Why Starbucks* Isn’t Paying Tax
I’m posting this in response to some great Twitter conversations about large corporations and tax avoidance. Specifically, why large corporations seek to shun this social responsibility.
The below is a modified section of the speech I gave at the MDG Summit earlier this year.
Once upon a time private businesses were created in the image of their founders and took a fairly paternalistic attitude towards their employees – understanding, as they did, the value of a healthy and stable workforce. This was an expense well worth its return at a time where employment was usually a life-long commitment.
Of course, as industries expanded and became more competitive not all companies offered the same commitments to their staff creating something of a lottery. Unequal provision of education and healthcare combined with increasing mobility (decreased retention) of staff fuelled the notion that improvements in social conditions were a responsibility the government should meet for all it’s citizens equally.
As the state assumed greater responsibility for employees and their families, businesses enshrined their belief that the burden of welfare and social responsibility had been “outsourced” to the state to whom it paid taxes.
Over time this created the situation we see now; where providing financial return to shareholders is the sole (or at least primary) responsibility of business. In turn, this informs funds and businessmen for whom the perception has developed that it is at best irresponsible, and at worst illegal, for those operating capital to invest it for anything other than maximum financial return, regardless of the social and environmental consequences of doing so.
These cultural shifts polarised capital to the situation we see now, where it will either be invested to extract financial returns (as in business) spent to achieve a social outcome (as in government) or donated to help those the system has failed (charity)
Social enterprise seeks to turn back the clock in developed nations and chart a new course for developing nations, reuniting business with its societal responsibilities …”
From this situation it is a small, Milgram-esque step for individuals within corporations to feel pressured to ‘forget’ that these burdens were effectively outsourced (not removed) and begin to seek to maximise shareholder value to the exclusion of paying morally due taxes, only heeding those that are legally due.
This is also why I believe legislation is the only tool by which we effectively bring capitalism back in line.
*and Amazon, and Topshop, and Vodaphone..
Profile cancel
Featured Updates
Latest Comments
- Amanda on On Ink, My Skin, And You..
- Tania on On Ink, My Skin, And You..
- Clara Belle on On Ink, My Skin, And You..




I think I lost the thread a bit somewhere. Why is it that these companies don’t pay taxes? I understand the history part and why they *should* pay, but I haven’t quite picked up from this why they *don’t*
Thanks to the way business has evolved, it has no social responsibility to do so and the law is insufficiently tight to force them to do anything more than they are :)
Are you suggesting that there was a time when Starbucks *would* have paid taxes that they weren’t legally obliged to?
I’m suggesting there was a time when *all businesses* did things they weren’t legally obliged to because that was how they attracted workers in an age where a job was a life-long commitment. But this was usually direct provision of services. As society changed and direct provision of services became something out sourced to government a sort-of Milgram/Middleman phenomena allowed the gradual constriction of these obligations until the situation we see now where modern businesses will use any loophole that can be exploited as long as the entity can get away with it and continue to trade.
Oooh, this is a pretty good expression of it (h/t @part_giraffe): “@hannahswiv you may like http://t.co/ki1lOTEv from awesome @Manda_Jones”
Worth saying, though, that the difficulty in increasing legislation to close the gaps will inevitably make Britain a less attractive and profitable place to do business… not something we can exactly bear right now. #Difficult
Hi, nice piece.
Do you have any ideas how we can close the loopholes from a legal standpoint?
I really hope moral indignation will drive customers away from companies who feel they are only responsible to their shareholders.