Grass seed is zero-rated, but turf is standard rated.
Grass seed is zero-rated, but turf is standard rated.
Latest from the courts
In the First Tier Tribunal (FTT) case of Eurolaser IT Ltd regarding Kittel and Mecsek assessments and penalties:
one interesting aspect was the award of costs.
Generally, in FTT cases the rule is that each party will usually bear its own costs.
However, it is worth recapping how the award of costs works via The Tribunal Procedure (First-tier Tribunal) (Tax Chamber) Rules 2009. In this instant case, the Appellant had not ‘opted out’ of the costs protection regime set out in rule 10(c)(ii) of the Rules. Consequently, the FTT ordered that Eurolaser must pay HMRC’s costs – a sting in the tail. So, what are the rules? (Where relevant here)
Orders for costs
“10.—(1) The Tribunal may only make an order in respect of costs (or, in Scotland, expenses)—
(a) under section 29(4) of the 2007 Act (wasted costs) [and costs incurred in applying for such costs];
(b) if the Tribunal considers that a party or their representative has acted unreasonably in bringing, defending or conducting the proceedings;
(c) if—
(i) the proceedings have been allocated as a Complex case under rule 23 (allocation of cases to categories); and
(ii) the taxpayer (or, where more than one party is a taxpayer, one of them) has not sent or delivered a written request to the Tribunal, within 28 days of receiving notice that the case had been allocated as a Complex case, that the proceedings be excluded from potential liability for costs or expenses under this sub-paragraph”
So, in “Complex” cases, an Appellant must submit a request that the case is excluded from the potential liability of costs being awarded, and HMRC must request repayment of its costs incurred in defending the case.
What are Complex cases?
These are complicated cases which:
such cases are allocated to a ‘track’ within the FTT system.
Other cost awards
It is also worth remembering that costs can be awarded if the appeal is brought unreasonably. This usually means that it is vexatious or frivolous, so proper advice should be sought when considering an appeal.
Investment company
HMRC denied claims for input tax incurred on costs relating to the potential acquisition of an overseas business and threatened to deregister the plc as it was not, currently, making taxable supplies. Additionally, HMRC contended that even if VAT registration was appropriate, the input tax incurred did not relate to taxable supplies and was therefore blocked.
We were able to persuade HMRC that our client had a right to be VAT registered because it intended to make taxable supplies (supplies with a place of supply outside the UK which would have been taxable if made in the UK) and that the input tax was recoverable as it related to these intended taxable supplies (management charges to the acquired business). This is a hot topic at the moment, but we were able to eventually demonstrate, with considerable and detailed evidence that there was a true intention.
This meant that UK VAT registration was correct and input tax running into hundreds of thousands of pounds incurred in the UK was repaid to our client.
Restaurant
We identified and submitted a claim for a West End restaurant for nearly £300,000 overpaid output tax. We finally agreed the repayment with HMRC after dealing with issues such as the quantum of the claim and unjust enrichment.
Developer
Our property developing client specialises in very high-end residential projects in exclusive parts of London. They built a dwelling using an existing façade and part of a side elevation. We contended that it was a new build (zero rated sale and no VAT on construction costs and full input tax recovery on other costs). HMRC took the view that it was work on an existing dwelling so that 5% applied and input tax was not recoverable. After site visits, detailed plans, current and historical photograph evidence HMRC accepted the holy grail of new build. The overall cost of the project was tens of millions.
Charity
A charity client was supplying services to the NHS. The issue was whether they were standard rated supplies of staff or exempt medical services. We argued successfully that, despite previous rulings, the supplies were exempt, which benefited all parties. Our client was able to deregister from VAT, but not only that, we persuaded HMRC that input tax previously claimed could be kept. This was a rather pleasant surprise outcome. We also avoided any penalties and interest so that VAT did not represent a cost to the charity in any way. If the VAT was required to be repaid to HMRC it is likely that the charity would have been wound up.
Shoot
A group of friends met to shoot game as a hobby. They made financial contributions to the syndicate in order to take part. HMRC considered that this was a business activity and threatened to go back over 40 years and assess for output tax on the syndicate’s takings which amounted to many hundreds of thousands of pounds and would have meant the shoot could not continue. We appealed the decision to retrospectively register the syndicate.
After a four-year battle HMRC settled on the steps of the Tribunal. We were able to demonstrate that the syndicate was run on a cost sharing basis and is not “an activity likely to be carried out by a private undertaking on a market, organised within a professional framework and generally performed in the interest of generating a profit.” – A happy client.
Chemist
We assisted a chemist client who, for unfortunate reasons, had not been able to submit proper VAT returns for a number of years. We were able to reconstruct the VAT records which showed a repayment of circa £500,000 of VAT was due. We successfully negotiated with HMRC and assisted with the inspection which was generated by the claim.
The message? Never accept a HMRC decision, and seek good advice!
Furthermore, the guidance on the use of form VAT53 to allow an accountant, or agent, to register, or make changes to, a VAT group on behalf of a business has been published. Unfortunately, this form needs to be downloaded, printed, completed by hand, and sent by post to HMRC.
Details on VAT groups, including the pros and cons here.
How to authorise an agent to act on a business’ behalf for VAT here.
VAT Basics
What types of entities can be a ‘taxable person’?
The definition of a taxable person in the VAT Directive is any person or body “who, independently, carries out in any place any economic activity, whatever the purpose or results”. Economic activity in the UK broadly means any business activity. I consider this definition below.
So, what is a person or body?
In practice, a taxable person or body is generally a business, sole trader or professional. Examples of types of legal entities are a:
Each type of entity or structure is subject to separate rules; from; governance, direct tax, reporting, accounting, risks, costs, benefits, responsibilities to legal rights and obligations etc. However, from a VAT perspective, the VAT legislation applies equally to all taxable persons.
Two or more corporate bodies may apply to register as a single taxable person (VAT group) if they can meet certain conditions.
A corporate body can apply to register each division separately if it:
What are not taxable persons?
Private individuals are not generally involved in business and will therefore not be classed as taxable persons.
What is business?
There is considerable case law on what constitutes ‘business’ for VAT purposes. I have written about this issue many times, as it is a fundamental issue in the tax.
The following articles consider such case law:
Registration
A guide to VAT registration here.
EORI is an acronym for Economic Operator Registration & Identification.
An EORI number is assigned to importers and exporters by HMRC (EOs) and is used in the process of customs entry declarations and customs clearance for both import and export shipments moving to or from the UK.
What is the EORI number for?
An EORI number is stored both nationally and on a central EU EORI database. The information it provides is used by customs authorities to exchange information, and to share information with government departments and agencies. It is used for statistical and security purposes.
A business may need to demonstrate to HMRC that it has carried out proper due diligence in certain cases.
Who needs an EORI number?
You will require an EORI number if you are planning to import or export goods. EOs can be sole proprietors, partnerships, UK incorporated companies, registered charities, and overseas companies. However, private individuals bringing their own possessions to or from the UK do not need an EORI number. An EO does not need to be VAT registered to have an EORI number.
For VAT groups, each member who imports or exports goods needs an EORI number.
Format of the EORI number
VAT registered companies will see the EORI as an extension of their VAT number. Your VAT nine digit VAT number will be prefixed with “GB” and suffixed with “000”.
How do I apply for an EORI Number?
Non VAT registered companies can apply using this link – FORM C220
VAT registered companies can apply using this link – FORM C220A
Once completed, your form should be emailed to: eori@hmrc.gsi.gov.uk
How long will my EORI application take?
The process is straightforward and EORI applications usually take up to three working days to process.
Please contact us if you have any issues with importing or exporting.
EORI checker
Gov.uk has provided a new tool to check a business’ EORI number. (This used to be an EU resource now not available due to Brexit).
Access
Who has access to an EORI number?
The general public can access limited data, When a business is notified of its EORI number, it will be asked whether it objects to this data being published on the site.
Things that have been taxed in the past
Revenue raising knows no bounds. Here are some things which have had their own specific tax. It is interesting to note that some taxation was intended to change behaviour, and some a result of stopping people’s indulgence. A brief view of what and where particular things were taxed:
Beards – Russia
Windows – UK
Body piercings – Arkansas US
Bricks UK
Salt – France
Champagne – Germany
Hats – UK
Candles – UK
Cow flatulence – Denmark
Playing Cards and dice – UK
Bagels (but not bread) – New York US
Fireplaces – UK
Tattoos – Arkansas US
Soap – UK
Illegal Drugs – Tennessee US
Google – France
Wig powder – UK
Unapproved baby names – Sweden
Not smoking cigarettes – China
Urine – Ancient Rome
Tethered hot air balloons – Kansas US
Cowardice – Knights could opt out fighting in wars by paying a tax called scutage – UK
Car Accidents – Missouri US
Political opponents’ land – Oliver Cromwell UK
Patterned wallpaper (but not plain white) – UK
Litigation – Tennessee US
Slave freedom – Ancient Rome
Modesty – women were not allowed to cover their breasts, and were taxed if they did – India
Belt buckles – Texas US
Robots – South Korea
Men not being married – Missouri US
Knowledge – UK
Clocks – UK
So now you know!
The Construction Reverse Charge (RC) background details here.
HMRC has recently published its VAT Reverse Charge for Building and Construction Services Manual.
It includes:
The contents of the new manual are:
In the Spring Statement 2025 HMG announced a package of measures that will affect VAT and other taxes. The aim is to close the tax gap and raise over £1 billion in additional gross tax revenue per year by 2029‑30.
Anti-fraud
HMRC is expanding its counter-fraud capability to increase the number of annual charging decisions for the most harmful fraud by 20%. Additional criminal investigations is intended to deliver a strong deterrent. This will include tackling those who undermine legitimate trade and small business, fraud committed by the wealthy, fraud facilitated by those in large corporations, and by individuals and companies who make it possible for others to hide money offshore.
Snitching
There will be a new HMRC reward scheme for informants will be launched later this year. This will target serious non-compliance in large corporates, wealthy individuals, offshore and avoidance schemes. The new scheme will reward informants with compensation linked to a percentage of any tax taken as a result of their actions.
“Phoenixism”
HMRC, Companies House, and the Insolvency Service will deliver a joint plan to tackle those who use contrived insolvencies to evade tax and write off debts owed to others. This will include increasing the use of upfront payment demands, making more directors personally liable for company taxes, and increasing the number of enforcement sanctions.
Compliance
HMG will invest £87 million over the next five years in HMRC’s existing partnerships with private sector debt collection agencies to collect more unpaid tax debts. It will also invest £114 million over the next five years to recruit an additional 600 HMRC debt management staff. In addition, the Government will invest £100 million over the next five years to recruit an additional 500 HMRC compliance staff.
The government also published four consultations on: