Tag Archives: vat-planning

VAT – Residential Property Triggerpoints

By Marcus Ward 17 February 2016

VAT and property transactions are uneasy bedfellows at the best of times. Getting the tax wrong, or failing to consider it at all can result in a loss of income of 20% on a project, or forgoing all input tax incurred on a development. Even a simple matter of timing can affect a transaction to a seller’s detriment. Here I take a brief look at issues that can impact residential property transactions. It is important to recognise when VAT may affect a project so I hope that some of these triggerpoints may prove useful.

General points

The following are very general points on residential properties. No two cases are the same, so we strongly recommend that specific advice is obtained.

Refurbishing “old” residential properties

Broadly speaking, the VAT incurred on such work is not reclaimable as the end use of the property will be exempt (either sale or rent). There is no way round this as it is not possible to opt to tax residential dwellings. It may be possible to use the partial exemption de minimis limits if there are any other business activities in the same VAT registration. If this is the only activity of a business, it will not even be permitted to register for VAT. There are special rules if the number of dwellings change as a result of the work (see below).

New residential builds

The first sale (or the grant of a long lease 21 years plus) of a newly constructed dwelling by “the person constructing” is zero rated. This means that any VAT incurred on the construction is recoverable. Care should be taken if the new dwelling is let on a short term basis rather than/before being sold as this will materially affect input tax recovery. Advice should always be taken before such a decision is made as there is planning available to avoid such an outcome. VAT incurred on professional and legal costs of the development may also be recovered such as; architects, solicitors, advisers, agents etc. VAT registration is necessary in these cases and our advice is to VAT register at the earliest stage possible.

The construction of new dwellings is zero rated, along with any building materials supplied by the contractor carrying out the work. The zero rating also extends to sub-contractors. It is not necessary for a certificate to be provided in order to zero rate such building works.

Conversions

There are special rules for refurbishments which create a different number of dwellings (eg; dividing up a single house into flats, or changing the total number of flats in a block, or making one dwelling by amalgamating flats). Generally, it is possible for contractors to invoice for their building work at the reduced rate of 5%. This rate may also apply to conversions. A conversion is defined as work undertaken on a non-residential property, such as a barn, office or church, into one or more self-contained dwellings. Once converted the sale of the residential property will be zero rated and all of the input tax incurred on associated costs is recoverable (similar to a new build).

Renovation of empty residential premises

Reduced rating at 5% is also available for the renovation or alteration of empty residential premises. Such a premises is one that has not been lived in during the two years immediately before the work starts. HMRC will insist on documentary evidence that the property has been empty for that time.

Purchase of a commercial property intended for conversion

If it is intended to convert a commercial property into residential use and the vendor indicates that (s)he will charge VAT (as a result of the option to tax having been exercised) it is possible for the purchaser to disapply the option to tax by the issue of a certain document; form VAT 1614D. This means that the sale will become exempt. Advice should always be sought on this issue by parties on each side of the transaction as it very often creates difficulties and significant VAT and other costs (mainly for the vendor).

Mixed developments

If what is being constructed is a building that is only in part a zero-rated dwelling, a contractor can only zero-rate its work for the qualifying parts. For example, if a building containing a shop with a flat above is constructed, only the construction of the flat can be zero-rated. An apportionment must be made for common areas such as foundations and roof etc. The sale of the residential element when complete is zero rated and the sale of the commercial part will be standard rated if under three years since completion. If the commercial part is over three years old at the date of sale, or is rented rather than sold, the supply will be exempt with the option to tax available – details here. If an exempt supply is made, the recovery of input tax incurred on the development will be compromised and it is important that this recognised and planning put in place to avoid this outcome.

DIY building projects

There is a specific scheme for DIY Housebuilders to recover input tax incurred on the construction of a dwelling for the constructor to live in personally. Details here https://www.marcusward.co/?s=diy

Sale of an incomplete residential development

There are two possible routes to relief if a project is sold before dwellings have been completed (either new build or conversion). This can often be a complex area, however, there is some zero rating relief which may apply, and also it may be possible to apply TOGC (Transfer Of a Going Concern) treatment to the sale. In both cases, it is likely that input tax previously claimed by the developer should not be jeopardised.

Overview

There are VAT complications for the following types of transactions/developments and issues:

work on listed properties
definition of a dwelling
arrangements where consortiums or syndicates are used/profit share
transactions in connection with nursing or children’s homes or similar
“granny flats” in the garden of existing houses
work on charitable buildings/ for charities
converting specific commercial property into residential property – particularly ex-pubs
sales to Housing Associations
sales of “substantially reconstructed protected buildings”
buying VATable buildings
date of completion – zero rating cut off
supplies by members of VAT groups
definition of building materials
input tax on white goods and similar
alterations for people with disabilities
garages with dwellings
land supplied with a property
buying property with existing, continuing leases
beneficial owner versus legal owner supplies
change of intention (buying land/property with the intention of using it for one purpose, but the intention changes after purchase)
where professional/architect’s fees are incurred
planning gains
own use of a property
mobile homes
reverse premiums/surrenders/reverse surrenders re; leases
holiday lets
hotels
business use by purchaser/tenant
contract stage of a property purchase where VAT is potentially chargeable by vendor
timing of supplies
work re; schools, churches, village halls, hospitals, or any other “unusual” structures

This list is not exhaustive, but I hope it gives a broad idea of where VAT needs to be considered “before the event”. As always, I am available to assist.

VAT – Latest from the courts – Holding companies management charges. Norseman Gold plc

By Marcus Ward 15 February 2016

The Norseman Gold plc case considered whether a holding company could recover input tax incurred on certain costs. This is turn depended on whether the holding company was making taxable supplies. Specifically; management charges to non VAT-grouped subsidiary companies.

The Upper Tribunal has recently released its decision. It upheld the First-tier Tribunal’s decision which confirmed that, although the management services in this case could have been considered as economic activities for VAT purposes, there was insufficient evidence to demonstrate that Norseman was making, or intended to make, taxable supplies when the input tax was reclaimed. The UT found that “…vague and general intention that payment would be made …” for management services was insufficient to show a connection between the VAT incurred and taxable supplies. Consequently, HMRC’s assessments to recover the relevant input tax were upheld.

Importance

This case emphasises the importance of holding companies having appropriate processes and ensuring that proper documentation is in place to evidence, not only the intention to make taxable supplies of management charges, but that those charges were actually made to subsidiaries. It is also important to ensure that actual management of the subsidiaries take place, and a record of this management is retained. Simply making a charge to subsidiaries is insufficient if no services are actually supplied as this will not constitute an economic activity.

Often significant costs can be incurred by a holding company in cases such as acquisitions and restructuring. It is important that these costs are incurred by, and invoiced to the appropriate entity in order for the VAT on them to be recovered. Consideration must be given to how the input tax is recovered before it is incurred and the appropriate structure put in place.

Please contact me should you require further information on this point or would like to discuss the matter further.

VAT Latest from the courts; can HMRC impose a higher value on a supply?

By Marcus Ward 9 February 2016

VAT Latest from the courts – Whether Open Market Value applies

HMRC has the power to direct that Open Market Value (OMV) is applied to the value of certain supplies between connected parties – VAT Act 1994 Schedule 6, paragraph 1. This power is used to avoid situations where one party is unable to recover all of the input tax incurred on purchases. Usually, the direction is used when one party purchase goods and services at OMV, recovers full input tax and then supplies these goods and services to a connected party at a lower price, thus reducing the amount of input tax lost by the recipient party.

HMRC deemed this to be the position in Temple Retail Limited and Temple Finance Limited (TC04840) where “TRL” purchased goods and services and resupplied them to “TFL”. TFL was a company that was unable to recover all of its input tax as a result of partial exemption (it made supplies of exempt credit as it sold goods to consumers via HP agreements). HMRC was concerned that TRL and TFL had an opportunity to improve their aggregate input tax recovery by charging fees for certain services below OMV and consequently issued an OMV direction.

HMRC later issued TRL with assessments for under-declared output tax for not complying with the direction and this, inter alia, was the subject of the appeal by the taxpayer.

The FT Tribunal was satisfied that the majority of TRL’s fees charged to TFL were charged at OMV. However, The Tribunal decided that advertising services were not calculated at OMV and held that these services should be recalculated by reference to a method which it specified.

The case is a useful reminder of HMRC’s powers to substitute a stated value of a supply with what it believes to be OMV between connected parties. Business which are connected and provide exempt services need to be aware of the position and ensure that relevant supplies do not fall foul of the OMV direction rules. Care should be taken to document the values used and the reasons why they reflect the economic reality of the position in order to avoid a challenge from HMRC. OMV is often an area that creates differences of opinion and therefore disputes. Any structures which set out to deliberately reduce the value of supplies are likely to result in more serious actions from HMRC.

A definition of what constitutes connected parties is found here

If the case sets off any warning bells, please contact us as soon as possible.

VAT – Overseas Holiday Lets; a warning

By Marcus Ward 8 February 2016

It is important to understand the VAT consequences of owning property overseas. It may not be commonly known that the UK has the highest VAT threshold in the EC. This means that for many ‘sideline’ businesses such as; the rental of second or holiday properties in the UK, the owners, whether they are; individuals, businesses, or pension schemes, only have to consider VAT if income in relation to the property exceeds £82,000 pa. and this is only likely if a number of properties are owned.

However, other EC Member States have nil thresholds for foreign entrepreneurs meaning that if any rental income is received, VAT registration may be compulsory. Consequently, a property owner that rents out a property abroad will probably have a liability to register for VAT there. Failure to comply with the domestic legislation of the relevant Member State means; payment of back VAT and interest and fines being levied. It is also not a good idea to provoke the interest of overseas tax authorities. VAT registration however, does mean that a property owner can recover input tax on expenditure in connection with the property, eg; agent’s fees, repair and maintenance and other professional costs. Such claims may be restricted if the home is used for own use.

It should be noted that, unlike other types of rental of homes, holiday lettings are always standard-rated. Also, the letting of holiday homes is always treated as a business activity unless lettings are very infrequent. If lettings are a one-off or rare, evidence should be retained to evidence this fact. There is no set number of times a property can be let before it is treated as a business, and the interpretation may differ between different Member States. Details of taxable supplies and being in business here

Given that every EC Member State has differing rules to the UK, it is crucial to check all the consequences of letting property overseas.

A final word of warning; I quite often hear the comment “I’m not going to bother – how will they ever find out?”

If an overseas property owner based in the UK is in competition with local letting businesses, those businesses generally do not have any compulsion in notifying the authorities. In addition, I have heard of authorities carrying out very simple initiatives to see if owners are VAT registered. In many resorts, income from tourism is vital and this is a very important revenue stream for them so it is well policed.

Please contact us for further details. We have experience in dealing with overseas VAT matters on our clients’ behalf.

Monthly VAT Round-Up

By Marcus Ward 29 January 2016

We produce a free monthly email update on all VAT things great and small. It covers events for the last month and flags up significant changes as a result of changes to legislation, HMRC announcements and case law. It also looks at specific VAT issues that may affect a business.

Please contact us you would like to subscribe.

marcus.ward@consultant.com

07748 117935

Twitter: @mw_vat

Linked In; Marcus Ward

Linked In Group – Marcus Ward Consultancy VAT

VAT – Zero rating of charitable building; latest from the courts

By Marcus Ward 25 January 2016

A recent case at the Upper Tribunal (UT): Wakefield College here considered whether certain use of the property disqualified it from zero rating.

Background

In order to qualify for zero rating a building it has to be used for “relevant charitable purpose”

This means that it is used otherwise than in the course or furtherance of a business. In broad terms, where a charity has a building constructed which it can show it will use for wholly non business purposes then the construction work will be zero rated by the contractor. This is the case even if there is a small amount of business activity in the building as long as these can be shown to be insignificant (which is taken to be less than 5% of the activities in the whole building) This so called de-minimis of 5% can be of use to a charity. In order for zero rating to apply the charity must issue a certificate to the builder stating the building will be used for non-business purposes.

Although the UT supported HMRC’s appeal against the F-tT decision there was an interesting comment made by the UT. The fact that students paid towards the cost of their courses (albeit subsidised) meant that business supplies were made, and the quantum of these fees exceeded the 5% de minimis meant that the construction works were standard rated. This decision was hardly surprising, however, a comment made by the Tribunal chairman The Honourable Mr Justice Barling Judge Colin Bishopp may provide hope for charities in a similar position to the appellant: he stated that it believed that the relevant legislation should be reconsidered, suggesting that;

“… it cannot be impossible to relieve charities of an unintended tax burden while at the same time protecting commercial organisations from unfair competition and preventing abuse …”.

In my view, it is worth considering the summing up in its entirety as it helpfully summarises the current position and provides some much sought after common sense in this matter:

“We cannot leave this appeal without expressing some disquiet that it should have reached us at all. It is common ground that the College is a charity, and that the bulk of its income is derived from public funds. Because that public funding does not cover all of its costs it is compelled to seek income from other sources; but its doing so does not alter the fact that it remains a charity providing education for young people. If, by careful management or good fortune, it can earn its further income in one way rather than another, or can keep the extent of the income earned in particular ways below an arbitrary threshold, it can escape a tax burden on the construction of a building intended for its charitable purpose, but if it is unable to do so, even to a trivial extent, it is compelled to suffer not some but all of that tax burden. We think it unlikely that Parliament intended such a capricious system. We consider it unlikely, too, that Parliament would consider it a sensible use of public money for the parties to litigate this dispute twice before the FTT and now twice before this tribunal. We do not blame the parties; the College is obliged to maximise the resources available to it for the pursuit of its charitable activities, just as HMRC are obliged to collect tax which is due. Rather, we think the legislation should be reconsidered. It cannot be impossible to relieve 16 charities of an unintended tax burden while at the same time protecting commercial organisations from unfair competition and preventing abuse”.

Action

If any charities, or charity clients have been denied zero rating on a building project, it will be worthwhile monitoring this development. Please contact us if you require further information.

VAT legislation – relationship between EU and UK law. A guide

By Marcus Ward 22 January 2016

As most people will know, UK domestic VAT law is derived from EU legislation, but what is the actual relationship?

It is important to understand how both elements of legislation work in cases of dispute with HMRC as it often provides additional ammunition.

History

Most Member States already had a system of VAT before joining the EU but for some countries VAT had to be introduced together with membership of the EU. When the UK joined the EU in 1972 it replaced two taxes; purchase tax and selective employment tax with VAT.

In 1977, the Council of the European Communities sought to harmonise the national VAT systems of its Member States by issuing the Sixth Directive to provide a uniform basis of assessment and replacing the Second Directive promulgated in 1967.

Council Directive 2006/112/EC (the VAT Directive) sets out the infrastructure for a common VAT system which each Member State is required to implement by means of its own domestic legislation. This important Directive codifies into one piece of legislation all the amendments to the original Sixth Directive, thus clarifying EU VAT legislation currently in force.

Intention

The aim of the VAT Directive is to harmonise the indirect tax within the EU, and it specifies that VAT rates must be within a certain range. The basic aims are:

Harmonisation of VAT law
Harmonisation of content and layout of the VAT declaration
Regulation of; accounting, providing a common legal accounting framework
Common framework for detailed description of invoices and receipts
Regulation of accounts payable
Regulation of accounts receivable
Standard definition of national accountancy and administrative terms

EU Statements

There are four types of EU statements:

Regulations – Are binding in their entirety and have general effect to all EU Member States. They are directly applicable in the UK legal system.
Directives – Are binding as to result and their general effect is specific to named EU countries. The form and methods of compliance are left to the addressees.
Decisions – Are binding in their entirety and are specific to an EU country, commercial enterprise or private individual.
Recommendations and Opinions – Are not binding and are directed to specific subjects on which the Council’s or Commission’s advice has been sought.

EU Legislation as part of UK Legislation

EU law is made effective for UK legislation via European Communities Act 1972 section 2. The effects of EU law as regards UK VAT legislation is summarised as follows.

Direct effect

The Court of Justice has held “wherever the provisions of a directive appear … to be unconditional and sufficiently precise, those provisions may … be relied upon as against any national provision which is incompatible with the directive insofar as the provisions define rights which individuals are able to assert against the state” (Case: Becker). Also in UFD Ltd it was stated that “in all appeals involving issues of liability, the Tribunal should consider the relevant provisions of the Council directives to ensure that the provisions of the UK legislation are consistent therewith”.

Primacy of EU Directives over UK legislation

A UK court which is to apply provisions of EU law is under a duty to give full effect to those provisions, if necessary refusing of its own motion to apply any conflicting provision of national legislation.

Interpretation of UK law

If UK VAT legislation is unclear or ambiguous, Tribunals are “entitled to have regard to the provisions of the relevant EU Directive in order to assist in resolving any ambiguity in the construction of the provisions under consideration’ (Case: English-Speaking Union of the Commonwealth).

Legal principles

In implementing the common VAT structure, domestic legislation is required to recognise certain legal principles.

Examples of some of these are the principle of:

Equality of citizens
Subsidiarity and proportionality
Non-discrimination on grounds of nationality
Fiscal neutrality
Legal certainty and the protection of legitimate expectations.

Practical application for most taxpayers

Practically, a result of the above is that taxpayers are regularly able to recover VAT (plus interest) paid to HMRC in error in cases where the UK domestic legislation has not implemented EU law correctly. However, HMRC has no right to recovery where VAT has been under-collected as a result of inappropriate implementation of the EU legislation.

VAT – How To Survive The Enforcement Powers

By Marcus Ward 19 January 2016

Penalties for VAT infringements are draconian and there is still an alarming array of enforcement powers to trap the unwary. By being conscious of the problem areas and planning carefully, it should be possible to avoid becoming an unwitting victim of the system. This article focuses mainly on VAT compliance.

Late Registration

You must notify HMRC if your turnover exceeds £82,000 in twelve months, or if you believe it will exceed £82,000 in the next thirty days. The penalty for failing to notify liability falls within the single penalty system and it could be up to 100% of the VAT due. There is no penalty if the taxpayer has a reasonable excuse for not registering at the correct time.

After Registration

Every VAT registered business needs to ensure that it is organised to deal with VAT correctly and on time:

Is there someone in your business who controls VAT accounting and ensures that new products etc. are properly dealt with for VAT purposes?
Do your business systems ensure that all output tax and input tax are properly recorded?
Are systems in force to ensure that proper evidence is obtained to support VAT input tax claims?
Where VAT is not charged on supplies made, is this correct in law and is proper evidence retained?
Are there systems in force to ensure that non‐deductible input tax is not reclaimed, e.g. most VAT on motor cars, or business entertaining?
Is VAT always considered before contracts are made?

Default surcharge

A default occurs if HMRC has not received your return and all the VAT due by the due date. The relevant date is the date that cleared funds reach HMRC’s bank account. If the due date is not a working day, payment must be received on the last preceding working day. .

Consequence of default

You receive a warning after the first default ‐ the Surcharge Liability Notice (SLN). Do not ignore this notice. If you fail to pay the VAT due on the due date within the next five quarters, the surcharge will be 2% of the outstanding tax. The surcharge increases to 5% for the next default, and then by 5% increments to a maximum of 15%. Each default, whether it is late submission of the return or late payment, extends the surcharge liability period, but only late payment incurs a surcharge.

Errors on returns and claims

Incorrect returns incur a penalty under the following penalties apply:

An error, when reasonable care not taken: 30%;
An error which is deliberate, but not concealed: 70%;
An error, which is deliberate and concealed: 100%.

If a taxpayer takes ‘reasonable care,’ then no penalty is due.

VAT Flat Rate Scheme (FRS)– New judgement on retrospective application

By Marcus Ward 14 January 2016

Latest from the courts

In the recent case of KDT Management Ltd an appeal against a decision by HMRC not to allow the appellant to retrospectively apply the percentage of turnover it says was appropriate to its business under the FRS instead of the one it says it mistakenly chose was considered.

HMRC issued an assessment to recover VAT which was alleged to have been omitted from the appellant’s returns because it did not apply certain increases of rate to its turnover under the FRS of accounting for VAT.

It was also an appeal against a decision by HMRC not to allow the appellant to retrospectively apply the percentage of turnover it says was appropriate to its business under the FRS instead of the one it says it mistakenly chose.

The decision was that the appeal against the assessments to VAT and interest were upheld. The appeal against the decision not to backdate was also upheld and the decision was cancelled.

Please contact us if you have been in dispute over the rate applicable on a FRS, or if you think you may be using an inappropriate percentage. This is likely to mainly affect small businesses.

Details of the FRS here

Small business: Should I register for VAT voluntarily?

By Marcus Ward 12 January 2016

OK, so why would a business choose to VAT register when it need not (let’s say it’s turnover is under the VAT registration limit of £82,000)? Isn’t it best just to avoid the VATman if at all possible?

This is not an article which considers whether a business MUST register, but rather it looks at whether it is a good idea to register on a voluntary basis if it is not compulsory.

As a general rule of thumb; if you sell to the public (B2C) then probably not. If you sell to other VAT registered businesses (B2B) then it is more likely to be beneficial.

If you sell B2B to customers overseas it is almost certain that VAT registration would be a good thing, as it would if you supply zero rated goods or services in the UK. This is because there is no output tax on sales, but full input tax recovery on costs; VAT nirvana! A distinction must be made between zero rated supplies and exempt supplies. If only exempt supplies are made, a business cannot register for VAT.

Apart from the economic considerations, we have found that small businesses are sometimes put off VAT registration by the added compliance costs and the potential penalties being in the VAT club can bring. Weighed against this, there is a certain kudos or prestige for a business and it does convey a degree of seriousness of a business undertaking. It may also make life simpler (and reduce costs) if a business buys goods or services from other EC Member States. We also come across situations where a customer will only deal with suppliers who are VAT registered.

The key to registration is that, once registered, a business may recover the VAT it incurs on its expenditure (called input tax). So let us look at some simple examples of existing businesses for comparison:

Example 1

A business sells office furniture to other VAT registered business (B2B).

It buys stock for 10,000 plus VAT of 2,000

It incurs VAT on overheads (rent, IT, telephones, light and heat etc) of 2,000 plus 400 VAT

It makes sales of 20,000.

If not registered, its profit is 20,000 less 12,000 less 2400 = 5600

If VAT registered, the customer can recover any VAT charged, so VAT is not a disincentive to him.

Sales 20,000 plus 4000 VAT (paid to HMRC)

Input tax claimed = 2400 (offset against payment to HMRC)

Result: the VAT is neutral and not a cost, so profit is 20,000 less 12,000 = 8000, a saving of 2400 as compared to the business not being registered. The 2400 clearly equals the input tax recovered on expenditure.

Example 2

A “one-man band consultant” provides advice B2B and uses his home as his office. All of his clients are able to recover any VAT charged.

He has very little overheads that bear VAT as most of his expenditure is VAT free (staff, train fares, use of home) so his input tax amounts to 100.

He must weigh up the cost (time/admin etc) of VAT registration against reclaiming the 100 of input tax. In this case it would probably not be worthwhile VAT registering (although the Flat Rate Scheme may be attractive, please see article here

Example 3

A retailer sells adult clothes to the public from a shop. She pays VAT on the rent and on the purchase of stock as well as the usual overheads. The total amount she pays is 20,000 with VAT of 4000.

Her sales total 50,000.

If not VAT registered her profit is 50,000 less 24,000 = 26,000

If VAT registered she will treat the value of sales as VAT inclusive, so of the 50,000 income 8333 represents VAT she must pay to HMRC. She is able to offset her input tax of 4000.

This means that her profit if VAT registered is 50,000 less the VAT of 8333 = 41,667 less the net costs of 20,000 = 21,667.

Result: a loss of 4333 in profit.

As may be seen, if a business sells to the public it is nearly always disadvantageous to be voluntarily VAT registered. It may be possible to increase her prices by circa 20%, but for a lot of retailers, this is unrealistic.

Intending traders

If a business has not started trading, but is incurring input tax on costs, it is possible to VAT register even though it has not made any taxable supplies. This is known by HMRC as an intending trader registration. A business will need to provide evidence of the intention to trade and this is sometimes a stumbling block, especially in the area of land and property. Choosing to register before trading may avoid losing input tax due to the time limits (very generally a business can go back six months for services and four years for goods on hand to recover the VAT). Also cashflow will be improved if input tax is recovered as soon as possible.

Action

Careful consideration should be given to the VAT status of a small or start-up business. This may be particularly relevant to start-ups as they typically incur more costs as the business begins and the recovery of the VAT on these costs may be important.

This is a basic guide and there are many various situations that require further consideration of the benefits of voluntary VAT registration. We would, of course, be pleased to help.