182Views23Replies

Author Options:

Pringles ARE Potato Crisps (Chips) Answered

Procter & Gamble will be forced to pay tens of millions of pounds in VAT after losing a legal battle with the (UK) taxman over its Pringles snack.

The Court of Appeal ruled in favour of the Inland Revenue, which maintained that Pringles constitute a potato snack and are, therefore, liable for VAT (tax). The Appeal Court judges disagreed with a previous ruling that the low potato content (42%) exempted Pringles from VAT.

See here for BBC article

Discussions

0
None
Doctor What

9 years ago

I was watching a food network special, and it said that after losing a court battle, pringles could not call themselves a "potato crisp (chip)". Hmmm... Restricted from the title, but still has to pay taxes? Sounds like America, not Britain.

0
None
lemonieDoctor What

Reply 9 years ago

It does, legal technicalities over junk-food can be interesting, (which is why I posted it) L

0
None
Doctor Whatlemonie

Reply 9 years ago

I love junk food laws, especially like the "McDonalds Coffee" cases (which is why I commented on your thread).

0
None
lemonieDoctor What

Reply 9 years ago

McDonald's can afford it - obvious choice. As far as lawyers go, there's a big pot o'gold at the end of the golden-arches...

L

0
None
Doctor Whatlemonie

Reply 9 years ago

Even though McDonald's can afford it, they still shouldn't be responsible for the mentally disrupted people who decide to sue over spilled coffee. No one in their right mind should need a warning that "coffee is hot". It reminds me of a debate in class. "Starbucks may warn you that coffee is hot, but it doesn't warn you that rubbing it all over your face will give you second degree burns, it's assumed."

0
None
lemonieDoctor What

Reply 9 years ago

Well aye, but all these people in Law School will need jobs when they graduate... L

0
None
KentsOkay

9 years ago

Is this what the world has come to?

0
None
lemonieKentsOkay

Reply 9 years ago

Yes, plenty of money to be made in litigation. L

0
None
Chicken2209

9 years ago

what? why now? I heard this years ago...

0
None
lemonieChicken2209

Reply 9 years ago

It's a very recent ruling. Can you post a link to what you heard years ago? L

0
None
Chicken2209lemonie

Reply 9 years ago

oh sorry, i skimmed through it and misread it

0
None
Goodhart

9 years ago

LOL the economy is going under....so there has to be some politician pouring over whether Pringles makes chips (crisps) or a snack (um, over here, it is all of the above ;-)

0
None
lemonieGoodhart

Reply 9 years ago

What are these in tax terms then (where you live)? L

0
None
Goodhartlemonie

Reply 9 years ago

I believe they come under food ( not taxed )

0
None
Lithium Rain

9 years ago

>>Pringles ARE Potato Crisps (Chips) Well...yeah.

0
None
whatsisface

9 years ago

What happened to Jaffa Cakes? I seem to remember they were in a battle over whether they were cakes or biscuits once...

0
None
lemoniewhatsisface

Reply 9 years ago

The courts ruled in favour of Mcvities: cakes. VAT exempt L

0
None
Kitemanlemonie

Reply 9 years ago

The ruling boiled down to:

If it goes soft as it goes stale, it's a biscuit.
If it goes hard as it goes stale, it's a cake.

0
None
lemonieKiteman

Reply 9 years ago

I think both cakes and biscuits are exempt. The VAT claim was based upon these being luxury (chocolate-covered) items. It was "cake" in the end as I remember it? L (have to account for a lot of recoverable VAT....)

0
None
caitlinsdad

9 years ago

Now I gotta look to see what the other 58% of the ingredients are...ohhh salt.

0
None
lemoniecaitlinsdad

Reply 9 years ago

And fat, and some other starch. From a VAT perspective I think this a sound ruling. L