Category Archives: Agent/principal

Combined Nomenclature – 2019 version published

By   5 November 2018
0

The European Commission (EC) has published the latest version of the Combined Nomenclature (CN) applicable from 1 January 2019.

The CN forms the basis for the declaration of goods

  • at importation or exportation or
  • when subject to intra-Union trade statistics

This determines which rate of Customs Duty applies and how the goods are treated for statistical purposes. The CN is a vital working tool for business and the Member States’ Customs administrations.

The CN is updated every year and is published as a Commission Implementing Regulation in the Official Journal of the European Union.

The latest version is now available as Commission Implementing Regulation (EU) 2018/1602 in EU Official Journal L 273 on 31 October 2018 and applies from 1 January 2019.

Businesses which import, and/or export need to be aware of any changes as they could affect the amount of Customs Duty payable. We recommend that such a business’s import/export agent or carrier should be contacted in the first instance.

Inter-company charges: What is VATable?

By   1 November 2018
0

This seemingly straightforward area can throw up lots of VAT issues and touches on a number of complex areas. If we look at what is commonly called a “management charge” it is clear that such a charge can cover a lot of different circumstances.

Do I charge VAT on a management charge?

An easy yes or no question one would think, however, this being VAT, the answer is; it depends. Typically, management charges represent a charge by a holding company to its subsidiaries of; a share of overhead costs, the provision of actual management/advisory services or office facilities or similar (the list can obviously be quite extensive).

Consideration for a supply

The starting point is; is something (goods or services) supplied in return for the payment? If the answer is no, then no VAT will be due. However, this may impact on the ability to recover input tax in the hands of the entity making the charge. It is often the case that a management charge is used as a mechanism for transferring “value” from one company to another. If it is done in an arbitrary manner with no written agreement in place, and nothing identifiable is provided, and VAT is charged, HMRC may challenge the VAT treatment and any input recovery of the company making the payment.

Composite of separate supply?

This is a complex area of the tax and is perpetually the subject of a considerable amount of case law. This has been so since the early days of VAT and there appears no signs of disputes slowing down. I have written about such cases here here here here and here

“Usually” if a combination of goods or services are supplied it is considered as a single supply and is subject to the standard rate. However, case law insists that sometimes different supplies need to be divided and a different rate of VAT applied to each separate supply. This may be the case for instance, when an exempt supply of non-opted property (eg; a designated office with an exclusive right to occupy) is provided alongside standard rated advice.

Approach

What is important is not how a management charge is calculated, but what the supply actually is (if it is one). The calculation, whether based on a simple pro-rata amount between separate subsidiaries, or via a complex mechanism set out in a written agreement has no impact on the VAT treatment. As always in VAT, the basic question is: what is actually provided?

Can the VAT treatment of a supply change when recharged?

Simply put; yes/ For example, if the holding company pays insurance (VAT free) and charges it on as part of a composite supply, then VAT will be added to an original non-VAT bearing cost. It may also occur when staff are employed (no VAT on salaries paid) but the staff are supplied to a subsidiary company and VAT is added (but see below).

Staff

The provision of staff is usually a standard rated supply. However, there are two points to consider. One is joint contracts of employment which I look at below, the other is the actual definition of the provision of staff. Care must be taken when analysing what is being provided. The question here is; are staff being provided, or; is the supply the services that those staff carry out? This is relevant, say, if the services the staff carry out are exempt. There are a number of tests here, but the main issue is; which entity directs and manages the staff?

Directors

There can be different rules for directors compared to staff.

If a holding company provides a subsidiary company with a director to serve as such, the normal rules relating to supplies of staff apply and VAT applies.

However, there are different rules for common directors. An individual may act as a director of a number of companies. There may be an arrangement where a holding company pays the director’s fees and then recover appropriate proportions from subsidiaries. In such circumstances, the individual’s services are supplied by the individual to the companies of which (s)he a director. The services are supplied directly to the relevant businesses by the individual and not from one company to another. Therefore, there is no supply between the companies and so no VAT is due on the share of money recovered from each subsidiary.

Planning

Planning may be required if;

  • the subsidiary cannot reclaim all VAT charged to it as input tax
  • there are cashflow/timing disadvantages
  • there are management or administrative complexities

Specific planning

VAT grouping

If commercially acceptable, the holding company and subsidiary companies may form a VAT group. By doing so any charges made between VAT group members are disregarded and no VAT is chargeable on them.

There are pros and cons in forming a VAT group and a brief overview is provided here

A specific development in case law does mean care must be taken when considering input tax recovery in holdco, details here

Joint contracts of employment

If members of staff are employed via joint contracts or employment no VAT is applicable to any charges made between the two (or more) employers. In addition, where each of a number of associated companies employs its own staff, but one company (the paymaster) pays salaries behalf of the others who then pay their share of the costs to the paymaster the recovery of monies paid out by the paymaster is VAT free as it is treated as a disbursement.

Disbursements

Looking at disbursements is a whole article in itself, and in fact there is a helpful one here

But, briefly, if a charge qualifies as a disbursement, then the costs is passed on “in the same state” so if it is VAT free, the onward charge is also VAT free, as opposed to perhaps changing the VAT liability as set out above. It is important to understand the differences between a disbursement and a recharge as a VAT saving may be obtained.

Overseas

The above considers management charges within the UK. There are different rules for making or receiving management charges to/from the EU and outside the EU. These charges are usually, but not always, VAT free and it is worth checking the VAT treatment before these are made/received.

There may be more planning for charities and NFP entities via cost sharing arrangements, but this is outside the scope of this article.

As may be seen, the answer to a simple question may be complex and the answer dependent upon the precise facts of the case. It is unusual to have two scenarios that precisely mirror each other, so each structure needs to be reviewed individually. Please contact us if you have any queries or would like more information on any of the above.

Customs Declaration Service (CDS) – Update

By   23 October 2018
0

As many will be aware, CDS will fully replace the Customs Handling of Import and Export Freight (CHIEF) system later this year/early next year, full details here.This will affect any business which imports or exports goods from or to countries outside the EU (and possibly will affect businesses which trade with the EU in the event of a No Deal Brexit).

HMRC have provided more information on the implementation of CDS.

They say that the number of businesses making declarations via CDS will grow over coming months. If you have not been contacted by HMRC then your business is not part of this first group. The time your business begins using CDS will depend on its(or its agent’s) software developer or Community System Provider. HMRC expect remaining importers will start to move to CDS early in the New Year. Exporters will migrate to CDS when export functionality becomes available in March 2019. This means that CDS and CHIEF will run in parallel for a short period of time. Import declarations will be made in CDS whilst export declarations will continue to be made in CHIEF.

Not an ideal situation, but it does seem prudent to phase CDS in in this way.

Checklist

  • Visit Customs Declaration Service to understand how the changes affect your business and what you will need to do to prepare for the introduction of CDS and when. This includes making sure you have a Government Gateway account and an EORI number.
  • A new Trade Tariff will be used for declarations on CDS to comply with the Union Customs Code (UCC) so it is important you take the time to understand how the information you provide as part of your declarations will change. The imports tariff can be found on the link above. The exports Tariff will be available later in the year.
  • If you use a software provider or agent, you may also want to check they are aware and are preparing for the new CDS.
  • If you use a C88 form or the National Export System to make declarations, please visit the web page above where you can find more information.

If you have any queries we will be pleased to help.

VAT: Education – what, precisely, is exempt?

By   12 October 2018
0

In my experience, there is a general assumption that all “education’ is exempt. It is true to say that a lot of education and tuition is indeed exempt, but that is not automatically the case. It is important to establish the reason for the application of non-taxable treatment. The VAT treatment depends on; what is actually being provided, who is providing it and the precise arrangements. I consider the more common issues below:

The legislation covering education is VAT Act 1994, Schedule 9, Group 6.

What does the term education mean?

It means a course, class or lesson of instruction or study in a subject. This includes:

  • lectures
  • educational seminars
  • conferences and symposia
  • recreational and sporting courses
  • distance teaching and associated materials

Schools etc

The first type of education exemption is relatively clear: It is the provision of education by an eligible body. An eligible body is, broadly; a school, college, or university (supplies by Local Authority schools, city technology colleges, sixth form colleges, academies and free schools – where education is provided for no charge, are non-business activities rather than exempt, and have their own set of rules). More on academies here

It is also worth noting that any ‘closely related” goods or services provided with exempt education are themselves exempt. This may cover items such as; certain stationery, accommodation, transport and catering.

There is usually very little disagreement about the VAT treatment of these entities.

Charities/ non-profit making organisations

If a charity/NFP entity is an eligible body supplies of education and vocational training (see below) by it are exempt. Such an organisation is likely to be an eligible body, where it’s a charity, professional body or company which:

  • cannot and does not distribute any profit it makes, and
  • any profit that does arise from its supplies of education is used solely for the continuation or improvement of such supplies.

There can be disputes over the term “does not distribute any profit” so care should be taken in this respect and advice sought if there is any doubt.

Tuition

Exemption applies to the supply of “private tuition, in a subject ordinarily taught in a school or university, by an individual teacher acting independently of an employer” – VAT Act 1994 Schedule 9, Group 6, item 2.

Taking each of these tests in turn:

  • What is “private tuition?

In order to qualify, the provider of tuition must act independently and not be an employee. Practically, this means that the person providing the tuition must either be a sole proprietor, a partner in a partnership, or a member of a Limited Liability partnership (LLP). Consequently, exemption does not apply if the teaching is carried out by a company or an employee. This is a matter of fact, however, it is possible to structure matters such that the exemption applies if it does not currently (and the restructure is possible commercially).

  • What does “ordinarily taught” in schools/universities mean?

This is often a moot issue and the significant amount of case lawn highlights this. Most of the mainstream subjects are covered of course, but what about subjects like; golf, horse riding and dance? Would they be ordinarily taught in schools? (The answer according to case law is; yes). However, there are many other subjects which are debatable and HMRC usually take an uncompromising line on this area, especially around sporting activities. If there is any doubt, we recommend seeking advice.

  • What does tuition mean?

Clearly, if a person teaches or coaches a subject to an individual or group, then this qualifies as tuition. However, a distinction must be made between this and a recreational type of activity which may be called a “class”, but no actual tuition is provided. Exemption does not apply, for example, for the simple provision of gymnasium or swimming pool facilities, or a yoga class where no coaching takes place (however, it is possible that these may be exempt under different parts of the legislation, but that is not the subject of this article).

Vocational training

Vocational training means training or re-training and work experience for paid employment or voluntary employment in areas beneficial to the community.

If vocational training is provided for a charge the VAT consequences are either:

  • for an eligible body (see above) vocational training is exempt
  • for a non-eligible body vocational training is still exempt to the extent that it is funded under an approved government funding scheme. Otherwise the supply is taxable.

English as a Foreign Language (EFL)

If a commercial entity makes supplies of tuition of EFL they will qualify for exemption. In these cases, tuition includes all elements that are integral to the course, held out for sale as such, and are the means by which it is intended to promote fluency in the use of the English language.

General

In respect of all of the above, if exemption does not apply the supply of education falls to be taxable as a default.

For completeness, exemption may also apply to; research, examination services, youth clubs, day nurseries, crèches and playgroups but these activities are outside the scope of this article.

Summary

There are many traps for the unwary here. Planning is always advisable and I recommend that any entity which provides education is conscious of the VAT implications and seeks advice where/when necessary.

VAT – Catering at a university campus; exempt?

By   3 September 2018
0

Latest from the courts

In the First Tier Tribunal (FTT) case of Olive Garden Catering Company Ltd (OGC) the mian issue was whether catering which was provided to the University of Aberdeen (UOA) students was an exempt supply. The specific issue was whether the catering was a supply “closely connected to education” which in turn depended on which entity was actually making the supply to students. For exemption to apply, OGC would need to be a principal in purchasing the food and other goods and an agent of UOA (pictured above) in delivering the catering (the exemption could not apply to a supply by OGC to the students).

Background

The central issue was whether the supply of food and staff by the appellant to UOA was a single supply of catering services at the standard-rate for VAT purposes (HMRC’s case) or that the main supply was for food at the zero-rate, with the supply of staff being a separate supply and eligible for staff wages concession which was the appellant’s stance. I comment that the procurement as principal and the delivery of catering as agent is common practice in the education sector and this case focussed on whether the relevant documentation actually reflected the economic reality.

Decision

The HMRC internal VAT manual VTAXPER64300 sets out the general principles for determining the VAT treatment of supplies made under a catering contract, which in turn depend in some situations on the capacity in which the caterer supplies its service, whether as principal or agent in the agreement. Of relevance in this case were the following statements:

(1) In general, it has been established practice that agency contracts are most often used in the education sector.

(2) Under agency contracts for the provision of catering it is accepted that:

  • The client makes a taxable supply of catering to the consumer, or the catering is subsumed within an overall exempt supply, eg; of education
  • VAT is not charged to the client on wages of the catering staff employed at the unit
  • VAT is charged on any management fee plus taxable stock and other services
  • Schools may only exempt supplies which are closely related to the overall provision of education

(3) This contributes to fair competition with in-house providers, and the contract catering industry acknowledges the value of that.

In respect of the contract for the supply of catering services, UOA was the principal and OGC was the agent by reference to the control exercised over; menu specifications, pricing, and the premises in which catering was carried out. The relevant contracts set out that the terms were set by UOA and were indicative of its status as the principal in the catering contract. The judge stated that the catering contracts between UOA and OGC appeared to be an agency contract with OGC acting as the agent. Consequently, the food produced OGC and served by its staff at UOA’s halls of residence was potentially a supply of food in the course of catering that can be subsumed within the overall exempt supply of education by UOA.

Commentary

A win for the appellant, but only after comprehensive consideration of all points and the substantial detailed documentation by the judge. There has been a run of Tribunal cases on the agent/principal point (not just in education and which I have covered in previous articles) and this case serves to demonstrate that each case will be determined on its merits. There can be no blanket VAT treatment and certain factors will point one way and others to a different VAT treatment. In my experience, HMRC are always eager to challenge agent/principal treatment and it is an area which has an enormous tax impact on a business. I always recommend that any contracts/documentation which cover potential agent/principal issues are reviewed to avoid unwanted attention from HMRC. Slight adjustments to agreements often assist in reaching the desired tax treatment. Don’t leave it to chance!

VAT – Place of supply of professional services flowchart

By   23 August 2018
0

A question I am often asked by my legal and accountant clients is “Do we charge VAT on our invoices?” The main issue with this general question is the place of supply (POS). Consequently, I have produced a simple flowchart which covers most situations and applies to all providers of professional services. Of course, this being VAT, there are always unusual or one-off queries, but this chart, with the notes should address the most common issues.

Place of supply Of Services Flowchart

POS services flowchart

Notes to flowchart

As always, nothing in VAT is as simple as it seems. So I hope the following notes are of assistance.

Place of belonging

If the services are supplied to an individual and received by him otherwise than for the purpose of any business carried on by him, he is treated as belonging in whatever country he has his “usual place of residence”.

If the services are in respect of an individual’s business interests, then more complex rules on the place of belonging may apply.  The issue is usually where more than one “establishment” exists.  In these cases, the rule is the place of belonging is the “establishment” at which, or for the purposes of which, the services are most directly used or to be used.

A guide to belonging here 

Property rental in the UK

Property rental is treated as a business for VAT purposes.  We must decide whether a rented property here creates a business establishment in the UK for the landlord.  If a person has an establishment overseas and owns a property in the UK which it leases to tenants; the property does not in itself create a business establishment.  However, if the entity has UK offices and staff or appoints a UK agency to carry on its business by managing the property, this creates a business establishment (place of belonging) in the UK. VAT Act 1994 s. 9 (5) (a).  In these cases, the professional services would likely be UK to UK and be standard-rated.

Difference between business and non-business:

Services provided to an individual are likely to be non-business unless the services are linked to that individual’s business activities, eg; as a sole proprietor.  Therefore, an individual’s tax return is, in most cases, likely to be in the recipient’s non-business capacity (although it may be prudent to identify why a UK tax return is required for a non-UK resident individual, ie; what UK activities have taken place and do these activities amount to a business or create a business establishment?)

This is an area that often gives rise to uncertainties and differences in interpretation (particularly when deciding which establishment has most directly used the services).  It may be helpful to reproduce a specific example provided by HMRC:

Example

“A UK accountant supplies accountancy services to a UK incorporated company which has its business establishment abroad.  However, the services are received in connection with the company’s UK tax obligations and therefore the UK fixed establishment, created by the registered office, receives the supply.”

As always, please contact us should you have any queries.

VAT: Adecco Court of Appeal case. Agent or principal?

By   6 August 2018
0

Latest from the courts

In the recent Court of Appeal (CA) case of Adecco here the issue was whether the services provided by Adecco – an employment bureau which supplied its clients with temporary staff (temps) were by way of it acting as principal or agent.

Background

Details of the issues as considered in the FTT and UT were covered here 

Overview

As is often the case in these types of arrangements, there are some matters that point towards the appellant acting as agent, and others indicating that the proper VAT treatment is that of principal. The important difference, of course, being whether output tax is due on the “commission” received by Adecco or on the full payment made to it (which includes the salaries of the relevant workers).

Decision

The CA decided that the supply of temporary staff by Adecco was as principal and consequently, VAT was due on the full amount received, not just the commission retained.

Reasoning

The CA focussed on the contractual position. Among the reasons provided for this decision were as follows (I have somewhat summarised). I think it worthwhile looking in some detail at these:

  • There was no question of the temps having provided their services under contracts with the clients: no such contracts existed. The contractual position must be that the temps’ services were provided to clients in pursuance of the contracts between Adecco and its clients and Adecco and the temps.
  • Although the contract between Adecco and a temp referred to the temp undertaking an assignment “for a client” and providing services “to the client”, it also spoke of the client requiring the temp’s services “through Adecco” and of the temp being supplied “through Adecco”.
  • While temps were to be subject to the control of clients, that was something that the temps agreed with Adecco, not the clients. The fact that the contract between Adecco and a temp barred any third party from having rights under the Contracts (Rights of Third Parties) Act 1999 confirms that the relevant provisions were to be enforceable only by Adecco, which, on the strength of them, was able to agree with its clients that the temps should be under their control. Adecco can fairly be described as conferring such control on its clients. (Broadly; the employment regulations required Adecco to treat itself as a principal with the result that that it could not therefore treat itself as an agent).
  • Adecco paid temps on its own behalf, not as agent for the clients.
  • Adecco by did not drop out of the picture once it had introduced a temp to a client. It was responsible for paying the temp (and for handling national insurance contributions and the like) and had to do so regardless of whether it received payment from the client Adecco also enjoyed rights of termination and suspension. It is noteworthy (as the UT said) that the contract between Adecco and a temp proceeded on the basis that a temp’s unauthorised absence could “result in a breach of obligations which we owe to the client”.
  • Adecco did not perform just administrative functions in relation to the temps. The temps, after all, were entitled to be paid by Adecco, not the clients.
  • Adecco charged a client a single sum for each hour a temp worked. It did not split its fees into remuneration for the temp and commission for itself.
  • The fact that Adecco had no control over a temp in advance of his taking up his assignment with the client did not matter.
  • Adecco undoubtedly supplied the services of employed temps to its clients.
  • In all the circumstances, both contractually and as a matter of economic and commercial reality, the temps’ services were supplied to clients via Adecco. In other words, Adecco did not merely supply its clients with introductory and ancillary services, and VAT was payable on the totality of what it was paid by clients.

Action

Clearly this was not the outcome the appellant desired, and it may impact similar arrangements in place for other businesses.  Although found on the precise nature of the relevant contracts, the outcome of this case is not limited to employment bureaux and similar but must be considered in most cases where commission is received by an “agent”. These may include, inter alia; taxi services, driving schools, transport, travel agents, training/education, online services, repairs, warrantee work and many other types of business. It is crucial that contracts are regularly reviewed the ensure that the appropriate VAT treatment is applied and that they are clear on the agent/principal relationship. If there is any doubt, please contact us as it is often one of the most ambiguous areas of VAT.