The European Union (EU) is a collective term. It does not, strictly speaking, have a legal personality.
With reference to Community legislation it is correct to refer to the European Community (EC).
Mind you, my Father has only just stopped calling it the Common Market……..
One of the most common queries regarding VAT is “my client passes on charges incurred on behalf of his customer, does he add VAT?” In other words, does the payment qualify as a disbursement?
Does it matter if the original supply has VAT on it?
Yes. Whether a payment is a disbursement is only a practical issue if the charge involved is initially VAT free since, if it were VATable, there would be no benefit to the final customer in passing the charge on “in the same state”. The points below assume that the charge in question is VAT free, eg; statutory fees (land registry, stamp duty, search fees, MOTs etc) insurance, financial products etc although benefits may also be obtained if the original supply is reduced rated.
So only if a supply is a disbursement can I pass it on in the “same state; ie; VAT free?
Yes
So when can I pass on a payment VAT free?
A disbursement is passed on without any alteration (eg; not marked up or changed in any way) and the supply must be to the final customer by the original provider. If the supply is VAT free then the recovery of the costs is also VAT free. The passing on of the payment from the final customer to the supplier is done as agent. Therefore, in these circumstances, a supplier may be acting as principal for part of a supply, and agent for another part. The disbursement should not appear on the “agent’s” VAT return.
When do I have to add VAT onto a supply which is originally VAT free?
When the onward supply is not a disbursement.
A distinction must be drawn between a necessary cost component of a supplier making a supply and a disbursement. An example is zero-rated travel. A supplier may incur a train fare in providing his service, but that is a cost component for him and not a disbursement, so VAT would be added to any onward charge. It is clear that the supplier is not actually supplying train travel to his customer, but is consuming the cost in providing his overall VATable service.
What are the rules for treating a payment as a disbursement?
The following criteria must be met by a supplier to establish whether it qualifies as a disbursement:
Please contact us if you have any queries on this matter. Sometimes the matter is less than straightforward and getting it wrong can be very expensive for a business. If you have been charged VAT on what you believe to be a VAT free disbursement, it may also be worth challenging your supplier.
For full details and diagrams please see here
From Royal Assent of Finance Bill 2014 (expected within the next week) HMRC has a new weapon which challenges a taxpayer’s basic right to have its case heard by a Court.
This is by the introduction of “Follower Notices”. The new power allows HMRC to order one taxpayer to settle their dispute when, in HMRC’s view, a decision in another case is relevant to the issues in the first taxpayer’s case. Since taxpayer’s circumstances are unlikely to be identical to another’s, the question of which decisions are relevant involves difficult decisions on issues of interpretation and questions of fact. These are points that ought to be considered by the Court, not unilaterally by one of the parties to the litigation.
A Follower Notice gives the taxpayer 90 days to concede its dispute and pay HMRC’s estimate of the tax due. The taxpayer has only limited rights to challenge the notice, and even then any such challenge is considered by HMRC and not the Court.
If the taxpayer does not concede following HMRC’s issue of a Follower Notice, additional penalties are levied. These penalties not only significantly increase the amount which the taxpayer has at stake in the dispute but must be challenged separately.
It is clear that the changes intend to reduce the backlog of similar disputes. However, these new rules are completely one-sided and has created an environment for yet further litigation and acrimony.
Please contact Marcus if you would like to discuss this further.
In the recent FTT case of Zipvit the court considered retrospective claims by businesses in cases where Royal Mail (and Parcelforce) had treated individually negotiated supplies of postage etc as exempt. In the previous ECJ case of TNT it was ruled that these services should have been standard rated. The claims (said to be over £1billion in total stood behind Zipvit) were made on the basis that recipients of these services could reclaim the VAT as input tax that should properly have been charged by the Royal Mail.
The three salient points where:
1. Where the supplies taxable? – On this point the court agreed with the taxpayer, the UK legislation must be read with the same restrictions as in the relevant EC Directive.
2. Was VAT due from, or paid by, the appellant? – Curiously, the judge did not agree with either party and stated that both had been labouring under a misapprehension. No further submissions were requested however, and on this point the appeal failed.
3. Lack of VAT invoice – Although HMRC have the discretion to accept alternative evidence to support an input tax claim, it was not obliged to. The FTT supported HMRC’s refusal and noted that there would, in any event, be a windfall for the applicant. The appeal was dismissed.
The judge commented that it was likely that this case would be appealed to a higher court.
If you have an appeal stood behind Zipvit, or have previously received exempt supplies from Royal Mail or Parcelforce in respect of individually negotiated contracts – please contact us for further information.
If you own land and install solar panels (which we shall use as an example, although the rules apply equally to any way of generating renewable power), it is relatively straightforward; as you are either consuming the power, or are the provider supplying electricity back to the National Grid.
Where the position may get slightly more complicated is where a solar panel business buy the ‘space’ to install energy producing equipment from someone else. Many businesses are renting the roof space from others upon which to install the solar panels. The businesses may pay the roof owners with ‘free’ electricity in return for renting out this space. Supply of electricity to the owners of the site
For a solar panel business leasing a site, the supply of electricity to the owners of that site is deemed to be a supply of goods.
The business installing the solar panels is the taxable person (if they are, or should be registered for VAT) and they are supplying the owners of the site with a ‘cheap’ supply of electricity in the course of the furtherance of their business.
The supply of electricity for domestic use is a reduced-rate supply under Group 1 of Schedule 7A VATA 1994. The reduced rate of VAT is 5%. If the site owner is using the electricity for domestic purposes then the reduced rate of 5% should apply. If the electricity is being used for business purposes then the supply becomes standard-rated at 20%. However, if there is mixed use, then so long as more than 60% of the use is domestic then the whole supply will be treated as ‘qualifying use’ ie; domestic, and the 5% will apply to the entire amount. Generally speaking, VAT charged at 5% is fully or partly irrecoverable by the recipient.
So in this scenario, the land owner is providing something in exchange for this electricity use; the land owner is giving the solar panel business the use of his land. Therefore this is ‘consideration’ for a service; even if it is ‘non-monetary’ consideration.
This means that the solar panel business will have to calculate a value for this consideration and then charge 5% (or 20%) VAT as necessary, on this amount if they are VAT registered.
The value placed on this non-monetary consideration is not usually a concern for the land owner making the supplies of this land, as this land supply is itself exempt from VAT.
The supply of the land
This is a supply of land by the owner of the site. Unless the land has been ‘opted to tax’ (OTT) then this supply will be exempt from VAT. If the land has been OTT by the landowner – the parties will need to look at the valuation of the (non-monetary) consideration as this will be subject to VAT at 20%. If there is no OTT and the supply is exempt; for a non-VAT registered person, this will have no impact, and this income will not be included in taxable supplies which count towards the VAT registration threshold. If a VAT registered entity makes exempt supplies of land, consideration must be given to his partial exemption position.
VAT consequences of the Feed-In Tariff
In recognition of the higher cost of producing electricity in this manner, people participating in the Feed in Tariff scheme will receive payment under a “generation tariff”. This payment is not consideration for any supply and it is therefore outside the scope of VAT.
Supply of electricity to the electricity board
In addition to the Feed-In Tariff there is the additional income which you may receive from the electricity board ie; the “Export Tariff”. These payments are “consideration for supplies of electricity by people participating in the Feed in Tariff scheme to the electricity company, where they are made by taxable persons in the course of their business”. The export tariff is not outside the scope of VAT and therefore it is a supply of electricity made in the course of the furtherance of your business to the electricity supplier. It will attract standard rated VAT as it is not the supply for domestic use.
Update
A recent Court of Justice of the European Union (CJEU – the EU’s highest court) case has ruled in favour of the taxpayer after he argued that solar panels installed on his house constituted a business for VAT purposes. This is good news for any people who supply any energy into the grid and are paid a feed-in tariff (FiT) for doing so.
It means that anyone receiving the FiT can VAT register and reclaim (at least some) VAT incurred on the purchase and installation of solar panels plus input tax incurred on any other goods and services relating to the panels.
The supply and installation of “energy saving materials”, including solar panels, is currently subject to a reduced VAT rate of 5% in the UK. The European Commission is currently challenging this policy, arguing that the tax incentive goes beyond the scope of the law. The VAT Directive only allows member states to apply reduced VAT rates to a limited number of goods and services, which are specified in an annex to the directive. So the cost of buying and installing solar panels may increase in the future.
It is anticipated that HMRC will need to deal with “thousands” of extra registration applications resulting in significant additional VAT repayments.
We all know that the VAT rules throw up some oddities which are mainly the result of new products, technology and the way people live their lives now. I do think that the law needs a significant, consistent overhaul rather than a piecemeal approach, but let’s just consider some of the weird results the present system throws up. This is a MOSS* for all tabloid journalists….
* Mini One-Stop Shop
An odd rule applies to gingerbread men. No VAT is charged if the figure has two chocolate spots for its eyes, but any chocolate-based additions, such as buttons or a belt, mean VAT is payable.
The sale of a horse is standard rated. However, the sale of a dead one (for horse meat) is zero rated. I wouldn’t really want to dwell on the VAT planning aspects of this…
A downloaded purchase of the bible is standard rated while “saucy” top shelf magazines are VAT free.
So that’s what it’s called….. From HMRC guidance – “For the purposes of establishing the place of supply of services, stallion nominations (The right to nominate a mare to be covered by a stallion in one breeding season) and the covering of mares is treated as ‘work carried out on goods’”.
Food for wild birds is zero rated while food for caged birds is at 20%.
Well, what do you know?! Jaffa cakes are cakes, Pringles are crisps and now Lucozade Sport is a beverage. That’s what the Upper Tribunal has just ruled, so the drink is now subject to VAT. So now we know.
(And since this is VAT, we have to mention Jaffa cakes – again!) It was ruled as a fact that cakes go hard when stale whereas biscuits go soft.
Food that is too hot to eat can be classed as cold food for VAT purposes.
Orange juice is zero rated. Lemon juice is zero rated. Mix them, and you have a standard rated product.
Peanuts in shells are zero rated, salted peanuts are standard rated.
If your shop is burgled, it’s best to let the robbers take your stock. Goods lost to theft are not subject to VAT, but if cash (which customers have paid for goods) is taken from the till a VATable supply has still been made and VAT is due on it.
The sales of kangaroos are standard-rated but kangaroo steaks are zero-rated.
Rabbits are zero-rated, even if sold as pets. Sales of pets are standard rated.
The sales of counterfeit (illegal) goods are subject to 20% VAT, but the sale of counterfeit banknotes are not.
There was a planning scheme called the golden toothbrush, but it didn’t matter what colour the toothbrush was.
Ferret food has recently been ruled to be subject to 20% when it was VAT free from 1973.
Caviar is deemed a necessity in terms of VAT, while orange squash is a luxury item.
Buying a coffin is standard-rated but hiring a hearse is VAT free.
Children’s clothing with rabbit and gazelle fur (and even dog skin) is zero-rated but if it has Tibetan goat fur it is subject to VAT.
Tuition provided by a sole practitioner is exempt, but if the tutor incorporates then their supplies become standard-rated.
In the Spearmint Rhino case it was ruled that there is no VAT on lap dances.
Under some VAT schemes, zero rated and exempt supplies are subject to VAT (and even some which are “Outside the scope of UK VAT”).
Dog food for a poodle is subject to VAT but exactly the same food can be zero rated if it is for a Labrador.
The CoA has just released its judgement in the Subway hot food case. It concerns the liability of toasted sandwiches (known as Subs) with a hot filling; meatball marinara.
This is a lead case for a large number of claims submitted on the basis that VAT has been over declared on certain supplies of hot takeaway food, that are (it was argued) essentially the same as supplies that have obtained zero rating. The Court has dismissed the taxpayer’s appeal.
If you have any “hot food” claims lodged – please contact us for further information.
Reports that a recently issued EC consultation document is proposing to harmonise VAT rates across Europe thus removing the UK’s zero rate have stirred up something of a hornet’s nest. Clearly, in this delicate (although slowly improving) climate for house builders an additional 20% cost could damage the market irrevocably adding £50,000 to the cost of a £250,000 house. Commentators in the trade have announced that it would be a disaster for new home buyers, the construction sector, and the UK economy in general.
However, are these reports in the national press all that they seem? Or is this another tabloid attack on the EC? Such consultation documents are issued regularly and they consider many aspects of VAT across the EC. An EC spokesman, when questioned about this issue, stated “the consultation was not pre-empting a move and considering VAT ‘in general’” Additionally, a spokesman for the Treasury announced “’The UK government has no intention of agreeing to such a proposal, and there is no consultation to change the zero tax rate”. Historically, UK authorities have fought doggedly to retain all of the UK’s zero rates because once they are removed, it is not possible under EC legislation, to reinstate them. The UK is unique in applying the zero rate to items such as food, new houses, books and newspapers and while it is not possible to widen or extend the scope of the zero rating, the UK is permitted, for the time being, to retain those which are in place. So, is there any truth in these “rumours”? It appears that the report was published by the Daily Mail, which in turn appears to have obtained the story from The Daily Express. Although there is a continuing will to harmonise VAT across the EC, I would be very surprised indeed if the UK was to be forced to standard rate new house builds. My personal view is that there appears to be a little mischief making here and the house building industry has enough to worry about rather than this imposed 20% price hike.
Please see here for our land and property services
Help!
Supplies relating to property may be, or have been; 20%, 17.5%, 15.%, 5%, zero-rated, exempt, or outside the scope of VAT – all impacting, in different ways, upon the VAT position of a supplier and customer. In addition, the law permits certain exempt supplies to be changed to 20% without the agreement of the customer. As soon as a supplier is provided with a choice, there is a chance of making the wrong one! Even very slight differences in circumstances may result in a different and potentially unexpected VAT outcome, and it is an unfortunate fact of business life that VAT cannot be ignored.
Why is VAT important?
The fact that the rules are complex, ever-changing, and the amounts involved in property transactions are usually high means that there is an increased risk of making errors. These often result in large penalties and interest payments plus unwanted attentions from the VAT man. Uncertainty regarding VAT may affect budgets and an unforeseen VAT bill (and additional SDLT) may risk the profitability of a venture.
Problem areas
Certain transactions tend to create more VAT issues than others. These include; whether a property sale can qualify as a VAT free Transfer Of a Going Concern, supplies involving Listed property and conversions of properties from commercial to residential use, whether to opt to a commercial property, the recovery of VAT charged on a property purchase, supplies between landlord and tenants, the Capital Goods Scheme, HMRC anti-avoidance rules and even seemingly straightforward VAT registration. Additionally, the VAT treatment of building services throws up its own set of VAT complications.
VAT Planning
The usual adage is “right tax, right time”. This, more often than not, means considering the VAT treatment of a transaction well in advance of that transaction taking place. Unfortunately, with VAT there is usually very little planning that can be done after the event. For peace of mind a consultation with me can steer you through the complexities and, if there are issues, to minimise the impact of VAT on a project. Assistance of a VAT adviser is usually crucial if there are any disputes with VAT inspectors.
For more information, please see our Land & Property services
Books are zero rated for VAT purposes, but only (currently) if they are of the traditional dead tree variety. The zero rating does not extend to e-books which are standard rated for VAT. There has been a long standing argument that similar content should not be taxed at different rates solely depending on the method of delivery. This argument is about to be tested in the courts. The UK is not permitted by the EC to extend its current zero rating for printed matter, however, it is expected that the contention in this case will be that the inclusion of new products will not extend the zero rating, but rather the development of technology has created a supply that should be covered by the existing zero rating legislation.
If it is accepted by the courts that all types of book should attract the same rate of VAT, it may mean that the rate will be equalised upwards. So, by the end of the year we could be looking at VAT of 5% being added to books, newspapers and other printed matter which was hitherto VAT free – A “tax on learning” as previous protests had it when there was a threat to tax free books.