Friday 19 October 2012

Starbucks is Now a No, and Costa is a Yes

I won't be buying another cup of coffee in Starbucks.

A couple of weeks ago I had intended on giving coffee up and going on a detox but am yet to start it.

Image source: http://www.thebronxjournal.com/green-basics-four-ways-to-be-green-and-save-green/

I was out and about in London the last 2 days and because of the recent stink about Starbucks' avoidance of corporation tax in the UK, I boycotted them.  On both occasions the convenient nearest alternative: Costa, was where I ended up.  Turns out I am happy about that.  One: because it tastes better, I promise you, and two: because they are a British company (which you'd never guess from the name) and as a result, pay substantially more tax, as they can't move it all around the globe like Starbucks does.  Having worked for a subsidiary that was part of a Group company that had 58 arms, I can recognise the international accounting techniques that Starbucks have used.  Yes they are nothing out of the ordinary and not illegal, but we were always advised to show a profit and pay tax where and when we could, otherwise HMR&C would be on to us.  Starbucks clearly aren't worried about that.  I guess my reason for boycotting them, is that the profit made is so substantial, that to pay NIL corporation tax - since 2009 - and only

Yahoo compares Costa and Starbucks for us:
For example, Starbucks' UK sales reached £398 million last year, yet it paid zero corporation tax in 2011. On the other hand, Costa Coffee - owned by FTSE 100 member Whitbread - turned over £377 million and paid £15 million in corporation tax on this smaller sum.
So Starbucks has paid no corporation tax since 2009, but what have they paid since they arrived on these shores:
What's more, despite UK sales totalling £3 billion since 1998, the giant US corporation paid just £8.6 million in corporation tax in 14 years.
I am sorry, but if you have ever worked in an area densely populated by Starbucks, like Liverpool Street, you will see every office worker with a Starbucks in their hand.  It does not seem ethical that our pounds are going to them, only so that it all goes overseas.  I know they provide jobs, and those working people provide the government with PAYE, but again it is always the little guy taking the burden!

Anyway, until I start my detox it will be Costa all the way for me!

What do you think? or do you not care?

Funny to hear that they arrived in 1998, as I knew it was relatively recent... only 14 years... I remember, like yesterday, the product placement they did in Austin Powers, and when I saw it I said "Who are they?"


I'll leave you with this article on ft.com which is interesting.

Liska x

15 comments:

  1. Starbucks coffee tastes like dishwater. I buy Nero or Pret coffee.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. I like Pret coffee too, but having talked to someone who has worked there for 15 years he has told me how they are using less coffee per cup and an inferior blend to what they used to. For me now (until I start my detox) it will be Costa all the way (1) it tastes good and (2) they pay tax = a winner!
      Liska xx

      Delete
  2. It's an interesting case in that technically they have done nothing illegal, will be interesting to see how HMRC deals with it.
    But why not take it one step further and drink at an independent? Not always possible clearly but there are some great ones out there and money spent is more likely to stay in your neighbourhood than go into a corporate bucket.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Don't get me wrong, I chose Costa as I was in the big smoke for 2 days for interviews. I ALWAYS go to independents when and where I can - eeek I should have made that clear in the post (live and learn).
      Liska x

      Delete
    2. I agree I recognised the accounting techniques they have exploited so also, in my post, said they have done nothing illegal.
      Shame being self employed and on PAYE isn't as easy to dance around.
      Liska x

      Delete
  3. Gosh I learn a lot from you Liska! That is disgusting. I do prefer Costa so I will now feel extra virtuous while sipping my decaff mocha. x

    ReplyDelete
  4. It's awful but I am stuck. There is nowhere else I can buy a sandwich because Costa refuse to cater for Coeliacs and the gluten free!!! They also refuse to sell Chai (personal choice I know but....) So when I am travelling and hungry I usually can't go independent, which would be my first choice, because they have nothing for me and I am heartly sick of going places and explaining that I am gluten free/wheat free and people not understanding that BREAD CONTAINS WHEAT. I kid you not......I must have told 20 places in the last 6 months after they offered me a sandwich after I said I cannot eat anything containing wheat or barley....grrrrrrr

    ReplyDelete
  5. I like my coffee strong and flavourful. I can't stand the watery coffee with the bitter aftertaste that Costa serve. I love the atmosphere as well as the coffee in Starbucks, plus the free WiFi, so I won't be boycotting.

    Like you say in your post... what Starbucks have done isn't illegal, in fact from a business point of view, I think its pretty smart. From a moral standpoint, Starbucks aren't to blame, the government are! If people are in uproar about it, they should urge the government to make it illegal to evade tax that way.

    Sorry to comment a conflicting opinion to yours, just thought it might be interesting to add a little debate.

    I assume since you are boycotting Starbucks, you are also boycotting all google products? So no more Gmail, G+, YouTube, Google Search, GFC, etc? Because Google UK did the exact same thing as Starbucks! xx

    ReplyDelete
  6. I like my coffee strong and flavourful. I can't stand the watery coffee with the bitter aftertaste that Costa serve. I love the atmosphere as well as the coffee in Starbucks, plus the free WiFi, so I won't be boycotting.

    Like you say in your post... what Starbucks have done isn't illegal, in fact from a business point of view, I think its pretty smart. From a moral standpoint, Starbucks aren't to blame, the government are! If people are in uproar about it, they should urge the government to make it illegal to evade tax that way.

    Sorry to comment a conflicting opinion to yours, just thought it might be interesting to add a little debate.

    I assume since you are boycotting Starbucks, you are also boycotting all google products? So no more Gmail, G+, YouTube, Google Search, GFC, etc? Because Google UK did the exact same thing as Starbucks! xx

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Thank you for visiting and commenting. Yes, I know it is not illegal. I recently got made redundant from a job where my employer was a subsidiary of a Group company and I had access to all of the financial information and know these inter-company finance practices are commonplace and legal. Yes the media is now saying Google, Starbucks and Amazon. They're just soundbites as they are household names. There'll be many many more; long list!

      No, I won't partake in any boycotting that literally shoots me in the foot, and Google now dominates my laptop and computer use.

      Boycotting Starbucks is easy. One, for me, Costa tastes better and two, when I finally get arsed to start my detox I won't be drinking coffee at all.

      If I lived on a dessert I would boycott the whole lot of them but unfortunately that's not real life.

      Glad you love Starbucks; I used to too.

      Liska x

      Delete
    2. Thanks to my spelling I am now splitting my sides laughing at the thought of me living on a cupcake!
      xx

      Delete
  7. Cool post. Thanks for the info! I'm posting a link to it on my blog. :)

    ReplyDelete
  8. We're still not there with Starbucks. Unless I can tell the gov how much tax I want to pay :/

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Oh no, I know they have just plucked a figure from the air, and it is almost as insulting as them not paying anything at all - it still shows that they and not HMRC are in the driving seat. They should pay the pounds and pence that they owe instead of on the one hand saying the UK is not profitable, yet at international meetings saying "the UK is doing very well".

      So I know what you mean, really I do, but I am glad that consumer power forced their hand into doing something - it's been quicker than waiting for the Govt or HMRC to do something :-)

      Delete

Drop me a line, and I will visit you right back - as soon as I get chance. Thanks for your comment.