Tesco resurrects online VAT dodge from Channel Islands | Business | The Guardian .
Tesco has quietly returned to a multimillion-pound Channel Islands tax dodge four years after the authorities in Jersey banished the supermarket group's VAT-free CD and DVD website from the island, accusing Britain's largest retailer of operating a "sham" selling structure that brought the Channel Islands into disrepute.
Guernsey and Tesco - tax avoiders that suit each other as both seek to undermine the tax base and the rule of law in the UK.
Thanks for reading this post.
You can share this post on social media of your choice by clicking these icons:
There are links to this blog's glossary in the above post that explain technical terms used in it. Follow them for more explanations.
You can subscribe to this blog's daily email here.
And if you would like to support this blog you can, here:
Buy me a coffee!
I don’t support a lot of your campaigns such as taxes pay for jobs – obviously they do pay for jobs but many of those are nonsense jobs. Taxes also cost real jobs in the private sector which in the end pays for everything. However, I am right with you on the £17.99 VAT dodge.
Having run a business that has suffered at the hands of the Channel Islands VAT abuse for 14 years, I do not blame the businesses that take advantage of it nor do I blame the Islands (or Switzerland). I blame the UK Government which could end it at a stroke by reducing the threshold to £7.99. I have considered long and hard why they would not do so and recover the lost millions in VAT as well as supporting beleagured suppliers in the UK. Regretfully, with no other logical explanation apparent it points to a whiff of corruption at some level. Unless the Government really is that incompetent which almost seems worse. I would love to know the full story.
Hi Woolley …contact me through Richard Murphy and I’ll fill you in. Regards Richard A
Hi Richard A.
Really intriguing comment. Better still, could you post here so we can all be educated? Or is it actionable? There HAS to be more to this than is in the public domain. Richard M has my email on record and I have no objection to him passing it on to you.