Buying a coffin is standard-rated but hiring a hearse is VAT free.
Tag Archives: marcus-ward
VAT stats 2020-21
HMRC has published UK VAT statistics for 2020 to 2021.
Headlines
The total VAT receipts in the tax year ending March 2021 decreased by 22% (£24.1 billion) from the previous year. There was a downward impact on receipts from the VAT deferral measure which took effect from 20 March 2020.
The Wholesale and Retail sector continued to be the largest contributor to net Home VAT liabilities.
Import VAT receipts was also lower: £4.2 billion (13%) for the year compared to the year ending March 2020. This was mainly due to postponed VAT accounting.
68% of total net home VAT declared was paid by traders with an annual turnover greater than £10 million.
VAT population – income
Incorporated companies accounted for the largest share of the VAT population and annual turnover. Companies accounted for 73% of taxpayers, and 92% of annual taxable turnover in the year ending March 2021. Sole proprietors were the second largest group in terms of VAT population; this group accounted for 16% of VAT traders.
Businesses with an annual turnover greater than £10 million declared £67 billion in net VAT, 68% of the total for the tax year. This group only accounted for 1% of businesses.
52% of businesses declared annual turnover below the VAT registration threshold of £85,000.
VAT population – trade sectors
The wholesale and retail sector was the largest in terms of contribution to VAT liabilities. Net VAT liabilities were £29 billion (30%) of the total for the tax year ending March 2021. The financial and insurance sector has replaced the arts, entertainment and recreation sector and accommodation and food services sector in the top ten trade sectors from the previous year.
The construction sector increased by £650 million (12%), the largest year-on-year change. The only other sectors to see increases were wholesale and retail sectors which increased by £30 million (2%) and professional, scientific, and technical activities which increased by £19 million (2%). Of the top VAT contributing sectors, the financial and insurance sector saw the largest decrease of £560 million (25%).
VAT registrations
New registrations increased from the tax year ending March 2013 to the tax year ending March 2017 where it decreased by 33,666 (8%). Since the tax year ending March 2018, there has been an upward trend in new registrations – 300,000 in the year to 2021.
Deregistrations were below 200,000 a year from the tax year ending March 2014 to the tax year ending March 2016, but increased above that level in the tax year ending March 2017, increasing further in the tax year ending March 2018. This increase in deregistrations was likely to be linked to policy changes in relation to the Flat Rate Scheme.
The freeze in the VAT registration and deregistration thresholds has increased the number of registrations and decreased the number of deregistrations progressively from the year ending March 2019.
Uber to charge VAT
Latest from the courts
Further to my article on the Supreme Court case, Uber went to the High Court seeking to challenge this decision, but the High Court has now upheld it.
This means it is very likely that Uber will be required to charge VAT on its supplies as the court found that taxi firms make contracts directly with their customers because Uber drivers should be treated as workers not contractors. This means that Uber make to supply of taxi services to the fare and not the individual drivers.
The High Court agreed with the Supreme Court and stated that: “… in order to operate lawfully under the Private Hire Vehicles (London) Act 1998 a licensed operator who accepts a booking from a passenger is required to enter as principal into a contractual obligation with the passenger to provide the journey which is the subject of the booking.”
A spokesperson for Uber said: “Every private hire operator in London will be impacted by this decision, and should comply with the verdict in full.”
Although not a VAT case itself, this decision is the latest in a long list of VAT agent/principal cases, the most important being:
It is crucial that businesses review their position if there is any doubt at all whether agent status applies to their business model.
VAT: HMRC – Customs changes from 1 January and 1 July 2022
Further to my article on new procedures, HMRC has issued a reminder of customs changes that come into effect on 1 January 2022.
It is now less than a month until full controls are introduced.
The Changes
- Customs declarations
Businesses will no longer be able to delay making import customs declarations under the Staged Customs Controls Most importers will have to make declarations and pay relevant tariffs at the point of import.
- Border controls
Ports and other border locations will be required to control goods moving Great Britain and the EU. This means that unless goods have a valid declaration and have received customs clearance, they will not be able to be released into circulation, and in most cases will not be able to leave the port. From 1 January 2022, goods may be directed to an Inland Border Facility for documentary or physical checks if these checks cannot be done at the border.
- Rules of origin for imports and exports
The UK’s deal called the Trade and Cooperation Agreement (TCA), means that the goods imported or exported may benefit from a reduced rate of Customs Duty (tariff preference). To use this a business will need proof that goods which are:
. imported from the EU originate there
. exported to the EU originate in the UK
- Commodity codes
Commodity codes are used worldwide to classify goods that are imported and exported. They are standardised up to six digits and reviewed by the World Customs Organisation every five years. Following the end of the latest review, the UK codes will be changing on 1 January 2022. HMRC guidance is available on finding commodity codes for imports into or exports out of the UK which includes information on using the ‘Trade Tariff Tool’ to find the correct commodity codes.
- Postponed VAT Accounting
A VAT registered importer is able to continue to use Postponed VAT Accounting (PVA) on all customs declarations that are liable to import VAT (including supplementary declarations).
Further changes from 1 July 2022
The following changes will be introduced from July 2022:
- requirements for full safety and security declarations for all imports
- new requirements for Export Health Certificates
- requirements for Phytosanitary Certificates
- physical checks on sanitary and phytosanitary goods at Border Control Posts
Businesses must be prepared for these changes and I recommend that an experienced representative is used.
VAT: Roof panels are not insulation. The Greenspace case
Latest from the courts
In the Upper Tribunal (UT) case of Greenspace Limited the issue was whether insulated roof panels were “energy-saving materials” per VAT Act 1994, sect 29A, Schedule 7A, group 2, items 1 and 2 and thus liable at the reduced rate of 5%. Or rather at the standard rate of 20% on the basis that they were a supply of a roof itself.
Background
The appellant supplied and installed roof panels for conservatories which comprised a layer of close-cell extruded polystyrene foam (Styrofoam) around 71mm thick. The Styrofoam was covered with a thin aluminium layer and a protective powder coating which are together around 2mm thick. The supplies were made to residential customers and the panels were fitted onto their pre-existing conservatory roofs. The Panels were slotted into place on the existing roof structure and Greenspace did not replace its customers’ existing roof framework when doing this; the struts and glazing bars that supported the previous glass or polycarbonate panels were left in place. Consequently, the Panels were not self-supporting and could only be used if the customer already had an existing conservatory roof structure.
The decision
The First-tier Tribunal (FTT) decided in 2020 that the panels were not “insulation for a roof” but were a new roof in their own right, and that the appellant’s supplies did not therefore qualify for the reduced rate of VAT (unlike insulation that could be separately attached to a roof, the panels actually formed the roof).
The UT dismissed the new appeal and found that the FTT had not been obliged to compare the roof after Greenspace had installed its panels to the original roof. The frame that was retained could not itself be described as a roof, and the provision of the Thermotec panels which made the conservatory weatherproof as well as insulating it could properly be categorised as the provision of a new roof.
One of Greenspace’s grounds of appeal was that the FTT decision was vitiated by the assumption that because the panels took the form of roof coverings, they were necessarily incapable of constituting “insulation for … roofs”. The appellant argued that as this was a flawed assumption (that Greenspace’s supplies “must” be treated as something more than insulation) the decision should be set aside. This contention was rejected by the UT judge.
Commentary
A fine distinction is often required to be made to establish the correct VAT treatment of a supply. In this case a degree of semantics was required to determine whether the panels were energy-saving materials (even when they certainly saved energy). On such small things turned the assessment of £2.6 million here. It always pays to double check VAT treatments rather than making assumptions.
A VAT Did you know?
Frozen foods are zero-rated, but ice cream, frozen yoghurt, ice lollies and sorbets are subject to standard rate VAT (although they are frozen).
VAT: Trading with the EU. Changes from 1 January 2022
From 1 January 2022 the rules for selling to, and buying from, the EU will change.
HMRC have issued information about these changes.
Broadly, from 1 January 2022, businesses will no longer be able to delay making import customs declarations under the Staged Customs Controls rules that have applied during 2021. Most businesses will have to make declarations and pay relevant tariffs at the point of import. However, see details of Postponed Accounting.
Please also see a publication issued by the Cabinet Office which includes a Policy Paper on The Border Operating Model.
VAT: Input tax recovery. The Mpala Mufwankolo case
Latest from the courts
In the First Tier Tribunal (FTT) case of Mr Mufwankolo the dispute was whether the appellant was able to recover VAT charged by the landlord of the property from which he ran his business – a licenced retail outlet on Tottenham High Road.
Background
The landlord had opted to tax the commercial property and charged VAT on the rent. The appellant was a sole proprietor; however, the lease was in the name of Mr Mufwankolo’s wife, and the rent demands showed her name and not that of the sole proprietor. It was contended by the appellant, but not evidenced, that the lease had originally been in both his and his wife’s names, despite his wife being the sole signatory.
The issues
Could the appellant recover input tax?
- Did the business receive the supply?
- Was there appropriate evidence?
It was clear that the business operated from the relevant property and consequently, in normal circumstances, the rent would be a genuine cost component of the business.
The Decision
The FTT found that there was no entitlement to an input tax claim and the appeal was dismissed. The lease was solely in the wife’s name and the business was the applicant as a sole proprietor. (There was an obvious potential for a partnership and an argument that a partnership was originally intended was advanced. The status of registration was challenged in 2003, but, crucially, not pursued).
It was possible for the property to be sub-let by the wife to the husband, however, this did not affect the VAT treatment as matters stood. Additionally, there was no evidence that the appellant actually paid any of the rent, as this was done by the tenant. There were no VAT invoices addressed to the sole proprietor.
Given the facts, there was no supply to the appellant, so there was no input tax to claim, and the issue of acceptable evidence fell away.
It was a certainty that the appeal could not succeed.
Commentary
There were a number of ways that this VAT cost could have easily been avoided had a little thought been given to the VAT arrangements. An oversight that created an avoidable tax hit.
A helpful guide to input tax considerations here: Care with input tax claims.
Legislation
The VAT Act 1994 Section 3 – Taxable person
The VAT Act 1994 Section 4 – Taxable supply
The VAT Act 1994 Section 24 (1) – Input tax
The VAT Act 1994 Section 24 (6) – Input tax claim evidence
VAT: Valuation
Further to my article on apportionment valuation and case review here and Transfer Pricing valuation I thought it useful to consider HMRC’s internal guidance on its approach to valuation.
Sometimes a single monetary consideration may represent payment for two or more supplies at different VAT rates. In such cases, a business is required to allocate a “fair proportion” of the total payment to each of the supplies. This requirement is set out at in The VAT Act 1994, Section 19(4).
“Where a supply of any goods or services is not the only matter to which a consideration in money relates, the supply shall be deemed to be for such part of the consideration as is properly attributable to it.”
Although this section requires an apportionment of the consideration to be performed, it does not prescribe the methods by which this is to be achieved. The most common methods are based upon the costs incurred in making the supplies or the usual selling prices of the supplies.
Examples of methods that have been found to be of general application are contained in VAT Notice 700 para 8. A business is not obliged to adopt any of these suggested methods, and HMRC may accept alternative proposals provided that they achieve a fair and reasonable result that can be supported by valid calculation.
Some sectors have special methods called margin schemes to determine apportionment of the monetary consideration. Details of these found in their notices and guidance. The schemes include:
- Tour Operators’ Margin Scheme Notice 709/5 (HMRC website)
- Second Hand Car Margin Scheme Notice 718/1 (HMRC website)
- VAT Margin and Global Accounting (second hand goods, works of art, antiques and collectors’ items) Notice 718 (HMRC website)
Basics
Before it is possible to perform an apportionment calculation, there are four basic questions that need to be addressed to determine whether an apportionment is appropriate and if so, what supplies it relates to.
- Is there more than one supply?
- Is there a single consideration?
- Can any part of the payment be treated as outside the scope of VAT?
- What are the liabilities of the supplies in question?
The issue of whether there is a single or multiple supply has created problems from the outset of the tax. The volume of case law illustrates that each decision is based on the facts of each case and there cannot be a one-size fits all approach to this issue. The most important and recent cases are here:
Metropolitan International Schools
General Healthcare Group Limited
VAT: HMRC to end making payable orders to NETPs
HMRC will stop issuing payable orders to overseas non-established taxpayers (NETP – taxpayers who are registered for UK VAT but do not have a business address here). The system automatically issued a payable order if a NETP was due a repayment.
Background
HMRC has received notifications and complaints from taxpayers advising that they can no longer cash their payable orders in their country or their bank. The impact of Brexit and COVID19 has seen an increase in banks/countries no longer accepting payable orders. Consequently, HMRC were sending repayments to NETPs with the knowledge they may not be able to cash them.
New Gform
To address this issue HMRC has created a Gform that will enable NETPs to send their bank account information in order that the issue of a payable order can be avoided and a Clearing House Automated Payment System (CHAPS) payment made instead.
Access
HMRC systems do not currently have CHAPS functionality or the ability to store overseas bank information. However, once a NETP has completed the form, which is accessed via the Government Gateway HMRC will set a lock on the taxpayer’s record to prevent the payable order being automatically issued. NETPs will then receive their repayments directly into their bank account without the need to visit their bank to cash a payable order.
Information required
Information requested on the Gform will include:
- VAT registration number
- address
- email address
- bank account information
- payable order information if necessary