Category Archives: VAT Planning

VAT Latest from the courts – exemption for sporting facilities by an eligible body

By   8 November 2016
0

St Andrew’s College, Bradfield

This Upper Tribunal case demonstrates the importance of getting the structure right. Full case here

Overview

Exemption exists for an eligible body making certain supplies of sporting services.

Background

St Andrew’s College is a boarding school and a registered charity.  It is the representative member of a VAT group which also included two subsidiary companies. The companies provided facilities for playing sport and the group intended to treat these as exempt supplies.  HMRC challenged the intended treatment on the basis that the subsidiaries did not qualify as eligible bodies via VAT Act 1994, Schedule 9, Group 10 (exemption related to sport, sports competitions and physical education). It was agreed that all of the other criteria were met, so the case turned on the definition of an eligible body.  It was common ground that the College, as an educational charity, was itself an eligible body. Even though, as the representative member of the VAT group, the College was treated as making all supplies actually made by the subsidiaries, that did not mean that the supplies were exempt.

Decision

In order to be regarded as an eligible body the subsidiaries were required to be a non-profit making body.  What was relevant here was whether the subsidiaries (themselves) had specific restrictions on their ability to distribute any profit that they made.  The UT formed the view that there was no specific restriction and that although profits were only covenanted up to the College this was insufficient to meet the test in Group 10 Note (2A).  It was also found that the deeds of covenant did not, of themselves, establish that the subsidiaries could make distributions only to non-profit making bodies.

Consequently, the subsidiaries failed to qualify for exemption and that the First Tier Tribunal correctly found that output tax was due on the income from provision of sporting facilities.

Commentary

This case highlights the importance of putting in place a correct structure and to ensure that it reflects the intention of the supplier.  One may see that in this scenario it would have been relatively simple to arrange matters to accurately reflect the aims of the group.  Care would have been required in drafting documentation etc as matters stood, or rearranging the supply chain.

It should also be noted that there are specific anti-avoidance provisions in place for certain suppliers of sporting services (although not in issue here). Advice should be taken at an early stage in planning to ensure that if exemption is desired, that it is achieved if possible.

VAT Latest from the courts – more on agent or principal

By   2 November 2016
0

Whether a business acts as agent or principal in respect of hotel accommodation

In the First Tier Tribunal (FTT) case of Hotels4U.com Limited (H4U) further consideration was given to the relationship of parties in travel/accommodation services.  This follows on from the recent Supreme Court case of Secret Hotels 2 Ltd which we considered here

Background

H4U entered into contracts with suppliers of hotel rooms and displayed details of the hotels on its website. Travellers and travel agents are able to book online, pay a deposit and receive a voucher which enabled them to occupy the relevant accommodation when presented to the hotel.

The FTT was required to decide whether H4U was acting as agent or principal in respect of these supplies made to travellers and travel agents.  If acting as principal, output tax would be due via the Tour Operators’ Margin Scheme (TOMS).  If acting as agent, the place of supply (POS) would be outside the UK and no UK VAT would be due.  We are aware that many of our clients are in a similar position so this decision will be important to them.

Decision

H4U contended that that its position was indistinguishable from the Secret Hotels 2 Ltd case such that it should be regarded as an agent.  The FTT upheld this contention for most of the relevant transactions (based on contracts which contained sufficient evidence to enable the Tribunal to reach a decision in UK law) so H4U could be seen as acting as agent.  H4U also argued that HMRC’s intention to seek a reference to the CJEU in respect of the interpretation of the EU Principal VAT Directive Article 306 on the meaning of “acting solely as an intermediary”’ (whether that is different from an agent in English law) was an attempt to re-argue the matter before the CJEU and should be resisted. The FTT stated that it was only considering the position under UK law.

Commentary

We understand that there are a number of similar ongoing appeals and this decision may be of benefit to them.  It also underlines the fact that documentation, and how each party acts, is important in determining the relationship.  No one piece of evidence on its own may be decisive but goes to form part of the overall picture.  As always in agent/principal cases, it is crucial that the documentation accurately represents the actual transaction.  Contracts can play a big part, as can the Terms & Conditions and wording on websites and advertisements.  Broadly, as a starting point, it must be clear to the customer that an agent is acting on behalf of a named principal; without this information, HMRC will likely form the view that there is no agency arrangement and that the “intermediary” party is acting as an undisclosed agent (for all intents and purposes acting as principal).  This means that any supply would be seen to be made to, and by the agent, such that (in this case) output tax would be due using TOMS.

Action

We shall have to wait and see whether HMRC is successful in making a reference on the possible distinction between the meaning of agent in UK and EC law.

In the meantime, any businesses which are involved in agency/principal relationships, not just in the travel field, may benefit from taking advice on whether their arrangements are affected by these two cases and whether there may be value in putting planning in place.

Latest from the courts: Excise Duty – against which party may an assessment be raised?

By   19 October 2016
0

A little “light” relief from VAT.  Indirect taxes extend to Customs and Excise Duties (as well as IPT and various other “lower profile” taxes) and we are able to assist with all of these.

In an interesting Excise Duty case; B & M Retail Limited (B & M) the Upper Tribunal were asked whether an assessment for Customs Duty due on wine and beer could be issued to an entity “down the chain” to an entity which was holding goods at a given time.

Background

HMRC detained the relevant the goods under The Customs & Excise Management Act 1979 (“CEMA”) Section 139 on the grounds that, in their judgment, on the balance of probabilities, Excise Duty had not been paid on the goods. Under B & M’s terms and conditions of business its suppliers were required to warrant that the sale of alcohol to B & M was on a “Excise Duty paid” basis.

The First Tier Tribunal (FTT) decided that despite an HMRC investigation resulting in the fact that they were not satisfied that duty had been paid on the goods, B & M was not responsible for the duty (and subsequent penalties) as the goods had passed through other various entities before they reached the appellant.  The decision was based on the fact that the duty point must have arisen before the goods reached B & M and consequently, the duty was payable by someone further up the supply chain and not simply by the entity which was holding the Excise Duty goods at the Excise Duty point.

Decision

However, the Upper Tribunal disagreed with the FTT and overturned the verdict.  The Upper Tribunal stated that “… the recognition by HMRC that one or more other Excise Duty points must, in principle, have been triggered before B & M received the relevant goods did not preclude HMRC from assessing B & M for excise duty …”.  The Upper Tribunal did, however, remit the case to the First Tier Tribunal to review the evidence to ensure that the assessment is in time and that, as a matter of fact, the Excise Duty due on the beer and wine remains unpaid.

Conclusion

It would appear that this decision currently gives HMRC the right to raise an assessment for duty and penalties anywhere along the supply chain when an entity is holding the goods, even though a “previous” entity may have been responsible for the payment. This is not * * polite cough * * small beer as the amount in question was £5,875,143 of duty and a penalty of £1,175,028.  This is helpful to HMRC as, in this instant case, it would appear that entities further up the supply chain were either not registered, or became deregistered, making it more difficult for HMRC to recover the Duty due.

It is important for every importer to be clear about the Excise Duty position and to carry out detailed due diligence on the relevant shipment.  It is now not possible to escape an assessment by demonstrating that a third party is responsible for the payment of the duty.

Latest from the courts: missing goods subject to VAT

By   13 October 2016
0
In the CJEU case of Maya Marinova the issue was whether goods which could not be located in the Bulgarian appellant’s warehouse were subject to VAT on the grounds they had been disposed of.

Background

The appellant purchased certain goods, and subsequently, at an inspection, was unable to either;

  • produce the goods , or;
  • demonstrate how they were disposed of.

The Bulgarian authorities had confirmed that the goods had been purchased from a supplier, but the purchases did not appear in the business’ purchase records. They assessed for VAT on the missing goods assuming that they had been purchased and sold off record and the output tax had not been accounted for. They employed a mark-up exercise based on similar goods sold in the appellant’s shop.

The case proceeded directly to the court without an AG’s opinion.  The matter was; whether the decision to assess offended the principle of fiscal neutrality if it were supported by national legislation (which it was here).  It was decided that in these circumstances, such action was not precluded and the assessment was basically sound.  It was stated that “… tax authorities may presume that the taxable person subsequently sold those goods to third parties and determine the taxable amount of the sale of those goods according to the factual information at hand …”.  As usual, the case was passed back to the referring court to consider whether the Bulgarian domestic legislation goes further than is necessary to ensure the correct collection of tax and to prevent evasion.

Commentary

Although the issues in this case arose from specific facts, this is not an uncommon scenario for a business.  It was hardly a surprising outcome.  In a similar position in the UK, HMRC is also very likely to form the view that if the goods are no longer on hand, then they must have been disposed of, unless evidence to the contrary is provided by a taxpayer.

Of course, there may be a genuine reason why the goods are no longer in stock, but no output tax has been declared on them.  These reasons are considered in guidance published by HMRC here and the rules mainly consider goods which have been lost, stolen, damaged or destroyed.

There are specific ways of dealing with VAT in these situations, and in fact, whether output tax is due at all.  Failure to comply with this guidance may result in an assessment being issued.   The general point is VAT is only due after a tax point has been created.  A crude example is that if goods are shoplifted from a store, there is no output tax due.  However, if the goods were sold and recorded via a till, and the money which went into the till was stolen, output tax is still due on the supply of those goods (as found in the case of G Benton [1975] VATTR 138).

As always with VAT, it is crucial to keep accurate and up to date records to evidence supplies (as well as recording the movement of stock and any discrepancies in these circumstances).  Although an inspector will need to demonstrate “best judgement” in issuing an assessment in respect of missing goods, it is obviously prudent to be able to demonstrate why the anticipated output tax has not been declared and therefore be prepared for such enquiries.

In this instant case, it was not discovered why the goods were not located in the warehouse.  It could be that there was a miscommunication between parts of the business, a simple underdeclaration of sales, staff theft, or any other hazards of business.  Even for non-tax reasons it is vital that a business’ systems are sufficiently robust to identify such occurrences and procedures are put into place to deal with them.

If you or your clients have received an assessment of this sort, it is usually worthwhile obtaining a review of the position.

VAT – Intended penalty for participating in fraud

By   3 October 2016
0

Consultation

A consultation was proposed in the 2016 Budget on the introduction of a new penalty for businesses that participate in VAT fraud. Now HMRC has announced that views are sought on; whether there is a case for a new penalty, its structure and to whom it should apply.  The intended changes will require amendment to Schedule 24 of the Finance Act 2007.  The main target of these proposed new measures is MTIC (Missing Trader Intra-Community) fraud.

Full details of the consultation paper here

Penalty principles

It may be worth reviewing HMRC’s view on the principles of applying a penalty, which they state are;

  • The penalty regime should be designed from the customer perspective, primarily to encourage compliance and prevent non-compliance. Penalties are not to be applied with the objective of raising revenues.
  • Penalties should be proportionate to the offence and may take into account past behaviour.
  • Penalties must be applied fairly, ensuring that compliant customers are (and are seen to be) in a better position than the non-compliant.
  • Penalties must provide a credible threat. If there is a penalty, we must have the operational capability and capacity to raise it accurately, and if we raise it, we must be able to collect it in a cost-efficient manner.
  • Customers should see a consistent and standardised approach. Variations will be those necessary to take into account customer behaviours and particular taxes.

Consultation Process

It may be an appropriate time to look at what the consultation process is and how it works.  This may helpfully be summarised (by HMRC) as:

There are 5 stages to tax policy development:

  • Stage 1 Setting out objectives and identifying options.
  • Stage 2 Determining the best option and developing a framework for implementation including detailed policy design.
  • Stage 3 Drafting legislation to effect the proposed change.
  • Stage 4 Implementing and monitoring the change.
  • Stage 5 Reviewing and evaluating the change.

The closing date for comments on this consultation is 11 November 2016.

Comment

Putting to one side the minor irritation of taxpayers being called customers (a bête noire of mine I’m afraid) it is difficult to argue with the above principles and any attempt to prevent or deter VAT fraud is to be welcomed, as long as it does not impact on innocent parties and HMRC apply any such penalty in an even-handed manner. As a taxpayer in a personal and business capacity, I welcome any measures that may result in my tax bill being increased to cover revenue lost to fraud!

Action

Of course, please respond to HMRC should you feel that you should make your views known.  The consultation is open to businesses, individuals, legal firms, accountants, and other interested parties.

We occasionally come across situations where innocent parties have been inadvertently been caught up in fraudulent supply chains. Please contact us for advice on planning that may be put in place to avoid this position and how we can assist if HMRC are making enquiries. As always in VAT, it always pays to be proactive to ensure that processes and structures in place are robust and are demonstrably so.

Bad Debt Relief (BDR) – Avoiding the VAT burden

By   20 September 2016
0
VAT Basics

Anything which can relieve the burden of VAT is to be welcomed. BDR is a useful tool if a business is aware of it and understand when it may be claimed.

It is at the very least frustrating when a client does not pay, and in some cases this situation can lead to the end of a business. At least the VAT charged to the client should not become a cost to a supplier.  The BDR mechanism goes some way to protect a business from payment defaulters.

Under the normal rules of VAT, a supplier is required to account for output tax, even if the supply has not been paid for (however, the use of cash accounting or certain retail schemes removes the problem of VAT on bad debts from the supplier).

There is specific relief however:

Conditions for claiming BDR

The supplier must have supplied goods or services for a consideration in money, and must have accounted for and paid VAT on the supply. All or part of the consideration must have been written off as a bad debt by making the appropriate entry in the business’ records (this does not have to be a “formal” procedure). At least six months (but not more than three years and six months) must have elapsed since the later of the date of supply or the due date for payment.

Records required

Various records and evidence must be kept (for four years from the date of claim), in particular to identify:

• The time and nature of the supply, the purchaser, and the consideration
• The amount of VAT chargeable on the supply
• The accounting period when this VAT was accounted for and paid to HMRC
• Any payment received for the supply
• Entries in the refund for bad debts account
• The accounting period in which the claim is made.

Procedure for claiming BDR

The claim is made by including the amount of the refund in Box 4 of the VAT Return for the period in which the debt becomes over six months old.

Repayment of refund

Repayment of VAT refunded is required where payment is subsequently received or where the above conditions have not been complied with.

Refund of input tax to debtor

Businesses are required to monitor the time they take to pay their suppliers, and repay input tax claimed if they have not paid the supplier within six months. Subsequent payment of all or part of the debt will allow a corresponding reclaim of input tax. This is an easy assessment for HMRC to make at inspections, so businesses should make reviewing this matter this a regular exercise.

Finally, there is tax point planning available to defer a tax point until payment is received for providers of continuous supplies of services. Please see here

Latest from the courts – Recovery of VAT on cars purchase

By   14 September 2016
0

Input tax incurred on the purchase of cars

There is a specific blocking order (Value Added Tax (Input Tax) Order 1992) which prohibits the recovery of input tax incurred on the purchase of cars. The block applies if there is any private use of the car whatsoever (even one mile).  HMRC’s approach has been that unless a business can demonstrate that there is no private use the input tax is disallowed.  Previous case law, notably Elm Milk Limited relied on the terms of the insurance covering the car (whether private use was permitted) and inter alia, the physical security of the car.

The case

In the First Tier Tribunal (FTT) case of Zone Contractors Limited TC05330 it was held that VAT was reclaimable on six cars purchased for business use.  The reason for the decision was that the relevant employment contracts specifically and explicitly prohibited any private use of the vehicles.

HMRC claimed that the business had not demonstrated that the use of the cars was monitored and controlled sufficiently to evidence the fact that there was no private use. However the FTT decided that the employment contracts could be relied on and permitted the claims. What is relevant in this case is that the court decided that no reliance could be placed on insurance documentation preventing recovery on the grounds of the policy including cover for use for social, domestic and pleasure and that HMRC could not rely on such documentation to disallow a claim as they had in the past.

Action

If a business has been denied input tax recovery on cars by HMRC, or has refrained from claiming input tax based on previous case law, it may well be beneficial to review the circumstances in light of this case. We can assist in lodging claims where appropriate.  After all, the VAT of £8000 on a £40,000 car is significant; even if only one has been purchased.

Egypt introduces VAT

By   9 September 2016
0

New VAT regime in Egypt

From 8 September 2016 Egypt has introduced VAT to replace its existing sales Tax.

The standard rate for the year ending 30 June 2017 is 13% and it is anticipated the rate from 1 July 2017 will be increased to 14%.

Any business carrying out transactions with Egyptian customers, or in Egypt itself, will need to review their operations to ensure compliance with the new regime.

We can assist with such a review which will need to consider; reporting systems, documentation, processes, budgeting, and contracts etc

VAT Latest from the courts – HMRC’s bad ‘phone service

By   18 August 2016
0

As we know, late payment of VAT results in a Default Surcharge. Details of DS here

However, if a taxpayer has a reasonable excuse the DS will not be due. In the interesting recent case of McNamara Joinery Ltd here

The appeal was on the grounds that HMRC itself caused the default. The business was successful in the appeal on the grounds that its agent could not contact HMRC to arrange a time to pay agreement because of HMRC’s poor telephone service. Anyone who has attempted to contact HMRC by telephone will appreciate that this isn’t a one-off case!

Background

The appellant had a previous history of submitting returns on time, but making late payments late such that the period in question would give rise to a DS if the return or payment was late. Appreciating that the business would not have sufficient funds to meet the VAT payment due, it instructed its agent to contact HMRC on its behalf in an attempt to arrange a “time to pay” (TTP) agreement. The agent attempted to do this two days before the payment was due. However, there were significant problems with the telephone service and the agent was unable to get through as the line kept “going dead” (It appears from later comments made by HMRC that this was due to the volume of calls made at the end of the VAT period). A TTP agreement was subsequently reached, but only after the due date which HMRC argued was too late to avoid the DS.

Decision

On the subject of reasonable excuse, the FT Tribunal observed that “A reasonable excuse is normally an unexpected event, something unforeseeable, something out of the appellant’s control. Insufficiency of funds is not regarded as a reasonable excuse although the reason for the insufficiency might be. It is unfortunately part of the hazards of trade that debtors fail to keep promises to pay. These submissions cannot be regarded as establishing for the appellant a reasonable excuse for the late payment.”
It continued “However, faced with the problem of not having received promised payments, the appellant through its agent did all that it could do in the circumstances…., its agent tried repeatedly to contact HMRC by telephone but was unsuccessful until 12 February 2016 when a time to pay agreement was made and subsequently the arrangements made were adhered to. In the Tribunal’s view this repeated failure to contact HMRC was unexpected and unforeseeable”. Therefore the taxpayer had a reasonable excuse and the DS was removed.

The Judge did not accept HMRC’s submission that the appellant should have been aware that there was a likelihood that there would be a large volume of calls being made to HMRC on the days immediately prior to the due date and that as a result the appellant could reasonably have expected delays in being able to make contact. HMRC do not publish times when their lines are likely to be busy. Rather than expecting delays it is reasonable for a taxpayer to expect telephone calls to HMRC to be answered without delay. In the Tribunal’s view HMRC were in a better position than the appellant to know when there is a likelihood of a large volume of calls and they should have arrangements in place to deal with the higher volume of calls promptly.

So HMRC lost this case because they failed to answer the phone.

Lessons to be learned

  1. One cannot rely on HMRC answering their own phones, even though they are fully aware that there will be an increased demand at certain times. They do not have arrangements in place to deal with the known demand. They do not have a reasonable excuse for not dealing with taxpayers!
  2. When attempting to contact HMRC it is a very good idea to keep an accurate log.
  3. If it is likely that a business is experiencing cashflow issues, contact HMRC as soon as possible and do not leave it to the last moment.
  4. It is possible to arrange a TTP agreement with HMRC.
  5. A business should take advice from their advisers as soon as possible to avoid DSs. This may avoid both a TTP position and/or a DS.

VAT Input Tax recoverable in each Member State – A country by country guide

By   17 August 2016
0

VAT incurred in other EC Member States may be recovered in certain circumstances. However, some claims are specifically blocked by Member States. Unfortunately, there are differences between each Member State’s domestic legislation.

For full details of how to make a claim for VAT incurred abroad, please see here 

Here is a summary of VAT which cannot be claimed via the refund system:

Austria

VAT cannot be recovered on:

• The purchase, hire, operation and repair of passenger motor vehicles, except driving school vehicles, taxis and hire car vehicles;

• Entertainment expenses, except for business meals where the purpose of the meeting and the identity of the participants are documented.

Belgium

VAT cannot be recovered on:

• Manufactured tobacco;

• Spirits, except those intended for resale or supply in respect of a service (e.g. bars, hotels and restaurants);

• Accommodation, meals and beverages under an accommodation or a catering contract, unless these costs are incurred by a company’s staff effecting outside supplies of goods or services or by taxable persons who in turn supply the same services for consideration;

• Entertainment expenses (although expenses incurred in respect of an advertising event may be recoverable);

• Generally; the purchase of motor vehicles used for passenger transport and goods and services relating to such vehicles (although in some cases a 50% restriction applies and there are exceptions depending on use).

Bulgaria

VAT cannot be recovered on:

• Goods or services intended for making VAT-exempt supplies;

• Goods or services intended for “non-business” supplies;

• Entertainment expenses;

• Motorcycles or passenger cars (with less than five seats, excluding the driver’s seat), although certain exceptions apply;

• Goods or services related to the maintenance of a motorcycle or passenger car; and

• Goods that have been confiscated by the State or a building that has been demolished because it was unlawfully constructed.

Croatia

VAT cannot be recovered on;

• Entertainment expenses;

• Purchase and lease of aircraft, vessels, cars and means of personal transport for leisure purposes;

• Supplies exempt from VAT via The Croatian VAT Act Articles 39, 40 and 114;

• Supplies of goods exempt from VAT via The Croatian VAT Act Articles 41 (1) and 45 (1) (2) – (intra-Community supply of goods);

• VAT charged in contravention of the provisions, ie; VAT charged when it should not have been.

Cyprus

VAT cannot be recovered on:

• Non-business supplies; if a supply has both business and non-business purposes, VAT can be reclaimed only on the business portion of the supply;

• Supplies or imports of passenger cars;

• Certain second-hand goods, e.g. cars and antiques for which the VAT margin scheme is used;

• Business entertainment and hospitality expenses, except the provision of

entertainment to employees;

• Supplies used or to be used to make a supply in Cyprus; and

• Goods and services, such as hotel accommodation, purchased for resale and that are for the direct benefit of travellers.

Czech Republic

VAT cannot be recovered on:

• Entertainment expenses.

Denmark

VAT cannot be recovered on:

• Meals for the owner and staff of a business. However, VAT on meals incurred for business purposes is partly refundable;

• The acquisition and running of places of residence for the owner and staff of a business;

• The acquisition and operating costs connected to holiday homes for the owner and staff of a business;

• Entertainment expenses, representation costs and gifts. However, VAT on business entertainment is partly refundable;

• The driving of foreign tourist buses;

• The acquisition, repair and operation of motor vehicles designed for the conveyance of not more than nine persons; and

• Payments in kind to the staff of a business. No more than 25% of VAT may be recovered on restaurant bills and no more than 50% of VAT on hotel accommodation.

• There is a right to deduct a specific amount of VAT for companies that lease

passenger cars if:

• The leasing period is at least six months; and

• The vehicle is used for business purposes for at least 10% of the mileage.

Estonia

A VAT refund is available if an Estonian company can make a similar VAT deduction on its business expenses. This limits the VAT deduction, for example, on meals and entertainment expenses. VAT on accommodation costs is deductible if the trip is not for leisure purposes.

Finland

VAT cannot be recovered on:

• Immovable property that the taxable person or its staff uses as a residence, nursery, recreational or leisure facility, as well as goods and services connected with it or its use;

• Goods and services related to transport between the place of residence and place of work of the taxable person or its staff;

• Goods and services used for business entertainment purposes and business gifts;

• (With some exceptions) Passenger cars, motorcycles, caravans, vessels intended for recreational or sports purposes and aircraft with a maximum permissible take-off weight not exceeding 1,550 kg, or on goods and services related to their use;

• Purchases intended for the private consumption of the entrepreneur or his personnel;

• Purchases related to exempt sales of investment gold;

• Purchases of taxable goods and services for direct benefit of passengers made in the name of a foreign travel service company; and

• Purchases that are VAT-exempt, but have erroneously been charged with VAT.

France

VAT cannot be recovered on:

• Accommodation costs incurred on behalf of the management or staff of a company. (VAT is recoverable when such expenses are incurred for the benefit of persons not employed by the company, provided the expenses are incurred in the interest of the company or when it supplies the same services for consideration);

• The supply, import, leasing, repair and maintenance of most cars for passenger transport and other related costs, such as petrol. (However, 80% of VAT on diesel fuel can be recovered and VAT is recoverable when the cars are purchased by a car dealer for resale or by a person who hires out cars.);

• Goods transferred without remuneration or for remuneration that is much lower than their normal price, unless the value of the goods is very low (except business gifts whose collective value does not exceed EUR 65, including VAT, per beneficiary per year); and

• Domestic transport of passengers and related expenses (except for public transport supplies and transportation from home to work, subject to conditions).

If French VAT has been incorrectly charged, a foreign taxable person can, in principle, obtain a refund (unless a corrected invoice has been issued—a specific procedure applies for a supplier to issue a corrected invoice).

Germany

VAT cannot be recovered on:

• Supplies of goods and services that are not used for business purposes, including gifts; or

• Supplies of services acquired or goods imported connected to certain exempt activities.

Greece

VAT cannot be recovered on:

• Intra-community supplies and exports.

• The supply, import or intra-community acquisition of tobacco products that are destined for use in non-taxable transactions;

• The supply, import or intra-community acquisition of alcoholic beverages that are destined for use in non-taxable transactions;

• Entertainment expenditure, including expenditure on hospitality and amusement;

• The acquisition, leasing or hire, modification, repair or maintenance of passenger vehicles with up to nine seats, pleasure boats except if they are used for the sale, leasing or transportation of persons for a fee;

• Accommodation, food, transport and entertainment expenses incurred for company personnel or representatives;

• The supply of goods and services in connection with real estate located in Greece (in certain circumstances);

• Expenses unrelated to the business activity of the claimant; and

• Incorrect VAT invoicing.

• If the VAT imposed is used for both taxable and exempt transactions, a refund will be granted only in respect of the taxable transactions.

Hungary

VAT cannot be recovered on:

• Use of goods or the services directly for exempt supply of goods and/or services; or

• Use of goods or services for purposes other than taxable business activities, except when the goods or services are entirely used in the interest of achieving taxable objectives.

• Motor fuels and other fuels, goods that are necessary directly for the operation of passenger cars;

• Passenger cars, motorcycles above 125 cc, yachts, sporting and leisure boats;

• Residential buildings (except where a taxable person engaged in the leasing of such buildings opted for taxation of the rental);

• Purchases of goods and services related to the construction and renovation of residential buildings;

• Food and beverages;

• Services received in connection with the operation and maintenance of passenger cars;

• Services of restaurants and other public catering services;

• Entertainment services;

• Taxi services;

• Parking services and highway tolls, with the exception of parking services used and highway tolls paid for a motor vehicle whose gross weight is equal to 3.5 tons or more (including buses); and

• 30% of telephone and mobile phone costs and services related to data submission by internet protocol.

Ireland

VAT cannot be recovered on:

• Petrol except diesel;

• Food, drink, hotels/accommodation or other personal services (as from 1 July 2007, VAT on accommodation is recoverable if certain stringent conditions are satisfied);

• Entertainment expenses; and

• The purchase, hire or importation of passenger motor vehicles (VAT on motor vehicles used for certain purposes is recoverable).

Italy

VAT cannot be recovered on:

• Entertainment expenses.

• It is possible to deduct VAT paid on cars/fuel/maintenance used for the company’s business. The percentage deduction set by Italian VAT legislation is 40% in the case of both private and business use. The deduction is 100% if exclusively used for business purposes.

Latvia

VAT cannot be recovered on:

• The acquisition of unused immovable property and services received in relation to the construction, reconstruction, renovation, restoration or repair of immovable property;

• Goods and services purchased for personal use;

− Rental, maintenance and repair of a passenger car if these services are not used for business purposes. If the vehicle is used for business purposes, VAT can be recovered for the business use (in proportion to that use), but the claimant must provide supporting documentation with the application (e.g. route description in Latvian or English);

− Purchase of fuel, lubricants and spare parts intended for a passenger car if they are not used for business purposes;

− Expenses for recreation activities;

− Catering (including restaurants);

− Health improvement activities; and

− Entertainment.

Lithuania

VAT cannot be recovered on:

• The purchase or lease of a passenger car;

• Transport of passengers by cars (taxi services);

• Entertainment and representation expenses. However, where a taxable person is established in the EU, 75% of the VAT incurred on entertainment and representation expenses (goods and

services) is refundable;

• The supply of goods or services on which VAT does not have to be accounted for;

• Goods supplied to another EU member state if the supply of these goods would have been subject to the zero rate; and

• Goods exported from the EU if the supply of these goods would have been subject to the zero rate.

Luxembourg

VAT cannot be recovered on:

• Supplies on which VAT has been charged by mistake;

• Goods or services that are VAT exempt.

• Goods or services used for private purposes.

Malta

VAT cannot be recovered on:

• Tobacco or tobacco products, except those intended for resale;

• Alcoholic beverages, except those intended for resale or for the supply of catering;

• Works of art, collectors’ items and antiques, except those intended for resale;

• Non-commercial motor vehicles (and goods and services for the purpose of

repairing, maintaining and fuelling non-commercial motor vehicles), except those intended for resale, charter/hire, driving instructions or for the purpose of the carriage of goods or passengers for consideration;

• Vessels or aircraft, except those intended for resale or charter/hire for the purpose of the carriage of goods or passengers for consideration;

• Purchases relating to the provision of hospitality or entertainment, subject to certain exceptions; and

• Purchases relating to the provision of transport or entertainment to employees, subject to certain exceptions.

The Netherlands

VAT cannot be recovered on:

• Supplies of goods and services that are not used for business purposes;

• Supplies acquired or imported in connection with an exempt business activity;

• Food and drinks in restaurants, hotels and cafes;

• Business entertainment in excess of EUR 227 per year per person;

• Employee benefits in-kind in excess of EUR 227 per year per person;

• VAT on costs for the lease or rental of cars (these are limited to an 84% VAT refund – a 16% adjustment is made for private use).

Poland

VAT cannot be recovered on:

• Goods and services, the acquisition of which resulted from a donation or free provision of services;

• Lodging and catering services, with some exceptions;

• The deductibility of input VAT on the purchase (lease) of passenger cars is limited to 60%, but not exceeding PLN 6,000 per car.

• The purchase of engine fuel, diesel oil and gas for passenger cars or other motor vehicles.

Portugal

VAT cannot be recovered on:

• Accommodation, food and drinks (except in the case of specific events);

• Entertainment expenses;

• Purchase, hire, importation and repairs of vehicles, boats, and aircraft (unless these assets are used in specific activities). However, it is possible to recover VAT incurred on commercial cars and trucks;

• Fuel expenses (50% of the VAT on diesel is recoverable and 100% if certain

vehicles are involved);

• Tobacco; and

• Travel expenses, including tolls (except in the case of specific events).

Romania

VAT cannot be recovered on:

• Invoices on which VAT was unlawfully charged;

• Acquisitions that can be VAT exempt;

• Acquisitions made by tour operators that apply the margin scheme in the Member State in which they are established;

• Tobacco products and spirits, except those intended for resale or for supply during the performance of a catering service and;

• Acquisitions of passenger vehicles and fuel (with some exceptions).

Slovak Republic

VAT cannot be recovered on:

• Supplies of goods and services where the application of VAT was not in compliance with the Slovak VAT legislation;

• Supplies of goods that are or may be exempt from VAT (intra-Community supply of

goods, export of goods); or

• Supplies made under the tour operator margin scheme.

Slovenia

VAT cannot be recovered for:

• Yachts and boats for sport and amusement, fuel, lubricants, spare parts and related services;

• Aircraft and fuel, lubricants, spare parts and connected services;

• Cars and motor bikes and fuel, spare parts and related services;

• Accommodation, meals and beverages, unless these costs are incurred by a taxable person in the course of supplies made as part of their economic activity and;

• Entertainment expenses.

Spain

VAT cannot be recovered on:

• Entertainment expenses;

• Food and drinks, tobacco;

• Jewels and precious stones;

• VAT on accommodation, restaurant and travel expenses will be refundable only to the extent the expenses are deductible for personal and corporate income tax purposes.

• VAT incurred on car rentals and fuel will be refundable only if the car is exclusively used for business activities.

• If not exclusively used for business activities, refunds of VAT on car purchases, car importations and car leases will be possible, but only if the car can be considered an investment good for Spanish VAT purposes (ie; it must be used for at least one year within the company), and only for the proportion that the vehicle is used for business purposes (a business use of at least

50% will be required).

Sweden

VAT cannot be recovered on:

• Permanent accommodation;

• Travel services (only applicable to persons supplying travel services);

• Unreasonable entertainment services;

• Purchase of motor vehicles; and

• Car rentals (these are 50% refundable), with certain exceptions for vehicles intended to be sold or leased by a taxable person whose particular economic activity involves the sale or leasing of motor vehicles, vehicles intended to be solely used for passenger transport for hire or reward and vehicles intended to be used for driving license education and transport of the deceased.

United Kingdom

VAT cannot be recovered on:

• Non-business supplies (if a supply covers both business and non-business use VAT can be reclaimed on the business element of the supply);

• Supplies the claimant intends to use for carrying on an economic activity in the

U.K. or that the claimant intends to export from the U.K. (i.e. economic activities, the place of supply of which is the U.K.);

• Business entertainment and hospitality expenses and other expenses on which the recovery of VAT is restricted in the U.K.;

• Goods and services purchased for resale (e.g. as part of package holiday) and which are for the direct benefit of travellers;

• VAT that has been incorrectly invoiced or where VAT has been charged on the dispatch of goods to another Member State, or the export of goods outside the EU;

• The purchase or import of passenger motor vehicles, unless used wholly for business purposes and

• Certain second-hand goods, such as antiques, for which a tax invoice will not be issued.

• Not more than 50% of VAT can be recovered on the lease of passenger motor vehicles not used solely for business purposes.

Please contact us if you have any queries on claiming overseas VAT.