Vodafone Disconnected (Oxford)

One would have thought that PPE undergraduates would have a greater grasp of the economics of the situation.

1. Vodaphone is hit for a bill for £4.8 billion.

2. Vodaphone raises charges for phone calls.

3. Vodaphone pays nothing. Customers pay £4.8 billion.

I never did rate PPE undergraduates.

"One would have thought that PPE undergraduates would have a greater grasp of the economics of the situation.

1. Vodaphone is hit for a bill for £4.8 billion.

2. Vodaphone raises charges for phone calls.

3. Vodaphone pays nothing. Customers pay £4.8 billion. "


1 Vodaphone is hit for a bill for £4.8 billion.

2. Vodaphone raises charges for phone calls.

3. everyone thinks "vodaphone, rip off, I'm changing provider"

4. vodaphone lose shed loads of money

5. in the meantime, we move onto the next corrupt bunch of bastards

6. change is forced?

Utopian? Yes, possible, Yes.... you... piss off and back to your day job of flogging this shit

... 4 Vodaphone loses shed loads of money.

Vodaphone no longer makes profits therefore income to HM Treasury = zero. EPIC fail. Do not go to Schools. Do not collect your Gentleman's Third.

"One would have thought that PPE undergraduates would have a greater grasp of the economics of the situation."

Well, I'm not a student (not everybody in Oxford is you know), and I have never studied PPE. However, the logical conclusion to your argument would seem to be that we cannot charge companies tax because they will just pass the costs on to their customers (or is Vodafone a special case). But that's what's been happening in western economies for years - how else do you suggest taxes are raised? If you suggest raising them from people, then people will have less money to buy products from companies - which is the same situation as companies passing their tax bill onto customers (except that for something like a mobile phone people would have the option of not buying it).

If you are making the case that taxes should not be raised, why not just say that? And while you're at it, make the case for no companies paying taxes, not just Vodafone.

BTW - Vodafone profits up - it's not like they can't afford to pay taxes.  http://news.yahoo.com/s/afp/20101109/bs_afp/britainjapantelecommobilecompanyearningsvodafone

You're quite right - all corporation taxes and the like are ultimately paid for by consumers. Given that governments need to raise money, the real debate is where and how those taxes should be levied.

What I object to is the idea behind much of this thinking that there is some pot of gold, held in the greedy clutching arms of some multinational, and snatched away from this poverty stricken country. The tax people took Vodaphone to court; the law said Vodaphone didn't owe the money. If you don't like that, change the law. Trying to shut down shops is pathetic on many levels. First, it doesn't work. Second, you are probably going to alienate the general public, which will bring your cause into disrepute. Thirdly, you can hardly complain about Vodaphone's illegal actions if you take illegal action yourself.

> The tax people took Vodaphone to court; the law said Vodaphone didn't owe the money.
> If you don't like that, change the law.

You obviously haven't bothered reading the details of this case:
 http://www.private-eye.co.uk/sections.php?section_link=in_the_back&issue=1273
...the 'tax people' were *winning* in court, but corporate-friendly bigwigs let Vodafone off the hook anyway in 'negotiations'.

> Trying to shut down shops is pathetic on many levels.

Disparaging people who are active without bothering to read the details of the case you're complaining about is pretty pathetic in my eyes.

> First, it doesn't work.

Depends what your aim is. Clearly it's not going to be enough on its own to make them pay up. But it might be the start of something more effective.

> Second, you are probably going to alienate the general public,
> which will bring your cause into disrepute.

You haven't been on one of these actions, have you? Many people are very supportive.

> Thirdly, you can hardly complain about Vodaphone's illegal actions
> if you take illegal action yourself.

We're not complaining about the *illegality* of Vodafone's actions, we're complaining about the profiteering immorality of it.

Private Eye is a journal with mixed success in issues such as this. I suspect their account might be a touch simplistic. And frankly, I doubt their statement that: 'conducted without consulting HMRC’s litigators and specialists in the tax law concerned on the chance of success in the courts'.

Well, if HMRC have cocked it up big time, your argument is not with Vodaphone [who can blame them for wanting to pay as little tax as possible?] but with the Revenue. Have you tried contacting your MP?

OK, you close Vodaphone stores for half an hour. That really is going to persuade them to hand over £6 billion to the Revenue. Or not. You talk about their 'profiteering immorality', and I would say you're talking bollocks. They paid what the taxman told them to pay. Do you really expect them to hand over more? Would you? And if you say yes, then, sir, you're a hypocrite.