Dance classes in some EU countries are subject to different VAT rates depending on whether the dance style is considered artistic or entertainment. In the UK, belly dancing and ceroc lessons are standard rated, but ballet is exempt.
Dance classes in some EU countries are subject to different VAT rates depending on whether the dance style is considered artistic or entertainment. In the UK, belly dancing and ceroc lessons are standard rated, but ballet is exempt.
Latest from the courts
In the Impact Contracting Solutions Limited (ICS) Upper Tribunal (UT) case the issue was whether HMRC had the power to cancel the VAT registration where that person has facilitated the VAT fraud of another ie; the scope of the “Ablessio” principle. It also illustrates the impact of EU cases on UK courts.
Background
ICS’s customers were temporary work agencies, and its suppliers were approximately 3,000 mini-umbrella companies (“MUCs”) which supplied labour. HMRC decided to cancel ICS’s VAT registration number with reliance on the principle in the decision of the Court of Justice of the European Union (CJEU) in Valsts ienemumu dienests v Ablessio SIA (C-527/11) (“Ablessio”). HMRC considered that ICS was registered for VAT principally or solely to abuse the VAT system by facilitating VAT fraud, and that, in such circumstances, they were empowered by the principle in Ablessio to cancel the registration. In particular, HMRC considered that the arrangements between ICSL and the MUCs were contrived, with the effect that the MUCs failed properly to account for VAT on their supplies to ICS.
ICS appealed against HMRC’s decision to cancel its registration.
The Issues
Does the principle in Ablessio apply only to a party that has itself fraudulently defaulted on its VAT obligations, or does it similarly apply to a party who has facilitated the VAT fraud of another party?
If the Ablessio principle does apply to a party who has facilitated the VAT fraud of another party, is simple facilitation sufficient, or must it additionally be proved that:
(a) the facilitating party was itself dishonest, or
(b) the facilitating party knew that it was facilitating the fraud, and/or
(c) the facilitating party should have known that it was facilitating the fraud?
The First Tier Tribunal (FTT) decided that Ablessio applies both to a party that has fraudulently defaulted on its VAT obligations and to a party who has facilitated the VAT fraud of another party. Further that simple facilitation by a party of the VAT fraud of another is not sufficient to apply the Ablessio principle. However, it is not necessary to prove that the facilitating party was itself dishonest. It must, however, be proved that the facilitating party knew or should have known that it was facilitating the VAT fraud of another party.
Decision
The appeal was rejected an the FTT’s decision was upheld. HMRC powers are not contrary to UK VAT legislation.
The application by HMRC of Ablessio is not contra legem or otherwise prohibited by the VAT legislation where it is applied to deregister a taxpayer who has either fraudulently defaulted on its VAT obligations or facilitated the VAT fraud of another party and at the relevant time has also made taxable supplies unconnected with such fraud or facilitation of fraud and which would result in a liability to be registered.
Ablessio applies to the deregistration by HMRC of a person as well as to a refusal by HMRC to register a person. It also provides for the deregistration of a person who has facilitated the VAT fraud of another, where the person to be deregistered knew or should have known that it was facilitating the VAT fraud of another.
Commentary
This decision was released this month and illustrates the ongoing influence of EU legislation and cases, “despite” Brexit
EU legislation does not, by itself, fall within the scope of retained EU law (see below). However, domestic legislation implementing EU rules forms part of EU-derived domestic legislation and is preserved in domestic law.
The VAT Act 1994 is not affected by Brexit because it is an Act of Parliament and, therefore, remains effective unless it is changed by Parliament.
Overview of the impact of EU legislation
Post-Brexit, the UK could have decided that UK courts should not be bound by EU case law. However, this would have resulted in a situation where the UK courts effectively had to begin with a blank piece of paper in deciding how a piece of retained EU law should be interpreted or applied. This approach would have resulted in considerable uncertainty for business over how retained EU law would operate. In order avoid this, section 6 of the European Union (Withdrawal) Act 2018 provides that:
Going forward
Helpful guidance is provided in the e-Accounting Solutions vs Global Infosys case (not a VAT case).
The Retained EU Law (Revocation and Reform) Act 2023 means that the principle of EU-law conforming construction is a corollary of the supremacy of EU law (which is abolished under Section 3 of the Act) and will therefore no longer apply from 2024.
The principles of statutory construction under English Law require a purposive interpretation of legislation, whether or not EU law principles are engaged. This involves considering the context in which the legislation was made. Depending on the legislation concerned, this process may be guided by “external aids”. External aids referred to in the judgment include Explanatory Notes and Government White Papers, and could also presumably include references to Hansard where seen as appropriate by the courts. To the extent that domestic enactments were made for the purpose of implementing EU law, the EU law position is such an “external aid” and the UK law should be construed accordingly.
Where Parliament used the same language as the Directive, one may assume that it intended to mean the same – accordingly, the CJEU interpretation of Directive-terms informs the interpretation of the UK statute.
However, the statutory language remains paramount – “external aids”, to which EU law instruments are effectively downgraded in UK law from 2024, cannot displace unambiguous statutory language in UK enactments that is inconsistent with EU law.
Further to my article on eInvoicing, I thought it may be helpful if I compiled a Glossary of terms used in connection with the subject. These definitions have been compiled from various sources and I have tried to keep them as “non-techy” as possible.
Accounts Payable Automation (APA)
An automated management of accounts payable by dealing with invoices received and payments sent. It requires integration of the invoicing process with accounting software.
Accounts Receivable Automation (ARA)
As APA but for accounts receivable (dealing with invoices sent and payments received).
Acknowledgement Of Receipt
The acknowledgement of receipt of an EDI message – the syntax and semantics are checked, and a corresponding acknowledgement is sent by the receiver.
Advanced Electronic Signature
A digital signature based on an advanced certificate uniquely identifying the signer. The signature keys are used with a high level of confidence by the signatory, who has sole control of the signing key.
Agreed Format
The electronic data format that businesses have agreed to treat as the data format of the original electronic invoice for tax purposes.
Audit Trail
The system which traces the detailed transactions relating to any item in an accounting record.
Authentication
The process of verifying a claim that a system entity or system resource has a certain attribute value.
Authenticity Of Origin
Assurance of the identity of the supplier or issuer of the invoice and that the document is the true original.
B2B
B2C
Biller Portal
Invoice providers’ web portal where invoice receivers can log on with a username/password to check and manage their invoices.
Billing Service Provider
A provider offering services to senders and receivers which involves the sending, collection and administrative processing of eInvoices.
Certification Service Provider
An entity which issues digital certificates or provides services related to electronic signatures.
Clearance
A tax authority approval being a precondition for the validity of a document.
Clearance Model
A tax authority is involved in the invoice data exchange between the vendor and the customer as a third party. It allows the tax authorities a real-time insight into the business transactions. The eInvoice must be approved by the tax authority before being sent to the recipient.
Continuous Transaction Controls (CTC Reporting)
Obligations requiring a taxpayer to submit relevant data to the relevant tax authority before, or shortly after, a transaction.
Data Integrity
Checks that data has not been changed, destroyed, or lost in an unauthorised or accidental manner.
Digital Certificate
A file or electronic password that proves the authenticity of a device, server, or user via cryptography and the public key infrastructure.
Digital Reporting Requirements (DRR)
The obligation for a taxable person to submit digital data on their transactions to HMRC.
Digital Signature
A technique used to validate the authenticity and integrity of a digital document, message or software.
eAccounting
The requirement for a taxable person to submit digital business records to a tax authority platform.
eArchiving
Storing electronic documents as evidence for a prescribed period of time according to the relevant HMRC regulations.
Electronic Data Interchange (EDI)
An intercompany communication of business documents in a standard format. EDI is a standard electronic format that replaces paper-based documents such as purchase orders or invoices.
eInvoice
Details here.
eReceipt
Electronically issued customer receipts.
EU eInvoicing
Details/how to here.
Format
The method of presentation of electronic data in an electronic document.
Four Corner Model
A process where suppliers and customers have one or several service providers that ensure the correct processing between them.
Invoicing Directive
The eInvoicing Directive which requires EU entities to receive and process all electronic invoices – compliant with the European standard.
Mandatory eInvoicing
The obligatory use of eInvoicing by business which is imposed by the country’s authorities. Around 80 countries mandate eInvoicing.
Pan-European Public Procurement On-Line (Peppol)
An EDI protocol, designed to simplify the purchase-to-pay process between government bodies and suppliers. It facilitates electronic ordering, invoicing and shipping between government organisations and businesses.
Periodical Transaction Reporting
An obligation for a taxpayer to submit transactional data on a monthly, quarterly or annual basis.
QR Code
eInvoice verification which allows users to verify the authenticity of an eInvoice based on the QR code appearing on it. The QR code is used to provide information related to a particular invoice.
Qualified Electronic Signature
An electronic signature which is compliant with EU Regulation 910/2014 for electronic transactions within the internal European market. It enables verification of the authorship of a declaration in electronic data exchange over long periods of time.
Post Audit eInvoicing
An invoice is sent to the tax authorities only after the transaction has been completed. The business must guarantee the authenticity and integrity of the invoice and archive the document to satisfy audit requirements. This is being overtaken by the Clearance Model (above).
Readability
The ability of a tax administration to interpret the content of an eInvoice.
Real-time reporting
An obligation for a taxpayer to submit fiscal data to a tax authority platform immediately, or shortly after, a transaction.
Transactional Data
Information that is captured from transactions. It records the time of the transaction, the place of supply, the value of the supply, the payment method, discounts if any, and other quantities and qualities associated with the transaction.
Three Corner Model
A process where invoice senders and receivers are connected via a single service provider for the sending and receiving of messages.
Two Corner Model
A process where invoice senders and receivers are connected directly for the sending and receiving of messages.
UN/CEFACT
The United Nations’ Centre for Trade Facilitation and Electronic Business has a global remit to secure the interoperability for the exchange of information between private and public sector entities.
Unstructured Invoice Document
An invoice that is created manually or automatically from a system and is not in a database. An Unstructured Document may contain data, but the data is not organised in a fixed format. Consequently, it is difficult to find and capture the data for use.
VAT Listing
An obligation for a business to submit VAT transactional data according to a domestic format. The data includes: information on values and recipients, as well as data which is required to be included on an invoice. The data are submitted on a periodic basis, often jointly with the VAT return.
Web Payment
An online service that manages the transfer of funds from a customer to the merchant of an e-commerce website.
Web Publication
A method of exchanging invoices with a buyer by placing an original electronic invoice on an agreed web site, in a secure closed environment operated by the supplier.
Whether a service is “related to land” is important because there are distinct rules for this type of supply compared to the General Rule. The place of supply (POS) of land related services is where the land is located, regardless of where the supplier or recipient belong.
The rule applies only to services which relate directly to a specific site of land. This means a service where the land is a central and essential part of the service or where the service is intended to legally or physically alter a property.
It does not apply if a supply of services has only an indirect connection with land, or if the land related service is only an incidental component of a more comprehensive supply of services.
What is land?
For the purpose of determining the POS, land (also called immoveable property in legislation) means:
What services directly relate to land?
HMRC provide the following examples:
The following HMRC examples are not deemed to be land related services:
These examples are mainly derived from case law and the department’s understanding of the legislation and they are not exhaustive.
The Reverse Charge
If an overseas supplier provides land related services in GB, the POS is GB and the reverse charge applies if the recipient is GB VAT registered.
If a GB supplier provides services directly related to land where the land is located outside GB, the POS is not GB. This means that there is a supply in another country. VAT rules in different countries vary (even across the EU) – some countries use the reverse charge mechanism, but others require the GB supplier to VAT register in the country of the POS (where the land is physically located).
A key feature of the place of supply rules is the distinction between B2B (business to business) and B2C (business to consumer) supplies. The distinction is important because it determines, inter alia, whether GB VAT is applicable to a supply made by a GB supplier.
Status of the customer:
To apply the B2B treatment a GB supplier must obtain evidence that the customer has business activities. If the supplier cannot obtain any evidence, they should apply B2C treatment.
A supplier needs to identify where his customer belongs in order to establish the place of supply.
VERY broadly, depending on the nature of the supply, the rule of thumb is that a B2B service is GB VAT free (it is subject to a reverse charge by the recipient as it is deemed to be “supplied where received”) but a B2C service is generally subject to GB VAT, regardless of the place of belonging of the recipient. There are exceptions to these rules however, such as the use and enjoyment provisions, land related services, hire of transport and admission to events.
In the age-old matter of whether a supply is separate/composite/compound for VAT purposes which and what is the nature of that supply, the Court of Appeal case of Gray & Farrar International LLP has provided very helpful guidance. A background to facts of the initial hearing here (although this decision was overturned by both the UT and the CoA).
I have previously considered these types of supply here, here, here, here, and here. Although not specifically concerning composite/separate supplies, the case sets out a hierarchy of tests to be applied in characterising a single supply for VAT purposes which now sets the standard. These test are:
Comments
The Mesto Test
CJEU Mesto Zamberk Financini (Case C-18/12)
The primary test to be applied when characterising a single supply for VAT purposes is to determine the predominant element from the point of view of the typical consumer with regard to the qualitative and not merely the quantitative importance of the constituent elements.
Principal/ancillary
If a distinct supply represents 50% or more of the overall cost, it can not be considered ancillary to the principal supply. In such cases an apportionment will usually be required.
Overarching
A generic description of the supply which is distinct from the individual elements. In many cases the tax treatment of that overarching single supply according to that description will be self-evident.
CPP
One must also have regard to the Card Protection Plan Ltd case. This has become a landmark case in determining the VAT treatment for single and multiple supplies. In this case the ECJ ruled that standard rated handling charges were not distinct from the supply of exempt insurance. It was noted that ‘a supply that comprises a single service from an economic point of view should not be artificially split’. Notably many subsequent court decisions have since followed this outcome thereby suggesting a general lean towards viewing cases as single supplies where there are reasonable grounds to do so.
What is digital Euro?
As a digital form of central bank money, the digital Euro will offer greater choice to consumers and businesses in situations where physical cash cannot be used. However, the digital euro would be a complement to cash, which should remain widely available and useable.
A digital Euro would offer an electronic means of payment that anyone could use in the euro area. It would be secure and user-friendly, like cash is today. As central bank money issued by the ECB, it would be different from “private money”, but you could also use a card or a phone app to pay with digital euro. It is intended to provide an anchor of stability for our money in the digital age.
Further details here.
Latest from the courts
In the First-Tier Tribunal case of Sports Invest UK Ltd the issue was the place of supply (POS) of a football agent’s services (commission received for a player’s transfer).
The POS is often complex from a VAT perspective and depends on the place of belonging (POB) of the supplier and the recipient of the supply. These rules determine if VAT is charged, where VAT is charged and the rate of VAT applicable, additionally, they may impose requirements to register for VAT in different jurisdictions.
Background
Sports Invest was a football agent based in the UK. It received fees in respect of negotiating the transfer of a player: João Mário from a Portuguese club: Sporting Lisbon to an Italian club: Internazionale (Inter Milan). The appellant signed a representation contract with the player which entitled it to commission, and a separate agreement with Inter Milan entitling it to a fee because the player was permanently transferred.
The Issues
To whom did Sports Invest make a supply – club or player? What was the supply? Was there one or two separate supplies? What was the POS?
As appears normal for transactions in the world of football the contractual arrangements were complex, but, in essence as a matter of commercial and economic reality, Sports Invest had agreed the commission with the player in case it was excluded from the deal. However, this did not occur, and the deal was concluded as anticipated. Inter Milan paid The Appellant’s fee in full, but did this affect the agreement between Sports Invest and the player? That is, as HMRC contended, did Inter Milan pay Sports Invest on the player’s behalf (third party consideration) such that there were two supplies; one to the player and one to the cub?
The FTT stated that there was no suggestion that the contracts were “sham documents”.
VAT Liability
The arrangements mattered, as pre-Brexit, a supply of services by a business with a POB in the UK to an individual (B2C) in another EU Member State would have been subject to UK VAT; the POS being where the supplier belonged. HMRC assessed for an element of the fee that it saw related to the supply to the player. The remainder of the fee paid by the club was accepted to be consideration for a UK VAT free supply by the agent to the club (B2B).
Decision
The court found that there was one single supply by The Appellant to Inter Milan. This being the case, the supply was B2B and the POS was where the recipient belonged and so that the entire supply was UK VAT free. There was no (UK) supply to the individual player as that agreement was superseded by the contractual arrangements which were actually put in place and the player owed the agent nothing as the potential payment under that contract was waived.
The appeal against the assessment was upheld.
Commentary
The court’s decision appears to be logical as the supply was to the club who were receiving “something” (the employment contract with the player) and paying for it. The other “safeguarding” agreement appeared to be simple good commercial practice and was ultimately “not required”. This case highlights the often complex issues of; establishing the nature of transactions, the identity of the recipient(s), agency arrangements, the POS and the legal, commercial and economic reality of contracts.
Latest from the courts
In the Court of Justice of the European Union (CJEU) it was ruled that electric vehicle charging via public charging points, was a supply of goods, regardless that some elements of the supply were services, ie; access technical support, reservation of a charging point, and a parking space while charging. The overriding supply was the provision of electricity which is classified as goods.
The full P. In W. case here.
It is unlikely that the UK authorities will form a different view.
Although in most cases there is unlikely to be a significant difference, although there could be issues with the time of supply (tax point).
While we await the fine details, trade between GB and Northern Ireland is likely to be subject to new rules. These are set out under the heading of The Windsor Framework published by HM Government.
(Very) General
Via the Northern Ireland Protocol (NIP), Northern Ireland operated under the EU VAT rules. There are revised VAT rules set out in The Windsor Framework. The EU rules on VAT rates will not apply to a list of goods for consumption in Northern Ireland in certain circumstances.
The Windsor Framework amends the legal text of the NIP to ensure that Northern Ireland will be subject to the same VAT and excise rules that apply in the rest of the UK.
The Framework means that legislation to apply the zero-rate of VAT to energy saving materials can be introduced. A number of other flexibilities should enable UK-wide VAT changes to apply in Northern Ireland. It is anticipated that future VAT issues can be addressed in order to manage any divergences in policy between GB and Northern Ireland.
A bit more detail
The Windsor Framework sets up a new UK internal trade scheme, based on commercial data-sharing rather than traditional international customs processes.
Under the NIP, a framework exists that allows goods to move from GB to Northern Ireland tariff-free. If the goods do not fall within that framework, they are treated as if moving across an international border and full customs declarations are required.
This Framework introduces arrangements through a new UK internal market system (colloquially called the “Green Lane”) for internal trade. Goods being sold in Northern Ireland will not be subject to “unnecessary paperwork, checks and duties”.
The new scheme will significantly expand the number of businesses able to move goods using the Green Lane by being classed as internal UK traders.
The Changes
To ensure that internal UK trade is protected, the agreement expands the number of businesses able to be classed as internal UK traders and move goods as ‘not at risk’ of entering the EU through three changes:
Businesses in the scheme that can show their goods will stay in Northern Ireland will gain access to a simplified process for goods movements, using ordinary commercial data rather than customs data.
Goods moving to the EU will be subject to normal third-country processes and requirements.
Reduction in so-called frictions
The Framework seeks to address a range of issues that added frictions or costs for internal UK trade: