Amazon's tax avoidance can only be solved at EU level
Little-Britainism won't help us here.
By Jon Worth Published 10 April 2012 11:58
The revelation in The Guardian last week that Amazon pays no UK corporation tax has prompted much anguish. How can a company that is the UK's largest online retailer with annual sales in the UK of £3.3bn get away with this? Tim Waterstone, founder of the high street book store chain, weighed in with a column in the same paper bemoaning Amazon's "contemptuous, arrogant and subversive" approach.
Despite all the attention on Amazon's behaviour, few solutions to the Amazon problem have been proposed. It's not as if the multinational is going to easily be shamed into paying more tax, and as Waterstone admits, Amazon is acting within the letter of the law.
The solution is instead to look at how tax systems work within the European Union and – shock horror – solve these issues at EU level.
There is a general consensus in the United Kingdom that being part of the EU's single market is a good thing. It allows a UK bookseller to ship its products to Luxembourg, and a Luxembourg bookseller to ship to the UK. There are no cumbersome tariffs or customs procedures involved in doing this. As consumers we win. Yet as taxpayers we increasingly lose.
The first problem is with Value Added Tax (VAT). Paper books have zero-rate VAT in the UK, while e-books are defined as electronic products and are subject to VAT at 20 per cent. Luxembourg, following the lead of France, has reduced VAT on e-books to three per cent. So Kindle e-books sold by the Luxembourg-headquartered Amazon EU Sarl, have a 17 per cent price advantage over the same publication sold by a UK-based e-book seller, even when bought by a customer residing in the UK.
In 2015 the EU VAT rules are due to change, meaning the country of residence of the purchaser will determine the VAT rate, but in the fast-paced technology sector the next three years are going to be crucial - how many UK-based booksellers are going to even be left by 2015?
The second problem is with corporation tax, both the rate of corporation tax and how you define the profits on which it is levied. Ireland's low 12.5 per cent corporation tax rate is one of the reasons both Google and Apple have their EU headquarters there. However Luxembourg is not an especially low corporation tax regime – its headline rate of 28.59 per cent is higher than the UK's rates. The attraction of Luxembourg for Amazon is instead that the costs that can be offset against income are defined differently. This allows for Amazon to have a lower taxable income if based in Luxembourg rather than in the UK.
The European Commission has realised that this is a problem for more than a decade, having repeatedly attempted to work towards a common consolidated corporate tax base (CCCTB), yet so far to no avail. The idea is that the definition of profits eligible to be taxed in all EU countries would be the same, yet the actual corporation tax rate would continue to vary.
Tax matters at EU level require the unanimous agreement of all EU member states and the UK and Ireland, among others, have refused to be drawn on the corporation tax issue - neither the tax base nor corporation tax rates. British chancellors (both Labour and Conservative) have repeatedly stuck to the line that taxation is a matter of national sovereignty and that further EU-wide rules on corporation tax are unwelcome. Yet as as the Amazon case shows, sticking to a resolutely national position on taxation becomes less and less tenable in a globalised market where electronic as well as physical goods are increasingly traded across borders.
Perhaps if you are George Osborne and you believe in a destructive race-to-the-bottom on tax rates all of this might be desirable, but it is high time that Labour revisited this issue in opposition. The only alternative to tax competition is tax harmonisation. An EU-wide agreement on the definition of an e-book for VAT purposes, and a commitment to a common consolidated corporate tax base are the very least Ed Balls should be demanding.
Latest tweets
More from New Statesman
- Online writers:
- Steven Baxter
- Rowenna Davis
- David Allen Green
- Mehdi Hasan
- Nelson Jones
- Gavin Kelly
- Helen Lewis
- Laurie Penny
- The V Spot
- Alex Hern
- Martha Gill
- Alan White
- Samira Shackle
- Alex Andreou
- Nicky Woolf in America
- Bim Adewunmi
- Glosswitch
- Kate Mossman on pop
- Ryan Gilbey on Film
- Martin Robbins
- Rafael Behr
- Eleanor Margolis
- Tools and services:
- Polls
- Predictions
- Archive
- Magazine
- PDF edition
- RSS feeds
- Advertising
- Subscribe
- Special supplements
- Stockists





















11 comments
When Oskar Lafontaine suggested tax harmonisation in the late 90s due to the reasons mentioned in the article he was labeled as the "most dangerous man in Europe" not only by the Sun but was also attacked by many other British media. Has the UK debate finally moved on
www.rollformingmachinexsj.com
www.rollformingxsj.com
www.jiebotech.cc
www.jiebotech.net
www.wxjiebo.cc
www.wxjiebo.net
www.wxjiebo.cc
www.wxjiebo.net
Post is nicely written and it contains many good things for me. I am glad to find your impressive way of writing the post. Now it become easy for me to understand and implement the concept. Thanks for sharing the post. styletostyle
العاب العاب تنظيف المنزل لعبة الجني الازرق لعبة السمكة العاب طبيب لعبة البيرة العاب تنظيف الوجه لعبة الفراخ العاب تسوق العاب ركن السيارات
When Oskar Lafontaine suggested tax harmonisation in the late 90s due to the reasons mentioned in the article he was labeled as the "most dangerous man in Europe" not only by the Sun but was also attacked by many other British media. Has the UK debate finally moved on?
reat blog. Its hard seeing a loved one struggling with addiction. The first step to recovery is getting help and there are rehab clinics that really do help. Riverview Manor is one and I made a full recovery witht he help of professionals there. Get help and take your life back fashionofwear
When Oskar Lafontaine suggested tax harmonisation in the late 90s due to the reasons mentioned in the article he was labeled as the "most dangerous man in Europe" not only by the Sun but was also attacked by many other British media. Has the UK debate finally moved on?
"costs can be offset against income" isn't that the basics of business? isn't that what determines profits? i know we have a problem but nothing is going to change this by having an EU policy even if all 27 countries agreed including many low tax eastern european countries, we still have an issue especially with online businesses. the key issue is that going forward, land taxes and other taxes on unproductive resources will remain the best source of revenues. taxing labour and employment (yes that's income tax) higher as well as company taxes will have a reverse impact.
instead we should look at getting rid of all the tax reliefs we offer businesses for this and for that, if we did that we could have lower and more simpler taxes that would provide better incentives and would be harder to avoid!