Risso Posted November 8, 2012 Share Posted November 8, 2012 This could have been written for Risso. Richard Murphy draws attention to coverage of electoral fraud in the Isle of Man involving trusts and shady financial backers: Richard Murphy @RichardJMurphy Missed this until now: election fraud in the Isle of Man using anonymous trusts? Whatever next! ht.ly/f7ura Like I said, the man's an arse. He actually called the police when a radio presenter joked that he wished that Mr Murphy be "taken out by a wet ops team". Then when the shootings occurred on Utoeya, he had the absolutely bare faced cheek to compare his situation to that. Still, nice bit of interesting deflection away from your ignorance of any actual facts about the Starbucks case. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
peterms Posted November 8, 2012 Share Posted November 8, 2012 Still, nice bit of interesting deflection away from your ignorance of any actual facts about the Starbucks case. Plenty of facts in what I've posted. Whereas you're saying "get the accounts and show what they've done, and if you can't, then it's all a pack of lies". Threadbare stuff. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jonno_2004 Posted November 8, 2012 Share Posted November 8, 2012 Is the Isle of Man Lib Dem or Conservative ? There are two main parties; the Liberal Vannin party and the Manx Labour Party along with other shady independents consisting of the odd pharmacist, shop owner and airport fireman. Not that by-elections mean ****-all anyway, apart from giving the same old ho-hum orators a platform (be that on Twitter or elsewhere ). Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
tonyh29 Posted November 8, 2012 Share Posted November 8, 2012 There are two main parties; the Liberal Vannin party and the Manx Labour Party along with other shady independents consisting of the odd pharmacist, shop owner and airport fireman. Not that by-elections mean ****-all anyway, apart from giving the same old ho-hum orators a platform (be that on Twitter or elsewhere ). I did sorta know that , I was trying to be funny whilst pointing this thread was about our UK government , not overseas governments :-) luckily I haven't given up me day job yet .... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Risso Posted November 8, 2012 Share Posted November 8, 2012 There are two main parties; the Liberal Vannin party and the Manx Labour Party along with other shady independents consisting of the odd pharmacist, shop owner and airport fireman. Not that by-elections mean ****-all anyway, apart from giving the same old ho-hum orators a platform (be that on Twitter or elsewhere ). I hope you're not suggesting that the nice Mr Singer is in anyway ill suited to running a small but prosperous country Jon! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jonno_2004 Posted November 8, 2012 Share Posted November 8, 2012 I hope you're not suggesting that the nice Mr Singer is in anyway ill suited to running a small but prosperous country Jon! Well considering I work with his 6'8 rugby-playing son Max, definitely not! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Risso Posted November 8, 2012 Share Posted November 8, 2012 Well considering I work with his 6'8 rugby-playing son Max, definitely not! I was sat next to him (Leonard, not Max) at a function on international finance recently. Then the next morning he served me some powdered baby milk in the chemist! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
snowychap Posted November 8, 2012 Share Posted November 8, 2012 Just seen Neil and Christine Hamilton enter Burger King in Shirley. With their reputations, I'm surprised that they weren't seen entering Shirley in Burger King. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
snowychap Posted November 8, 2012 Share Posted November 8, 2012 How can it "not be about last year's accounts"? That's one year, and the year before was the same, that showed a loss AFTER transfer pricing. A 'loss AFTER' or a 'loss BEFORE'? And is the £4m loss before the mats costs they apparently pay to the other Starbucks concern in Belgium, Switzerland or wherever? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
peterms Posted November 8, 2012 Share Posted November 8, 2012 A 'loss AFTER' or a 'loss BEFORE'? And is the £4m loss before the mats costs they apparently pay to the other Starbucks concern in Belgium, Switzerland or wherever? They report an operating loss of £32.8m. This includes £2.8m interest charges, and £25.8m royalties. They do not identify the cost of materials bought from other Starbucks divisions. Which is why suggestions of "looking at the accounts" to establish this are pointless, as any accountant will know. Reuters did ask them, during the research which led to their report. Starbucks wouldn't tell them. ...Starbucks declined to give details, or comment on what the charges indicate about the price its roaster paid its Swiss unit for coffee beans. It also declined to say what profit the Swiss coffee-buying unit makes, although Alstead said it was "moderately" profitable. Swiss law does not require the unit to publish accounts... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Risso Posted November 8, 2012 Share Posted November 8, 2012 What's a normal GP% for a coffee shop chain Peter? What gross profit would you like them to have made? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
chrisp65 Posted November 8, 2012 Share Posted November 8, 2012 What's a normal GP% for a coffee shop chain Peter? What gross profit would you like them to have made? come on, can you really not see it's a perfectly legal racket? but, they are clearly ashamed or embarassed by their own business model because they won't be up front about it Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
peterms Posted November 8, 2012 Share Posted November 8, 2012 What's a normal GP% for a coffee shop chain Peter? What gross profit would you like them to have made? What's normal? Well, Costa and Caffe Nero have both seen significant growth in profits - which would be consistent with what Starbucks' CFO and President were reporting about how Starbucks were doing. What profit would I like them to make? The point is rather what profit I would like them to report, and the answer is the profits that were actually made here, without the taxdodging wheezes which push the tax burden onto others. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
tonyh29 Posted November 9, 2012 Share Posted November 9, 2012 presumably then Peter you welcome Osbornes moves (along with Schäuble) to crack down on these forms of avoidance ....As you apparently don't have any political bias you'll be happy to praise him for this move ? I do work with a large US Corporation based in the UK , occasionally i have to work on global projects coming out of the US budget , before the project starts I always have to fill in some US withholding tax form whereby they can withhold 30% of the payment , however they won't if they are satisfied that I'll be paying the tax in the UK instead of the US ... does something similar not exist for all these US corporations working elsewhere in the world , like a reciprocal agreement ? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
snowychap Posted November 9, 2012 Share Posted November 9, 2012 What's a normal GP% for a coffee shop chain Peter? What gross profit would you like them to have made? What's a normal GP, Martin? What were their mat costs, Martin? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
snowychap Posted November 9, 2012 Share Posted November 9, 2012 They do not identify the cost of materials bought from other Starbucks divisions. Which is why suggestions of "looking at the accounts" to establish this are pointless, as any accountant will know. Indeed. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
peterms Posted November 9, 2012 Share Posted November 9, 2012 presumably then Peter you welcome Osbornes moves (along with Schäuble) to crack down on these forms of avoidance ....As you apparently don't have any political bias you'll be happy to praise him for this move ? Osborne is doing as little on taxdodging as political pressure and the public mood will let him. He does understand, bless him, that doing nothing at all isn't acceptable, but he has no real interest in attacking his own political base, social grouping, donors, and friends. That is at the same time understandable on a personal level, and something which makes him unfit for the position he holds. Any bit of progress is welcome, but any praise for Osborne should come when taxdodging is tackled comprehensively, not after a few footdragging concessions. I do work with a large US Corporation based in the UK , occasionally i have to work on global projects coming out of the US budget , before the project starts I always have to fill in some US withholding tax form whereby they can withhold 30% of the payment , however they won't if they are satisfied that I'll be paying the tax in the UK instead of the US ... does something similar not exist for all these US corporations working elsewhere in the world , like a reciprocal agreement ? I think you're talking about companies making sure they can show that they have complied with regulations regarding collecting tax due from contractors or temporary staff, to show that those people have paid the tax due to them? That would be quite different from companies shifting money around between members of its own group in order to avoid tax. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Risso Posted November 9, 2012 Share Posted November 9, 2012 What's normal? Well, Costa and Caffe Nero have both seen significant growth in profits - which would be consistent with what Starbucks' CFO and President were reporting about how Starbucks were doing. What profit would I like them to make? The point is rather what profit I would like them to report, and the answer is the profits that were actually made here, without the taxdodging wheezes which push the tax burden onto others. To be clear I asked for GP (ie Gross Profit) PERCENTAGE. It's kind of important. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
peterms Posted November 9, 2012 Share Posted November 9, 2012 To be clear I asked for GP (ie Gross Profit) PERCENTAGE. It's kind of important. Why don't you get Costa's and Caffe Nero's accounts and work it out, then? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
blandy Posted November 9, 2012 Moderator Share Posted November 9, 2012 To be clear I asked for GP (ie Gross Profit) PERCENTAGE. It's kind of important. I don't know about the bean counting (see what I did there) of these Coffee companies, but just from a layman's terms, you'd kind of think that the price of a cup of coffee at whatever it is - 3 quid? or 2.50 or thereabouts, would kind of reflect something like Cost of raw materials, cost of wages, cost of machines and heating and lighting and rent and advertising and all that, with around 5 - 10 percent profit on the total sold, including all the cakes and butties and stuff they sell - a profit margin of 10% would be excellent. 5% good, and 3% decent. Maybe you could say something like the overpriced coffee market even 15% might be achievable in good times and 2% in bad. They have in the past undoubtedly raked in huge sums and profits. Maybe they've expanded too fast, maybe not, but they've clearly paid very little tax in one of their biggest markets. Same goes for Germany. Which kind of looks iffy. Maybe in the last couple of years they've suffered, with as you say reduced demand because everyone's skint, but over the piece, they look and behave as if they're "guilty" of quite legal money shuffling to minimise their tax burden. Frankly if they weren't doing that it wlould be a surprise as it would mean either they're ethically based, which they would be shouting about, or they employ incompetent accountants, which seems unlikely. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts