Welcome to the blog. All the opinion on this blog is my own or as attributed. Thank you for reading - I hope you enjoy.

Friday, 7 December 2012

What do tax dodging Starbucks and the Duchy of Cornwall have in common?

The Duchy of Cornwall's web site tells us that the Duchy is a private estate. At the same time this 'private estate pays no corporation tax as it is a 'crown body'.

Is this morally correct even though it is quite 'lawful'?

Just like Starbucks, Charles Windsor is not legally required to pay tax and yet he chooses to pay money to HMRC as a public relations exercise.

What is the difference between Starbucks 'volunteering' to pay tax and the Duke of Cornwall 'volunteering' to pay tax?

Why is it that when one pays a sum of money (that it is not legally required to do) it is vilified by the press and MPs and yet no-one mentions the other?

Just as it is claimed that it is immoral for Starbucks and Google et al to avoid paying tax (though there is no legal requirement) so it must be for the Duchy of Cornwall - shouldn't it?

No comments:

Post a Comment

It won't be long before your comment is displayed. Thanks for taking the time to comment.