On 27 Feb 2017 at 2:28pm Are we mugs? wrote:
Caffe Nero paid no corporation tax last year, despite £25.5m profit
The company, which has 613 stores in the UK and Ireland, said it paid no corporation tax because its parent company reported a loss. Caffe Nero is part of Rome Pikco Group, a holding company that manages the chain’s presence in the UK, Turkey and the Gulf states, and reported a loss of £22.2m in the year to the end of May 2016. Companies House filings show turnover at Caffe Nero grew 6.7 per cent to £257.6m as it opened 31 stores over the year. Caffe Nero has not paid UK corporation tax since 2007 and came under criticism last year for not paying corporation tax in 2015 on profits of £23.6m. Starbucks has also faced backlash in the past over alleged tax avoidance, but has since changed the structure of its company and paid an £8.1m UK corporation tax bill in 2015.
Check it out here »
On 27 Feb 2017 at 2:36pm Yes we are wrote:
HMRC and their sweetheart deals (along with corporate tax structure and parent company royalty payments that put a healthy company into a loss), all defended vigorously by central government and Mrs Caulfield as legitimate business practices.
Makes you sick to think you paid more tax then a multimillion pound company (or it should do anyway). Do what I do and vote with your wallet, don't shop at stores that don't pay tax.
On 27 Feb 2017 at 3:11pm More to it than that wrote:
Good luck managing to not shop anywhere that doesn't pay corporation tax on all of its profits. Also what's your definition of profit for this boycott? Operating profit, trading profit, profit before interest and tax? It's a broad term...
Did the report say how much VAT Caffee Nero paid in the same time period? What about employers national insurance? Business rates maybe? There's more to tax than income tax and sure, the government could rip up all the bilateral tax agreements we have with trading parties around the world and tax all income in this country but then none of the companies would base themselves here and whilst there would still be tax on turnover (VAT), there'd be little employers NI, certainly less than you could tax off their "Profits".
About the only sensible thing Hammond has said since becoming Chancellor is that he wants to turn the UK into a low-tax country for businesses. Sure there will be people aghast that he is planning to lower corporation tax but all the big companies don't currently pay any tax at all here, by dropping the rate you lose out on tax from national businesses (But give them more to invest in the country) but then you encourage all your Googles and Starbucks and Boots and Vodefoens to funnel all their money from around the world into the UK to take advantage of our low tax rates and the exchequer makes a metric ton of cash as a result (And Luxembourg and Ireland are screwed).
Taking 5% off every multinational on the planet is way better than taking 20% off every business in the UK.
On 27 Feb 2017 at 3:31pm @More to it than that wrote:
There isn't more to it than that, frankly you're an idiot for suggesting there is.
VAT is paid by the customer, PAYE is paid by the staff member (minimal contribution by employer), why even bother to bring them up when the conversation is about companies not paying tax on profits...?
On 27 Feb 2017 at 3:37pm Clifford wrote:
You can always guarantee a brave dissident will step forward and risk his liberty and perhaps life to defend the corporation underdogs from scurrilous attacks. More to it than that, we honour your courage.
On 27 Feb 2017 at 5:29pm Actually wrote:
VAT is only paid by the customer the same way income tax is. You give money to a company when you buy stuff and they pass it on to the government in the form of tax, how are the two any different?
Also employers NI kicks in at the same threshold and is a slightly higher percentage as employee's up to £3,600 odd a month. Just being wrong isn't the basis for a decent argument.
Of course the real scandal here is non-doms and the historically low rates of capital gains tax but the shoutiest people here are sadly often the least informed.
On 28 Feb 2017 at 7:18am @actually wrote:
Because you go to prison if you don't pass the VAT on, whereas TAX can legally be avoided. The mere fact that I'm having to explain the different says it all... the point of the OP is how much TAX has been legally avoided, you think passing VAT on and paltry NI contributions make up for that, astoundingly stupid comment.
On 28 Feb 2017 at 7:51am Lord Snooty wrote:
Another reason for boycotting Caffè Nero in Lewes is that the staff are hopeless. The service is really slow and they seem to think that they're too good for the place. The only time the men become animated is when they can drool over a young female customer, trying to win her over with extra loyalty stamps on her card.
On 28 Feb 2017 at 8:05am Belladonna wrote:
Two ways to effect change.
1. Publically boycott the company and encourage others to do so. Passing on VAT and NI contributions to the govt. from customers and employees does not constitute paying tax.
2. Counter intuitively - become a shareholder in the company. With voting rights and a chance to speak at shareholders AGM you can make your voice heard directly.
All companies who operate in UK should pay their fair share of tax regardless of where their parent company is. Contributing to the society is a moral duty and will help support the schools, hospitals, roads, which we all need and use. If companies want to operate in the UK using its well educated workforce and well run societal structures, they should help pay for them.
On 28 Feb 2017 at 9:35am Do any of you people wrote:
know what employers NI is? Yes, employees pay national insurance which is deducted from their wages but then the company pays an additional amount out of its profits, more or less equal to the amount the employee contributes.
On 28 Feb 2017 at 9:46am Pedro wrote:
@above. Yes, I am aware. Does this compulsory tax, that all employers throughout the UK, fairly and equally pay, give the multinational and big companies a pass to avoid paying a fair amount of corporation tax or even begin to justify it?
The issue is corporation tax, and certain companies aggressive avoidance of it. The fact they obey other tax rules does not mean they have any special dispensation from corporation tax.
On 28 Feb 2017 at 11:56am mike2 wrote:
This really is the only way to resist. Governments are in the pockets of the multi nationals. Hitting them in the pocket where it hurts, refusing to be one of their 'consumers' gets results. It's the only weapon left.
On 28 Feb 2017 at 1:36pm Braindeadro wrote:
No company is breaking any laws by "avoiding" corporation tax. What they are doing is no different to you or I taking advantage of our £10k personal allowance when we pay income tax, the difference being that Corporation tax and international taxation laws are insanely complex and allow companies to take advantage like this.
Rather than boycotting companies who are just acting within the legal framework provided to them, you'd be better off getting your local any entirely ineffective MP to demand her Tory paymasters take steps to simplify our tax laws and stop taking advice on making tax law from accountancy firms who then charge corporations to help them avoid paying tax.
You should be angry with the government, PWC and KPMG, not Caffe Nero.
On 28 Feb 2017 at 1:51pm Tom Pain wrote:
More to it than that has a good point.5% of something is better than 100% of nothing.But how dismal it is that the government is just a tax farming agency. Britannia rules and waves goodbye.
On 28 Feb 2017 at 1:55pm @Braindead wrote:
Actually you're very silly to say "no company is breaking any laws", it's pretty much a dead certainty that some are. Past this point any arguments you make will be ignored and written off as you being ignorant.
The trouble is when you route all funds through various shell companies that operate on a licensed basis to a parent company, it is almost impossible to tell either way.
Comparing it to personal tax allowance shows just how very little you comprehend about either the subject or the real world...