TaxCorporate TaxStarbucks tax payments a bizarre move

Starbucks tax payments a bizarre move

The public's mood hasn't set tax bills before, so why is it setting Starbucks'?, asks Calum Fuller

Starbucks tax payments a bizarre move

SO, STARBUCKS has come good on its £20m promise to the taxman, making its first £5m payment to HM Revenue & Customs this week. How kind.

The move – an attempt to placate the irate British public, tabloids and Public Accounts Committee after it emerged the coffee house had paid only £8.6m in corporation tax since 1998 – gives the impression the levy is somehow voluntary. Indeed, these new payments have been openly described as such.

“HMRC should calculate what it thinks it is owed and charge it, and Starbucks should pay it. Tax is not voluntary, and the taxman should not be in the business of accepting extra, voluntary, payments.”

I wrote those words in December after Starbucks announced its intention to make the payments, and I feel it’s as true now as it was then.

Granted, it may be a good PR move, but that is simply not how it works, and gives entirely the wrong impression of how the tax system functions.

A prime example of that is the mainstream media’s repeated and widespread citation of companies’ sales and turnovers rather than their profit, which is, of course, what corporation tax is levied on. It only serves to confuse and does very little to further the debate on corporate taxation.

So do these payments mean Starbucks is profitable in the UK? It’s not clear, although its statement alongside the first instalment said it is “undertaking measures to make Starbucks profitable in the UK”, suggests it isn’t just yet.

Well, it wouldn’t be if it hadn’t decided to forego reductions against various transfer pricing mechanisms and capital allowances, which it’s entitled to.

It’s an incredibly weird situation, but the salient point is this: companies’ tax bills should not be determined by public opinion, rather than the rules.

From Starbucks’ perspective, though, it should be minded to follow through its new policy. A one-off gesture will only attract more ire.

Calum Fuller is the tax correspondent for Accountancy Age and Financial Director

Related Articles

‘Google tax’ nets HMRC £281m

Corporate Tax ‘Google tax’ nets HMRC £281m

1w Emma Smith, Managing Editor
Autumn Statement: Investment and tax avoidance highlighted in Hammond's speech

Corporate Tax Autumn Statement: Investment and tax avoidance highlighted in Hammond's speech

10m Kevin Reed, Writer
Colin: Tell them about the money, mummy

Business Regulation Colin: Tell them about the money, mummy

10m Taking Stock
Economic activity carried out in the UK must be taxed accordingly

Corporate Tax Economic activity carried out in the UK must be taxed accordingly

1y Accountancy Age, Reporters
EU competition head Vestager defends Apple tax ruling

Corporate Tax EU competition head Vestager defends Apple tax ruling

1y Richard Crump, Writer
Five key tax and business burdens the chancellor must ease in Autumn Statement

Business Regulation Five key tax and business burdens the chancellor must ease in Autumn Statement

10m Kevin Reed, Writer
Friday Afternoon Live: Making Tax Digital; CIMA prez's new role; tax conduct guidance

Corporate Tax Friday Afternoon Live: Making Tax Digital; CIMA prez's new role; tax conduct guidance

11m Kevin Reed, Writer
European Commission told to draft financial transaction tax by year-end

Business Regulation European Commission told to draft financial transaction tax by year-end

11m Keith Nuthall, Reporter