Ever been sent dodgy electricals by an online shop?

Beryl, leaving aside the tax issues, which I agree should be properly addressed by our government, I think that what we need is for online stores to be forced to behave responsibly. They can and do provide access to goods at reasonable prices which might not otherwise be easily available, and that is not something we should have to give up.

The Schuko adaptor which is the subject of the test purchase is not something easily obtainable on the high street. Staying on the subject of plug adaptors, it is a fact that many of those sold by such reputable shops as John Lewis and Boots do not comply with the standards! This is especially true of the universal types, all of which accept Schuko (German) plugs, but none provide an earth contact for Schuko.

I wholeheartedly agree tax issues should be addressed by governmental bodies but it is also important to look at the big picture. These digital multinational companies are well able to produce goods at very low prices simply because of their tax avoidance policies which may be legal (in some countries) but wholly unethical depriving the UK of valuable revenue that could be put to good use by helping to fund our public services, NHS education etc.

Monopolistic practice can also procure dominance over prices and supplies, leaving high street stores who pay their fair share of corporation tax unable to compete and subsequently go into liquidation. If governments are unable (or unwilling to address this unfair “legal” practice it is up to the consumer to exercise their influence by boycotting these companies.

Beryl – Unfortunately, I don’t believe the situation is quite as simple as you make out. One of the purposes of the EU is to allow freedom of movement of goods and to allow companies to trade across the EU without unnecessary restrictions. A company has to be registered somewhere. Are you seriously suggesting that citizens of the other 27 member states should boycott British companies because they are paying tax to the UK Government? Or maybe you are suggesting that companies should be forced to register a subsidiary in each of the territories in which it trades? This would create a huge rise in administration and compliance costs, no doubt to the benefit of the accountants, but would defeat the whole point of the single market and freedom of movement of goods.

Scott – I tink you are perhaps missing the point that Eire and Luxembourg are leaching off the EU by deliberately low tax rates for the likes of Amazon and Google. It is because of their size that these corporations can game the EU’s various countries tax codes.

And of course US corporaations tend to hold billions of profits off-shore until such time as ythe US goverment gives them a tax amnesty. From Bloomberg:
“The largest U.S.-based companies added $206 billion to their stockpiles of offshore profits last year, parking earnings in low-tax countries until Congress gives them a reason not to.
The multinational companies have accumulated $1.95 trillion outside the U.S., up 11.8 percent from a year earlier, according to securities filings from 307 corporations reviewed by Bloomberg News.”

And there are any number of US states and cities where the tax on that $1.95 trillion could be very useful. However much of the cash pile will go to buying companies in the UK to maximise further tax advantages.

I think there is a difference between legal and advisable and perhaps it is best this gets sorted out pre any TTIP agreements which allow corporations to sue national governments. I am not quite sure BTW how Whch? can say it supports TTIP – as a member I have never been asked and I have never ever seen it discussed anywhere in Which?

Malcolm: For a more unbiased opinion which may go some way to answer some of your questions there is an interesting article in The Guardian.