Can tax policy outweigh marketing in terms of how a brand is perceived? The Marketing Society Forum
marketingmagazine.co.uk, Friday, 23 November 2012 08:30AM
Tax issues have created a wave of negative publicity for Amazon, Google and Starbucks in the UK.
NO - CLARE FIELD, DIRECTOR, LUTECE LIMITED
How should we feel about drinking coffee bought via Switzerland and taxed in Holland?
If I drank coffee, which I don't, I would feel great. Well done, Starbucks, for being so smart. As a consumer, that would increase my brand loyalty.
As long as it is legal and ethical, there is no problem. Legal compliance is clear in this case. Being ethical in sourcing is a must, hence Fair Trade to protect the vulnerable. Ethical tax paying is about following the rules, however.
I don't think the Treasury counts as vulnerable or exploited.
As for Amazon - standing in front of Ms Hodge not knowing who runs your show is not good for public perception.
YES - CATHERINE BECKER, CHIEF EXECUTIVE, ADCONNECTION
Brands should live and breathe their values. Their marketing strategy should be an extension of their ethos, not an add-on. Starbucks' 'creative' tax arrangements seem at odds with its honest, community-focused positioning communicated through every touchpoint.
Tax avoidance is now part of the public consciousness; people don't like companies that don't contribute to the local economy.
Twitter is awash with announcements that Starbucks regulars are buying their grande skinny lattes elsewhere. Creativity is better displayed in a marketing strategy than in a company's accounts.
NO - TIM RYAN, FOUNDER, REVL8
In a world where there is no hiding of anything much, brands can't expect to get away with things that they may once have, and that includes tax arrangements.
However, to suggest that it could outweigh a brand's marketing strategy is an over-stretch. Sure, such arrangements may lead to lurid headlines for a few days.
It might also lead to red faces for marketers who should have had better media training, but any decent marketing strategy should have crisis-management plans as part of the overall structure.
If it doesn't, it is not the fault of the marketing strategy, but of the senior marketer who signed it off.
NO - RICHARD EXON, FOUNDER, JOINT
The current crop of tax-avoiders are a long way from a Ratner moment. These brands are so hard-wired into our modern lives that apparently we cannot simply cast them off in protest.
This may enrage or depress us, but not enough people are voting with their feet to cause real damage to these huge brands.
This could change, but not until the opposition to their tax practices is organised, mainstream and focused.
This article was first published on marketingmagazine.co.uk
- Do digital brands need bricks-and-mortar outlets to be successful? The Marketing Society Forum
- Starbucks: has its tax offer come too late?
- Should senior managers at brands 'back off' so innovation can thrive? The Marketing Society Forum
- Amazon discloses UK profits of £74m on sales of £3.35bn amid questions over tax avoidance
- Are letter-style print ads an effective way to defend your brand in a crisis? The Marketing Society Forum
- Is it practical to expect '10 out of 10' in every piece of creative marketing? The Marketing Society Forum
- Should rights-owners make a moral judgement on potential sponsors? The Marketing Society Forum
- Digital Account Director - Creative Agency - London Sphere Digital 50-70k +bonus +benefits, London, South East
- Managing Director - Equity potential DU Group £120,000 - £150,000, South Oxfordshire
- Brand Strategist - Maternity Cover at Trends, Innovation & Brand Strategy Consultancy Emma & Rachael & You £35 - £40k pro rata, Central London
- Marketing Manager Michael Page Digital GBP35000 - GBP40000 per annum, Reading
- Digital Analyst Michael Page Digital GBP25000 - GBP30000 per annum, Manchester