Amazon UK pays $3.7 million tax on $6.5 billion sales

[dipsydoodle]

Source: Reuters

(Reuters) - Amazon.com's main UK unit paid $3.7 million of taxes on its 2012 income, it said on Wednesday, despite group UK sales of $6.5 billion (4 billion pounds), prompting criticism from lawmakers and competitors.

Amazon.co.uk Ltd added in its accounts, published through the UK companies register, that it received 2.5 million pounds in government grants during 2012 - just ahead of the 2.4 million it paid in corporation tax, the UK form of corporate income tax.

Corporate tax avoidance has risen to the top of the political agenda in Europe following revelations in the past couple of years about how little big names like Apple Inc., Starbucks, Google and Microsoft pay in tax in markets where they reap billions of dollars in sales.

The companies say they follow the rules but UK Prime Minister David Cameron has called for international action on the shifting of profits, which can help firms cut tax bills.

Read more: http://uk.reuters.com/article/2013/05/15/uk-amazon-britain-tax-idUKBRE94E0GE20130515

[DreamGypsy]

1. True at face value, but doesn't necessarily reflect "a tax avoidance agenda" ...

...just standard operating procedure under current EU laws.

From Forbes: Amazon UK's Tax Dodging Ways: But How Much Tax On Its Profits Should A Loss Making Company Pay?

One reason why it’s not much of a story is that anyone who has been paying any attention at all to such matters knows very well that various of the internet companies are not paying much tax anywhere in Europe. Because they all (Microsoft MSFT +0.54%, Google GOOG +2.4%, Facebook FB -1.33% and yes, Amazon) run their sales through either Luxembourg or Ireland. This isn’t, by the way, an aberration, this is the way the European Union has set up the Single Market. That you can sell to all EU countries from a base in any one of the 27. This is entirely deliberate.

It goes further than this too: as I and several others have been pointing out Amazon’s warehouses and logistics in the UK do not lead to a taxable situation because the law says they don’t. That goes back to 1968 and the UK/Luxembourg double taxation treaty (itself an absolutely standard one, based on the normal OECD standards). There is simply nothing odd at all about this tax situation.

However here’s my guess at it. Tom Bergin (the author of this piece at Reuters) and Jesse Drucker at Bloomberg seem to be campaigning more than reporting on this corporate tax situation. It’s not something I’m about to try and prove, it’s an entirely personal opinion, but looking at the people they tend to quote and the slant of the stores that is my opinion. It is of course entirely fine to campaign: I certainly do so here and elsewhere. But then I’m not working as a reporter for a news organisation either.

But leave my suspicious mind aside for a moment. We’re talking here about the 2012 accounts for Amazon UK, which is, as we know, part of Amazon itself: which, for that 2012 full year made a loss of $39 million. Indeed, we know that Amazon’s declared philosophy is not even to try and make a profit: get as much money in as possible, of course, but then use that to keep expanding the business.

Yes, the citizens of the EU and the US (and everywhere else) should understand tax laws, be aware of the consequences of those laws, and work to change the laws when they do not "promote the general welfare".

[valerief]

2. Wow, a corporation that actually pays taxes! Piddly, yes, but it beats the U.S. NOTHING collected.

[jayfish]

3. No, It Didn't Pay Any Taxes.

it received 2.5 million pounds in government grants during 2012 - just ahead of the 2.4 million it paid in corporation tax, the UK form of corporate income tax.

[valerief]

4. Whoa, thanks for reading it for me. Proves I can't check out DU and work at the same time!!!! nt

[Nye Bevan]

5. Why criticize Amazon, if they didn't break any laws?

I don't pay more taxes than legally required. If people think they are paying too little tax, they should focus on changing the law.