UK lawmakers blast Starbucks, Amazon over tax payments

LONDON (AP) - British lawmakers on Monday accused major multinational companies of aggressive tax avoidance, amid calls by the U.K. government for a global crackdown on firms that seek to evade taxes.
In sometimes bitter exchanges at a three-hour parliamentary committee hearing, legislators questioned Starbucks, Google and Amazon about the amount they pay to the U.K. government in taxation.
Lawmakers scoffed as Troy Alstead, Starbucks global chief financial officer, claimed that the fact the coffee giant had reported losses for all but one of the 15 years it has operated in the U.K. was down to poor performance - and not an attempt minimize its taxes in Britain.
"You have run the business for 15 years and are losing money and you are carrying on investing here. It just doesn't ring true," said Margaret Hodge, head of parliament's Public Accounts Committee.
Alstead acknowledged to the panel that its taxable profits in the U.K. are calculated after royalties paid to its European headquarters in the Netherlands have been deducted. He said that Starbucks had a special tax arrangement with the Dutch government covering its headquarters, but declined to give details.
"Respectfully I can assure you there is no tax avoidance here," Alstead told the panel.
Companies operating in Europe can base themselves in any of the 27 European Union nations, allowing them to take advantage of a particular country's low tax rates.
Alstead insisted that Starbucks was not seeking to mislead investors or tax authorities about its performance in Britain.
"We are not at all pleased about our financial performance here. It is fundamentally true everything we are saying and everything we have said historically," he told the committee.
Last week, Britain and Germany called for the world's largest economies to do more to collaborate to fight tax evasion, particularly in online commerce.
Hodge told witness Andrew Cecil, public policy director at Amazon, that many people in Britain are angered over the low tax rates paid by the retailer.
"Your entire activity is here yet you pay no tax here and that really riles us," she said.
Cecil's claims that he did not know certain information about Amazon or could not make it public infuriated lawmakers.
"The idea that you come here and simply don't answer the question and pretend ignorance - it's just not on, it's awful," Hodge said, calling Cecil a "not serious person."
Matt Brittin, chief executive of Google UK, told the committee that his company picked Ireland and Bermuda as main bases because tax rates were favorable. Brittin denied one lawmaker's accusation that the Internet search giant was breaching its own code of "Don't be evil."
"We comply with the law in the U.K.," he said. "It would be very hard for us to pay more tax here based on the way we are required to structure by the system."
Hodge fired back, saying lawmakers were "not accusing you of being illegal, we are accusing you of being immoral."
In sometimes bitter exchanges at a three-hour parliamentary committee hearing, legislators questioned Starbucks, Google and Amazon about the amount they pay to the U.K. government in taxation.
Lawmakers scoffed as Troy Alstead, Starbucks global chief financial officer, claimed that the fact the coffee giant had reported losses for all but one of the 15 years it has operated in the U.K. was down to poor performance - and not an attempt minimize its taxes in Britain.
"You have run the business for 15 years and are losing money and you are carrying on investing here. It just doesn't ring true," said Margaret Hodge, head of parliament's Public Accounts Committee.
Alstead acknowledged to the panel that its taxable profits in the U.K. are calculated after royalties paid to its European headquarters in the Netherlands have been deducted. He said that Starbucks had a special tax arrangement with the Dutch government covering its headquarters, but declined to give details.
"Respectfully I can assure you there is no tax avoidance here," Alstead told the panel.
Companies operating in Europe can base themselves in any of the 27 European Union nations, allowing them to take advantage of a particular country's low tax rates.
Alstead insisted that Starbucks was not seeking to mislead investors or tax authorities about its performance in Britain.
"We are not at all pleased about our financial performance here. It is fundamentally true everything we are saying and everything we have said historically," he told the committee.
Last week, Britain and Germany called for the world's largest economies to do more to collaborate to fight tax evasion, particularly in online commerce.
Hodge told witness Andrew Cecil, public policy director at Amazon, that many people in Britain are angered over the low tax rates paid by the retailer.
"Your entire activity is here yet you pay no tax here and that really riles us," she said.
Cecil's claims that he did not know certain information about Amazon or could not make it public infuriated lawmakers.
"The idea that you come here and simply don't answer the question and pretend ignorance - it's just not on, it's awful," Hodge said, calling Cecil a "not serious person."
Matt Brittin, chief executive of Google UK, told the committee that his company picked Ireland and Bermuda as main bases because tax rates were favorable. Brittin denied one lawmaker's accusation that the Internet search giant was breaching its own code of "Don't be evil."
"We comply with the law in the U.K.," he said. "It would be very hard for us to pay more tax here based on the way we are required to structure by the system."
Hodge fired back, saying lawmakers were "not accusing you of being illegal, we are accusing you of being immoral."
America - can you just take all your companies, our cars, everything back from the world this day forward?
Â
Let them exist with what they have. Â They don't need us; they don't want us - they just want our money.
Â
We need to rebuild America here at home.
This comment has been deleted
"Respectfully I can assure you there is no tax avoidance here,", That is funny.
We're American... And we know how to withhold things...Â
"Companies operating in Europe can base themselves in any of the 27 European Union nations, allowing them to take advantage of a particular country's low tax rates."
Â
Sounds like Starbucks is playing by the rules the EU gave it.
Â
When forced, Starbucks will just pass the costs on to consumers. It's how the world works. Besides, if it seems the laws allow for this.Â
Â
In the end, governments will eventually run out of other people's money.Â
Â
Â
Â
Aaaaah the American way... Corporations and companies are given tax breaks, loopholes, and loads of other incentives... I'm not suprised at all they are attempting to conduct business that way in other parts of the world.
"Companies operating in Europe can base themselves in any of the 27 European Union nations, allowing them to take advantage of a particular country's low tax rates."
Â
Dear UK, you've identified the problem. Now go to the EU and fix it instead of blaming companies by playing by the rules the EU came up with long ago. This is the similar scenario playing out here in the US; Fix the corporate tax laws if you think they're broken.
 @Kermee It's all a show. Make the sheeple think you are doing something and that you really care.Â
Funny how running out of money changes things.... The U.K. must have the same kind of government overinflated, abusive and out of control.
The last 20 years in the UK has seen the conservative party growing stronger. They're mirroring us in alot of sad ways but since they already had things like the NHS in place they aren't seeing as many 3rd worldesque sitautions as we are in the US.http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_Kingdom_general_election,_2010Â
And this is surprising that companies look for tax havens both domestically and internationally? Look at Nevada and Delaware. US companies are getting out of paying billions in tax because of these 2 states. All the libtards that love their Apple products can thank Nevada for helping Apple get out of paying billions of dollars in taxes.
Â
This will never end until states and nations converge on tax policies and the chance of this happening is about as good as the chance of Switzerland opening their books to the outside. Not without threats of war (or worse) will these organizations ever change. Too much money to be made by these few countries hiding the profits of so many.Â
 @Beam_Me_Up HEY HEY I'm a "libtard" and I won't touch apple products thanks. The moment a company starts manufacturing electronics here in the US I will happily pay more for their products so that I use products that I know in good conscience haven't been made by children and are being paid (hopefully) a living wage. To be honest though, all electronics you and I are using aren't very sustainable or good. Until some company that isn't as totally profit driven takes up the torch we won't see this happen.Â
 @quidproquo I threw the "libtard" comment in just because @LeftWing was so quick to make this political. I did not own Apple products until my wife and kids got them. I don't have the budget in my working life to buy only American made electronics, I would be out of business. And with the Walmart economy I don't see any relief in sight. I will buy US when I can afford it but the US will not survive on what I can afford to buy.
The tax-avoiding RepubliCants will love to hear this!Â
 @LeftWing I believe all of the above mentioned companies largely donated to the Democratic party or by LeftWing do you mean "Socialist"? America is an Oligarchy, not a 2 party system. It is this division of Americans that are preventing progress. I am an American before I pledge my allegiance to a party. Let me guess, you rely on grants or donations where you work and want more people to feel obligated to give their money to the entities that are mismanaged or corrupt. I am not a fan of the "Entitlement Generation".
 @LeftWing Oh, and you think that only the republicans are hiding their money offshore? There are just as many democrats hiding money as there are republicans. Or do you really think that the rich democrats only use investors and advisers that don't take advantage of any and all loopholes? Give me a break but more importantly move on with the broken record.Â