The following press release was issued by The Fair Tax Mark this morning. As is clear, I am a director of the Fair Tax Mark:
The campaign for large businesses to adopt a more responsible attitude to tax receives a major boost today with Lush Cosmetics becoming the first high street multi-national company in the UK to be awarded the Fair Tax Mark.
The Fair Tax Mark which today celebrates its first birthday is the world's first independent accreditation scheme to address the issue of responsible tax with Lush being the latest company to be awarded the Mark.
The cruelty-free cosmetics giant which has built its retail empire on iconic products such as the Think Pink bath bomb now operates 105 stores across the UK and over 900 stores in 49 countries around the world.
Mark Constantine OBE, Lush Co-founder and Managing Director said:
Tax is a notoriously murky and controversial area of business. Today more than ever it's reassuring to know that the Fair Tax Mark is setting a benchmark for responsible tax behaviour. We're both flattered and proud to have made the Mark.
The first Fair Tax Mark certification of a high street multi-national business now opens up the opportunity for large businesses to be equally open and transparent about their tax affairs. This in turn will enable shoppers to support those businesses that pursue responsible tax behaviour.
Richard Murphy, a tax justice campaigner and one of the founders of the Fair Tax Mark said:
Lush has chosen to voluntarily report its annual sales and taxes paid in each country it operates in. This is genuinely ground-breaking for a multinational in the retail sector.
With the issue of tax avoidance still dominating the headlines, in its first year of operation the Fair Tax Mark has successfully awarded the Mark to growing numbers of the UK's most progressive companies. These include SSE plc which is the first FTSE 100 company to be awarded the Mark.
Richard Murphy continued:
Around the world and here in the UK people are now aware that many big businesses routinely fail to pay the taxes they really owe. What they now want to do is spend their money with those companies who are doing the right thing by seeking to pay the fair tax that they owe in the right place at the right time.
The Fair Tax Mark is designed to allow consumers to identify those businesses who are paying their fair share of tax. This makes the Mark the next step in the campaign for tax justice.
Thanks for reading this post.
You can share this post on social media of your choice by clicking these icons:
You can subscribe to this blog's daily email here.
And if you would like to support this blog you can, here:
This is excellent news. Well done.
Congratulations Lush.
I am reminded that at the Ethical Consumers AGM in September 2012 where you Richard were a guest speaker and where the idea of some sort of tax accreditation scheme was talked about in questions time, afterwards I was in conversation with two people and Lush was mentioned on numerous occasions. To my shame I had to ask what Lush was. But then, I am only a retired agricultural engineer who is much more likely to know what Swarfega is. It turned out that one of people I was talking to was a Lush executive, who I am sure would be happy to know that all the female members of my family know all about Lush. Despite my ignorance, congratulations Lush, but also congrats. to Fare Tax Mark.
In Monday’s Guardian there was a headline – Johnson makes mischief over top Tories’ tax returns. Boris Johnson calls for all politicians to publish their tax returns. George Osborne and David Cameron say they are relaxed about the suggestion, but there are complications, not least about confidentiality.
Last night on BBC Question time, Duncan Banatine, no less, said that he thought all MPs should publish their tax returns.
Is this not something that Fair Tax Mark could help them with?
I remember you saying on this blog, some months ago that you could see no reason why anyone, other than expats, wishing to have a UK bank account, would require an offshore bank account if tax evasion or avoidance, or illegal hiding of money was not involved. (This is from memory, so may not be an exact report of what you said.)
If this is the case could not MPs and Parliamentary candidates be asked one simple question. – “Do you or your immediate family have an offshore bank account.” If the answer is yes or they refuse to answer, we the electors can draw our own conclusions, and vote accordingly. And presumably the list could be published for all to see. Seems simple to me, but then I’m only a simple retired agricultural engineer.
Regards
David Lucas
We are working ion something like this….out very soon
How many Fair Tax Marks awarded now? I count 7?
I think it’s 10
The Lush one was a bit of a given though since Lush and Ethical Consumer already work together.
Good evening
How long has the Fair Tax Mark been running? In truth, 10 companies having it does not seem very many.
Is there a problem with the processing of applications? Do you need more staff to speed up processing?
Also, I have to admit I find the website confusing in that it says it is ‘not for profit’ but then says it is considering offering an opportunity for EIS investment, yet it is a prerequisite of EIS that there is an intention to make a profit.
Perhaps, as a director of the organisation, you could clarify the position on applications and EIS?
KRs
Tim
Compared to most accedreditation schmes we are going at lightening pace. Fair Trade took three years to do one.
We could not offer EIS
That comment was written when Social Invetsment Tax Releif was being mooted and has obviously not been updated. We would, I think, qualify for that relief but have not done so
Richard,
The statement from FTM says ‘The accreditation of Lush […] has involved the business publishing a full country-by-country financial report’, but Lush doesn’t publish any financial details at all on their website, and only say they are ‘committed to move towards reporting country-by-country results’
I’m confused. Can you clarify? Have they already published a full country-by-country report, or when do they plan to? Were they awarded the FTM on the basis of their commitment, or not yet published report, or did they score well enough on the other areas that country-by-country reporting wasn’t needed?
They have done c-b-c and we have seen it
It appears that not everything hit the web at the time we / I expected
In practice they passed without it anyway
The criteria makes clear this is possible
Thanks for clearing that up Richard. Are there any plans (or reasons why not) to publish the scorecards? which would make it much clearer what documents were assessed and how they were scored.
Like all similar schemes we do not publish the scores
Great news about Lush – we need more of them
I wish … there was a site I could go to with league tables of the major companies in each sector where I am a consumer with some indications of what they are are up to tax-wise. So:
– UK turnover
– UK profit
– UK tax paid
– Use of tax havens and off-shore companies – yes/no
– Use of off-shore borrowing, intellectual property fees etc
I’m well aware that this could get over complicated and would certainly be contentious. But I can form a view that if a company turns over £1bn in the UK and only pays £1m tax, they are probably up to something.
I stopped using Amazon several years ago along with Starbucks as they are easy calls. But who else should I be avoiding – or using?
The work required would be enormous
Not plauisible at present
But public CBC would make it much, much easier
Absolutely understand that.
But if – and its a big if – one thought that customer pressure might change corporate behaviour, it might be worth it. Maybe just focus on the top 10 players in each of 5-10 sectors. Last 3 years, publicly available data only, which the general public just doesn’t see or understand (unsurprisingly). Keep it very simple to start with. Maybe just turnover and tax paid in UK. After Amazon, Starbucks, Google et al, the public is registering that there is some kind of ratio that makes sense. Perhaps include a few of the ‘good guys’ to show the contrast
It might put some of these companies on the defensive. And start to shift the behaviour of companies who aren’t on the list – in case they end up on it.
And keep up the amazing feed of articles – getting forwarded all over the place…
Can you find the money?