As the Observer notes:
Campaigners have threatened to extend direct action protests after once again forcing Vodafone stores to shut.
Activists have gathered under the banner of UK Uncut to demonstrate against Vodafone, claiming it has been let off a tax bill — an allegation strongly denied by both the company and HM Revenue and Customs.
After another day of protests today, campaigners said they planned to target other high street stores and banks.
The argument about whether the tax avoided was £6 billion or not is a red herring — as I am sure Vodafone and H M Revenue & Customs both know. The question is why a settlement was reached when HMRC was winning its case. And why the overall tax burden of UK based multinational corporations is falling so fast.
I hope the protestors continue to demand 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:
Sure HMRC won the technical battle, but they may have thought it doubtful whether they would have won the substantive battle. Would be good if HMRC could, without transgressing privacy, explain where they felt the CFC rules may not have been in their favour. As there are at least 150 other companies being chased for CFC tax payments, it would be interesting to see how many of these are settled on a similar basis.
Whether or not HMRC was right to settle for £1.25 billion from Vodafone, this correction from the Independent this morning shows that accuracy and some old-fashioned journalistic research has been lacking in some of the reporting in the general press.
http://www.independent.co.uk/news/corrections/correction-vodafone-2128027.html
@Ralph
You miss the point
The quantum is not what matters – and making it an issue is a deliberate side show
The issue is why it happened
The apology changes nothing – and I have always made that clear
Sorry, I am confused.
For good or evil, Vodafone has accepted a legally binding settlement on what is plainly a complex issue. The only reason to protest against them (it seems to me) is if a) you have a stake in Vodafone (eg shareholder, employee) AND b) you think the settlement is too high (ie they should have fought harder to reduce it).
If (as these protesters apparently feel) the settlement is too LOW, shouldn’t the protest be directed against HMRC?
Aren’t these protesters taking aim in the wrong direction?
The whole thing is a mess. Entering into a ‘freedom of movement’ type agreement with another country and then using CFC laws on activities by your nationals in that other country is just plain madness. Do one. Or the other. Or neither. But not both.