
In practice, it wouldn't surprise me if some of the UKuncut lot think that stuff like the above is fine. It's only bad when the "rich" do it.
Not from me, it would be somewhat hypocritical seeing as how I do it myself.
The Scott Trust is non-profit making but the Guardian Media Group which it owns likes to make money.
When then Guardian Media Group (GMG) bought businesses from publisher Emap, the deal was structured to avoid stamp duty by putting it through a new company incorporated in the Cayman Islands.
GMG made over £300m before tax but paid only £800,000 in tax last year
I have no real problem with GMG doing this - everyone else does it after all - it's when the Guardian goes on a huge moral crusade against other companies doing the same then it starts to smell.