Sorry Procter & Gamble (and stoners) Pringle’s are just another potato chip
It’s not my business to tell anyone how to run their business. But it’s awfully hypocritical of Procter & Gamble to spend years running advertisements comparing the greasiness (or lack thereof) of Pringle’s to other potato chips, and then turn around and tell a court that it doesn’t believe its product is actually a chip.
British courts have reversed themselves from a ruling last year and decided that yes, Pringle’s are made from potatoes and do qualify as potato chips. Because of the ruling and the way Britain’s value-added-taxes (VAT) are set up, P&G must pay more than $100 million in back taxes on Pringle’s.
With such a large amount of money on line, this decision didn’t come lightly:
It [The British Court] considered Pringle’s appearance, taste, ingredients, process of
manufacture, marketing and packaging, and concluded that “while in many
respects” they “are different from potato crisps and so they are near
the borderline, they are sufficiently similar to satisfy that test.”
The company also tried to argue that Pringle’s shouldn’t count as potato chips because they do not contain sufficient qualities of “potatoness.”
The money may seem like a fortune but to put it in perspective, it’s roughly equivalent to what the company spends in just one week on advertising.
(Image via Flickr: Roadside Pictures)