Welsh Town begins to use "google" tax avoidance loopholes

Spurfect11

Vital Champions League
Small welsh town traders adopt tax avoidance schemes used by large multinationals to draw attention to tax abuse and grossly unfair tax loopholes that see companies like google, Amazon, Starbucks and Vodafone pay no tax year upon year.

What if every single business in the UK small or large adopted this? Our tax coffers works be depleted within weeks. It's estimated that around £120 billion (yes billion) with of tax corporation tax is done each year. Think how many problems we could sort out with even half that money.




http://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/crickhowell-welsh-town-moves-offshore-to-avoid-tax-on-local-business-a6728971.html





When independent traders in a small Welsh town discovered the loopholes used by multinational giants to avoid paying UK tax, they didn’t just get mad.

Now local businesses in Crickhowell are turning the tables on the likes of Google and Starbucks by employing the same accountancy practices used by the world’s biggest companies, to move their entire town “offshore”.


The Powys tax rebellion, led by traders including the town’s salmon smokery, local coffee shop, book shop, optician and bakery, could spread nationwide.

Crickhowell.jpg
The town centre of Crickhowell, located within the Brecon Beacons
Crickhowell residents want to share their tax avoidance plan with other towns, in a bid to force the Treasury into legislation to crack down on loopholes which allowed the likes of Amazon to pay just £11.9m of tax last year on £5.3bn of UK internet sales.

A town dominated by independent businesses, some of which have been passed down three generations, Crickhowell traders recently fought off a high street planning application from a large supermarket chain.

In the BBC2 documentary, The Town that Went Offshore, the residents express their anger at companies including Caffé Nero, which has not paid corporation tax in the UK since 2008, despite recording sales worth £1.2 billion.

The film, presented by Heydon Prowse, co-creator of the BBC Three series The Revolution Will Be Televised, follows the Crickhowell shopkeepers as they travel to the Isle of Man, where Caffé Nero’s parent company is based for tax purposes.

Jo Carthew, who runs Crickhowell’s Black Mountain Smokery, which sells local artisan produce, with her family, said: “We were shocked to discover that the revenue generated by hard-working employees in these British high street chains isn’t declared. We do want to pay our taxes because we all use local schools and hospitals but we want a change of law so everyone pays their fair share.”

“Until now, these complicated offshore tricks have only been open to big companies who can afford the lawyers’ fees. But we’ve put our heads together, and worked out a way to mimic them. It’s jolly clever.”

Crickhowell

A small market town on the southern edge of the Black Mountains and in the eastern part of the Brecon Beacons National Park, Crickhowell is a popular tourism destination.

John Evans described Crickhowell as the “Glittering Jewel of the Vale” in his 19th century book, The Garden of Wales.

The chain-free High Street prides itself on being one of the few thriving thoroughfares left where local businesses sell local produce.

The town has a population of around 2,800 people.

Crickhowell’s most notable son was the surveyor Sir George Everest (1798–1866), a Surveyor-General of India, after whom Mount Everest was named.
Mrs Carthew said the traders had a “very good meeting” with HMRC when they submitted their offshore tax plan for approval. “It’s a threat to the Government because if they don’t act this could be rolled out to every town. Everything we have proposed is legal.”

George Osborne has pledged to introduce a “Google tax”, hitting large technology companies which divert their profits overseas. But Heydon Prowse said: “As soon as one loophole is closed, another one opens. The Crickhowell traders are sick and tired of shouldering the burden for the entire system. They don’t get invited to cosy chats with HMRC top brass like the major corporations but they are the backbone of the British economy.”

READ MORE

Autumn Statement: ‘Google tax’ on profits going offshore may prove
Tax avoidance: Celebrities named in leaked documents revealing
China's elite linked to 'offshore tax havens'
The Welsh traders also visit Amsterdam, where a sweet heart tax deal struck between Starbucks, which pays no corporation in the UK, and Dutch officials, has now been ruled unlawful state aid by the European Commission.

Steve, a Crickhowell coffee shop owner Steve said: “I have always paid every penny of tax I owe, and I don’t object to that. What I object to is paying my full tax when my big name competitors are doing the damnedest to dodge theirs.” One of the town’s traders discovered that he paid seven times more in corporation tax than Facebook, which paid less than £5,000 in the UK last year.

Made by Renegade Pictures, the documentary will be screened in 2016 as part of BBC Two’s Britain’s Black Economy season, which explores how different levels of society are finding loopholes in the system.
 
It's worth understand that around 70% of the corporate taxes that can legitimately be avoided by large overseas multi-nationals that choose to invest in the UK, is largely facilitated by Ireland - a fellow member of the EU....

Of course, all these things have to end at some point and Ireland is currently under investigation for it's part in these practices..

Osborne to his credit has led the charge to get international agreements in place to bring these practices to and end or at least minimise their ability to do so ...

The key issue is assessing profitability because what most simply don't or haven't understood is the difference between revenues (as stated once again in the article) and the taxable element i.e. profits - many of those companies have and continue to invest heavily in expansion, driven from cashflow and gross margins and hence why even if they remain 'onshore' the tax that they would pay verses their revenues looks 'relatively' small.

It should also not be forgotten the tax/NI paid by the company and their employees; which in many cases simply dwarfs anything that they'd pay in corporation tax., and the UK treasury and we all benefit directly from this tax at source....
 
Yes Ireland is the main offender. Good for them, bad for other countries. A prime example of how "looking out for number 1" can sometimes be a terrible idea.

Regarding taxable profits and getting away without paying them saying all your profits go back into the business through "expansion" and the like i.e. the Amazon model...

well why can't I set up a business that ploughs all their profits back into expansion and the like until I have conquered the global market tax-free?
 
I saw this, love this story - puts HMRC in a cleft stick

We should all do this. Either we all pay or none of us do
 
The way for all to benefit is for the big businesses and the small businesses to pay what they owe in tax.

It'll be great if the Crickhowell people push the government into taking action and recover tax from the likes of Starbucks etc. Britain needs this and it will straighten things out for the future so that tax will be paid to the people. Well done Crickhowell traders and others!
 
Spurfect11 - 11/11/2015 16:57

Yes Ireland is the main offender. Good for them, bad for other countries. A prime example of how "looking out for number 1" can sometimes be a terrible idea.

Regarding taxable profits and getting away without paying them saying all your profits go back into the business through "expansion" and the like i.e. the Amazon model...

well why can't I set up a business that ploughs all their profits back into expansion and the like until I have conquered the global market tax-free?

Of course you can! (if you have the smarts, a credible idea and the capital to risk) and many business do just that - Amazon/ebay/Facebook/google etc raised absolutely massive amounts of risk capital and ploughed it into expansion and made huge losses for years and years ....

But, along the way they went from a small handful of employees into hundreds of thousands per company - all of which paid massive amounts of income tax and NI contributions in their respective regions - and all whilst the companies were making eye watering losses...

Of course, the shit starts when they do eventually start making profits as when they do reach the tipping point the profits accumulate rapidly and they'll have used perfectly legal means to ensure that the money flows back to ALL the risk takers and shareholders first and then the tax man will be at the back of the queue...

I wonder if that approach really is that bad - perhaps we should ask their employees?
 
ST2 - 24/11/2015 11:18

Watch Deliveroo fail to, um, deliver. Despite being quoted at a $100m

They have so far raised around $200 mill and it was predicted by one analyst I know as probably needing around 3 times that amount over the next 3 years-5 years!!

As for their and others business model I think at the end of the day predicting the laziness of people in general now cannot be underestimated....and this new sectors success will really come down to another 'last man standing' after what will be a bloodbath for the investors who get it wrong....I'm very happy not to be an investor in those funds that at chucking money at it..

Personally, I think it says lot about why advanced economies of the World are storing up huge well-being/health issues for itself...

 
For me the bottom line is this, these companies like Starbucks etc want the trade from our population so they should use the same rules as anyone else, pay tax on what they sell and NO ONE should get out of that. That's fair and square, all the rules should apply to all traders. if we get rid of the inequalities in the country, everyone will be happy (well those that like fairness anyway and decent people do).


 
Spursex - 24/11/2015 09:04

Spurfect11 - 11/11/2015 16:57

Yes Ireland is the main offender. Good for them, bad for other countries. A prime example of how "looking out for number 1" can sometimes be a terrible idea.

Regarding taxable profits and getting away without paying them saying all your profits go back into the business through "expansion" and the like i.e. the Amazon model...

well why can't I set up a business that ploughs all their profits back into expansion and the like until I have conquered the global market tax-free?

Of course you can! (if you have the smarts, a credible idea and the capital to risk) and many business do just that - Amazon/ebay/Facebook/google etc raised absolutely massive amounts of risk capital and ploughed it into expansion and made huge losses for years and years ....

But, along the way they went from a small handful of employees into hundreds of thousands per company - all of which paid massive amounts of income tax and NI contributions in their respective regions - and all whilst the companies were making eye watering losses...

Of course, the shit starts when they do eventually start making profits as when they do reach the tipping point the profits accumulate rapidly and they'll have used perfectly legal means to ensure that the money flows back to ALL the risk takers and shareholders first and then the tax man will be at the back of the queue...

I wonder if that approach really is that bad - perhaps we should ask their employees?

my problem with this, is that it appears you are justifying what amazon do because they pay tens of thousands of staff that contribute to society through income tax. This should not mean that they pay no tax themselves. those employees could be employed by smaller companies which do turn a profit and hence pay their own taxes.

Amazon and the rest of them will always find some way to write their profits off.

It means that companies that DO make and declare a profit are effectively punished via having to pay tax. This should not be what tax is all about. Tax is a subscription fee to a functioning society, not a form of punishment. What Amazon and co. do is to not pay this subscription fee, because they consider it as a punishment, and hence benefit from it at the expense of those that do. It also means that less tax money is going into the coffers, and our own taxes are paying for sub-standard services on a nationwide level.
 
Spurfect11 - 24/11/2015 13:32

Spursex - 24/11/2015 09:04

Spurfect11 - 11/11/2015 16:57

Yes Ireland is the main offender. Good for them, bad for other countries. A prime example of how "looking out for number 1" can sometimes be a terrible idea.

Regarding taxable profits and getting away without paying them saying all your profits go back into the business through "expansion" and the like i.e. the Amazon model...

well why can't I set up a business that ploughs all their profits back into expansion and the like until I have conquered the global market tax-free?

Of course you can! (if you have the smarts, a credible idea and the capital to risk) and many business do just that - Amazon/ebay/Facebook/google etc raised absolutely massive amounts of risk capital and ploughed it into expansion and made huge losses for years and years ....

But, along the way they went from a small handful of employees into hundreds of thousands per company - all of which paid massive amounts of income tax and NI contributions in their respective regions - and all whilst the companies were making eye watering losses...

Of course, the shit starts when they do eventually start making profits as when they do reach the tipping point the profits accumulate rapidly and they'll have used perfectly legal means to ensure that the money flows back to ALL the risk takers and shareholders first and then the tax man will be at the back of the queue...

I wonder if that approach really is that bad - perhaps we should ask their employees?

my problem with this, is that it appears you are justifying what amazon do because they pay tens of thousands of staff that contribute to society through income tax. This should not mean that they pay no tax themselves. those employees could be employed by smaller companies which do turn a profit and hence pay their own taxes.

Amazon and the rest of them will always find some way to write their profits off.

It means that companies that DO make and declare a profit are effectively punished via having to pay tax. This should not be what tax is all about. Tax is a subscription fee to a functioning society, not a form of punishment. What Amazon and co. do is to not pay this subscription fee, because they consider it as a punishment, and hence benefit from it at the expense of those that do. It also means that less tax money is going into the coffers, and our own taxes are paying for sub-standard services on a nationwide level.

No, I didn't say any of that, nor I hope did I imply it - I've long argued here for an end to legal corporate tax mitigation the likes of Amazon use via Dublin.

What I am doing is putting into context that their investors took ALL the risks and warrant and expect that the company ad shows it's fiduciary duty to them to act in their interests. When these debates are being had, they need to be had in context and it also needs to be understood that an imposition of a harsher regime could cost Ireland hundreds of millions if not billions of Euro's and a wholesale re-evaluation by many large tech companies about where they plant their legal entity European admin/sales operations..

Whilst some are keen to 'punish' these companies, it can just as easily scare them off for good and see a huge drop in the overall tax take - both personally through Income tax/NI and the corporate profits i.e. much as the UK government is now risking with such Banks as HSBC move their legal jurisdiction, which if they do, could cost the UK hundreds if not thousands of jobs and £100's of millions in taxes they pay.

In other words, it's never just as simplistic in the global economy to do what to many seems easy to do - there are just too many players in the World economy that are willing to and need to do something different in their national interest (as Ireland have done).

Osborne has in his short term as free of other influences done more to bring the possible long term solution to this corporate tax issue than any other chancellor before him., it isn't there yet, but he's making good progress in getting the gov to treat this issue fairly and more I importantly to get some form or agreement with the World's leaders.