Boycotting Amazon

Nothing simple about it bags These entities are not a single company they are a group of companies charging each other for services and having registered offices in different companies.
VC is angling for Cleggy's job I suppose. It is probably his if he wants it.

It doesn't look like a very simple problem to me. One wouldn't expect it to, really, given what balls ups the Inland Rev can make of even "small people's" tax affairs.

Vince Cable on the problem of international tax avoidance

Charming post, jend. I'm sure everyone will think me silly and an apologist for Amazon and/or Starbucks now. You make me laugh.

Absentgrana, Osborne's family trust fund is offshore, or was in 2011,according to an article in the Guardian, and I cannot imagine that has changed.
Bags, you are just being silly. I assume I pay the correct amount of tax, as I fill in a tax return every year and have done since I set up my first business in 1989.
In fact this year I had a letter from the tax man to say I had underpaid by a thousand pounds when I closed the guest house, which shocked me.
So I sent a letter to the tax man and rang up the accountant I had had, who was equally upset as it said he was fiddling the taxman on my behalf.
Two months later, I had another letter apologising. My accountant had got it right. If they can chase me, they should be able to chase the big companies.
If I did pay more than I should that can hardly count as immoral.
Do you have shares in Starbucks or Amazon? You seem to be sticking up for them rather a lot!
And yes, actually, I believe the last three governments have been immoral as far as the tax question is concerned, going back to when Tony Blair took over. His wife is also being immoral by setting up a company that takes money from the NHS. Oh, and Thatcher was immoral before that. Answer your question?

i find amazon very good on delivery whether they pay tax or not is up to this so called goverment

Or perhaps the clever people these companies employ will always be one jump ahead. As long as there are some countries with "light" tax regimes there will always be loopholes. Grant me the knowledge to know the things I can have an affect on...

I cannot imagine how Starbucks makes ANY profit. Tried their coffee once - never again.
However, admit to being hooked on Amazon; it's just so easy to find what you want and have it sent. But I WILL be exploring the alternatives more, from now on.
As for Kindle - I've been yearning for one, but can't really justify it as I use the local library regularly and get my books for free. Now I shall find it easier to keep resisting the urge to buy one!
But then, as others have already said, if we had intelligent and brave poiticians ( I include all Parties), and a functioning Civil Service, these loopholes would have been dealt with years ago.

Bags Is George Osborne's family trust fund offshore? (That was provoked by your last two sentences.)

No

I can't do Xmas without Amazon.

If that makes me shallow, sorry.

I understand what you're saying, absent, and I think nearly all of us agree that it is the correct way to do things and what we would do too. However, the law apparently allows various definitions of company monies which, in turn, allow companies to get away with not paying tax when, really, they 'should', we think. A change in the law is clearly necessary and I think we're all agreed about that. The question is how to effect that. Some are not convinced a boycott would make a scrap of difference and resent the implication that they are immoral for thinking so and not acting, which leads me to wonder if behaviour that doesn't make any difference can be defined as immoral.

While I would prefer it if companies such as Amazon did pay taxes in the countries in which they operate, I can't really blame them for taking advantage of daft laws that allow them not to. I think our law-makers are far more to blame than any company on this issue. For all I know, the loopholes in the law may have been deliberately put there by politicians. That wouldn't surprise me one bit.

Many companies, including independent book sellers, must be keeping their fingers crossed that a significant number of people stop buying from Amazon and start buying from them instead.

Bags I think the views expressed range across a spectrum from "If it's legal, then it's okay" to "It's unethical and therefore wrong". Someone also suggested that if the opportunity to reduce our tax liability by legal, if questionable, means arose, we would probably do it.

As someone who is self-employed and not earning a lot these days, there's probably quite a bit of scope for manipulating and massaging the figures on my tax return. I have never been tempted to do so. I am scrupulous about claiming genuine expenses against tax but am equally scrupulous about declaring every penny of income. This doesn't make me Goody Two Shoes. I think everyone in the country should pay the fair and proper amount of tax and not find ways of wriggling out of doing so – and I am no exception.

I also avoid buying products from certain companies and countries because I believe them to be unethical. Some other people share this viewpoint but I don't think we expect to change much; we do it because we believe it to be the proper thing to do.

By the way, I don't think anyone is saying that not paying tax is "fine and dandy" (granjura). I think people are just questioning the effectiveness of boycotting large companies as opposed to government actually doing its job properly and making tax laws without loopholes.

Boycotting South African produce during the apartheid regime did work eventually, but that was a somewhat different case, many more people supported the boycott, even governments up to a point, and it took YEARS. It was worth doing.

So far, I'm not convinced that boycotting Amazon would be an effective strategy. I'm saying this as one who has tried over some years various shopping strategies aimed at changing something fundamental (such as how milk is produced). My efforts seem to have been ineffective. That's putting it mildly.

Successive governments have failed to close these loophole. This article might be a touch too far left but it does highlight some interesting points.

l-r-c.org.uk/features/story/my-cousin-the-artful-tax-dodger/

In the past couple of weeks I have received from Amazon the bulk of my DGD's Christmas presents. By using them I have saved myself hours of wandering around shops (my idea of Hell) and a fair amount of money. Am I expected to return them in case I am regarded as some sort of spineless supporter of immorality? It's not going to happen!

jendurham, it is the government's moral duty to make laws that are effective and fair. It would appear that successive governments have failed to do this with regard to company tax law. Does that make our governments immoral too? (that's a straight question; I am seeking your view, not expressing mine).

Would you/do you pay more tax than you are legally obliged to pay? If not, are you being immoral? I would suggest not.

Read Tax Research UK to find out about the above.

Bags, it's nothing to do with legal. It's the morality of it.
All these companies that say they only make their profits in the Cayman or Virgin Islands must have one coffeeshop per person out there. Have holidaymakers there noticed the enormous warehouses built by Amazon?
Did you know that there are companies that store stuff in this country, ship it to the US and reimport it to avoid VAT?
Perfectly legal but immoral.

Agree about Google Chrome, Jen!

I agree with Granjura here.
It is not okay for companies to be immoral or for people to encourage it.
For all those of you who have a Kindle, you can google Calibreto convert EPUB to a Kindle friendly version, which is opensource, and download the software.
This is from the Guardian today.
Haven't done it myself as although I have a Kindle, it was bought for Ken for his 65th birthday last year as he was having difficulty reading and holding a book.
It has all the 20 books we bought for him to read, and all I have done so far is recharge it when needed. Can't bring myself to use it yet.
Of course you could say that Google is as bad as Amazon and make excuses that way. That's all they are.
I get fed up of Google telling me I can download Google Chrome because it's so much better than anything else. It really messes up my computer. Whenever my computer is running slowly I check and sure enough, I have managed to download Chrome without being aware. I get rid of it and the computer is okay again!

I am heartened to see the response to my initial post but sad to see that there is relatively little support, and even less recognition of the fact that we, as consumers, have enormous power. We all managed without Amazon not so very long ago and as others have pointed out, there are alternatives. I have decided to buy from my local independent book seller, rather than Amazon. I have a Kindle (which is not without problems) but managed for most of my life without one and can do so again.

Of course it is up to government to close the loopholes, but we can ramp up the pressure by letting Amazon AND our MPs know just how angry we are. No, a few Gransnet boycotters will not do the trick, but just do a search on "Amazon boycott" and you will see that there is a feeling that such a mass movement could apply the necessary pressure for change.

My mother used to say that you have to hit them where it hurts - i.e. in the wallet. She was right. A mass boycott, which is gaining ground, would, I'm certain, make the powers that be sit up and take notice.

merlotgran, my comment was not personal- but a general comment re the many people here who say not paying tax is fine and dandy, and that a boycott serves no purpose. I disagree- you do as you like, of course.

And do Argos and the Gift Company pay more tax than they are legally obliged to pay? I doubt it. And if their accountants found a way for them to pay less, though still within the law, would they not choose to pay less?

It is the government's responsibility to make effective tax laws and companies' responsibility to maximise their profits for their shareholders. Company managements actually must do this by law. They would be acting illegally otherwise.

If we think tax laws are wrong, our democratic duty is to apply pressure on politicians to reform tax laws.

By the way, I won't be buying xmas presents from Amazon this year, but I never did anyhow, so no change there.