Category Archives: Agent/principal

Customs Declaration Service (CDS) – Update

By   23 October 2018
0

As many will be aware, CDS will fully replace the Customs Handling of Import and Export Freight (CHIEF) system later this year/early next year, full details here.This will affect any business which imports or exports goods from or to countries outside the EU (and possibly will affect businesses which trade with the EU in the event of a No Deal Brexit).

HMRC have provided more information on the implementation of CDS.

They say that the number of businesses making declarations via CDS will grow over coming months. If you have not been contacted by HMRC then your business is not part of this first group. The time your business begins using CDS will depend on its(or its agent’s) software developer or Community System Provider. HMRC expect remaining importers will start to move to CDS early in the New Year. Exporters will migrate to CDS when export functionality becomes available in March 2019. This means that CDS and CHIEF will run in parallel for a short period of time. Import declarations will be made in CDS whilst export declarations will continue to be made in CHIEF.

Not an ideal situation, but it does seem prudent to phase CDS in in this way.

Checklist

  • Visit Customs Declaration Service to understand how the changes affect your business and what you will need to do to prepare for the introduction of CDS and when. This includes making sure you have a Government Gateway account and an EORI number.
  • A new Trade Tariff will be used for declarations on CDS to comply with the Union Customs Code (UCC) so it is important you take the time to understand how the information you provide as part of your declarations will change. The imports tariff can be found on the link above. The exports Tariff will be available later in the year.
  • If you use a software provider or agent, you may also want to check they are aware and are preparing for the new CDS.
  • If you use a C88 form or the National Export System to make declarations, please visit the web page above where you can find more information.

If you have any queries we will be pleased to help.

VAT: Education – what, precisely, is exempt?

By   12 October 2018
0

In my experience, there is a general assumption that all “education’ is exempt. It is true to say that a lot of education and tuition is indeed exempt, but that is not automatically the case. It is important to establish the reason for the application of non-taxable treatment. The VAT treatment depends on; what is actually being provided, who is providing it and the precise arrangements. I consider the more common issues below:

The legislation covering education is VAT Act 1994, Schedule 9, Group 6.

What does the term education mean?

It means a course, class or lesson of instruction or study in a subject. This includes:

  • lectures
  • educational seminars
  • conferences and symposia
  • recreational and sporting courses
  • distance teaching and associated materials

Schools etc

The first type of education exemption is relatively clear: It is the provision of education by an eligible body. An eligible body is, broadly; a school, college, or university (supplies by Local Authority schools, city technology colleges, sixth form colleges, academies and free schools – where education is provided for no charge, are non-business activities rather than exempt, and have their own set of rules). More on academies here

It is also worth noting that any ‘closely related” goods or services provided with exempt education are themselves exempt. This may cover items such as; certain stationery, accommodation, transport and catering.

There is usually very little disagreement about the VAT treatment of these entities.

Charities/ non-profit making organisations

If a charity/NFP entity is an eligible body supplies of education and vocational training (see below) by it are exempt. Such an organisation is likely to be an eligible body, where it’s a charity, professional body or company which:

  • cannot and does not distribute any profit it makes, and
  • any profit that does arise from its supplies of education is used solely for the continuation or improvement of such supplies.

There can be disputes over the term “does not distribute any profit” so care should be taken in this respect and advice sought if there is any doubt.

Tuition

Exemption applies to the supply of “private tuition, in a subject ordinarily taught in a school or university, by an individual teacher acting independently of an employer” – VAT Act 1994 Schedule 9, Group 6, item 2.

Taking each of these tests in turn:

  • What is “private tuition?

In order to qualify, the provider of tuition must act independently and not be an employee. Practically, this means that the person providing the tuition must either be a sole proprietor, a partner in a partnership, or a member of a Limited Liability partnership (LLP). Consequently, exemption does not apply if the teaching is carried out by a company or an employee. This is a matter of fact, however, it is possible to structure matters such that the exemption applies if it does not currently (and the restructure is possible commercially).

  • What does “ordinarily taught” in schools/universities mean?

This is often a moot issue and the significant amount of case lawn highlights this. Most of the mainstream subjects are covered of course, but what about subjects like; golf, horse riding and dance? Would they be ordinarily taught in schools? (The answer according to case law is; yes). However, there are many other subjects which are debatable and HMRC usually take an uncompromising line on this area, especially around sporting activities. If there is any doubt, we recommend seeking advice.

  • What does tuition mean?

Clearly, if a person teaches or coaches a subject to an individual or group, then this qualifies as tuition. However, a distinction must be made between this and a recreational type of activity which may be called a “class”, but no actual tuition is provided. Exemption does not apply, for example, for the simple provision of gymnasium or swimming pool facilities, or a yoga class where no coaching takes place (however, it is possible that these may be exempt under different parts of the legislation, but that is not the subject of this article).

Vocational training

Vocational training means training or re-training and work experience for paid employment or voluntary employment in areas beneficial to the community.

If vocational training is provided for a charge the VAT consequences are either:

  • for an eligible body (see above) vocational training is exempt
  • for a non-eligible body vocational training is still exempt to the extent that it is funded under an approved government funding scheme. Otherwise the supply is taxable.

English as a Foreign Language (EFL)

If a commercial entity makes supplies of tuition of EFL they will qualify for exemption. In these cases, tuition includes all elements that are integral to the course, held out for sale as such, and are the means by which it is intended to promote fluency in the use of the English language.

General

In respect of all of the above, if exemption does not apply the supply of education falls to be taxable as a default.

For completeness, exemption may also apply to; research, examination services, youth clubs, day nurseries, crèches and playgroups but these activities are outside the scope of this article.

Summary

There are many traps for the unwary here. Planning is always advisable and I recommend that any entity which provides education is conscious of the VAT implications and seeks advice where/when necessary.

VAT – Catering at a university campus; exempt?

By   3 September 2018
0

Latest from the courts

In the First Tier Tribunal (FTT) case of Olive Garden Catering Company Ltd (OGC) the mian issue was whether catering which was provided to the University of Aberdeen (UOA) students was an exempt supply. The specific issue was whether the catering was a supply “closely connected to education” which in turn depended on which entity was actually making the supply to students. For exemption to apply, OGC would need to be a principal in purchasing the food and other goods and an agent of UOA (pictured above) in delivering the catering (the exemption could not apply to a supply by OGC to the students).

Background

The central issue was whether the supply of food and staff by the appellant to UOA was a single supply of catering services at the standard-rate for VAT purposes (HMRC’s case) or that the main supply was for food at the zero-rate, with the supply of staff being a separate supply and eligible for staff wages concession which was the appellant’s stance. I comment that the procurement as principal and the delivery of catering as agent is common practice in the education sector and this case focussed on whether the relevant documentation actually reflected the economic reality.

Decision

The HMRC internal VAT manual VTAXPER64300 sets out the general principles for determining the VAT treatment of supplies made under a catering contract, which in turn depend in some situations on the capacity in which the caterer supplies its service, whether as principal or agent in the agreement. Of relevance in this case were the following statements:

(1) In general, it has been established practice that agency contracts are most often used in the education sector.

(2) Under agency contracts for the provision of catering it is accepted that:

  • The client makes a taxable supply of catering to the consumer, or the catering is subsumed within an overall exempt supply, eg; of education
  • VAT is not charged to the client on wages of the catering staff employed at the unit
  • VAT is charged on any management fee plus taxable stock and other services
  • Schools may only exempt supplies which are closely related to the overall provision of education

(3) This contributes to fair competition with in-house providers, and the contract catering industry acknowledges the value of that.

In respect of the contract for the supply of catering services, UOA was the principal and OGC was the agent by reference to the control exercised over; menu specifications, pricing, and the premises in which catering was carried out. The relevant contracts set out that the terms were set by UOA and were indicative of its status as the principal in the catering contract. The judge stated that the catering contracts between UOA and OGC appeared to be an agency contract with OGC acting as the agent. Consequently, the food produced OGC and served by its staff at UOA’s halls of residence was potentially a supply of food in the course of catering that can be subsumed within the overall exempt supply of education by UOA.

Commentary

A win for the appellant, but only after comprehensive consideration of all points and the substantial detailed documentation by the judge. There has been a run of Tribunal cases on the agent/principal point (not just in education and which I have covered in previous articles) and this case serves to demonstrate that each case will be determined on its merits. There can be no blanket VAT treatment and certain factors will point one way and others to a different VAT treatment. In my experience, HMRC are always eager to challenge agent/principal treatment and it is an area which has an enormous tax impact on a business. I always recommend that any contracts/documentation which cover potential agent/principal issues are reviewed to avoid unwanted attention from HMRC. Slight adjustments to agreements often assist in reaching the desired tax treatment. Don’t leave it to chance!

VAT – Place of supply of professional services flowchart

By   23 August 2018
0

A question I am often asked by my legal and accountant clients is “Do we charge VAT on our invoices?” The main issue with this general question is the place of supply (POS). Consequently, I have produced a simple flowchart which covers most situations and applies to all providers of professional services. Of course, this being VAT, there are always unusual or one-off queries, but this chart, with the notes should address the most common issues.

Place of supply Of Services Flowchart

POS services flowchart

Notes to flowchart

As always, nothing in VAT is as simple as it seems. So I hope the following notes are of assistance.

Place of belonging

If the services are supplied to an individual and received by him otherwise than for the purpose of any business carried on by him, he is treated as belonging in whatever country he has his “usual place of residence”.

If the services are in respect of an individual’s business interests, then more complex rules on the place of belonging may apply.  The issue is usually where more than one “establishment” exists.  In these cases, the rule is the place of belonging is the “establishment” at which, or for the purposes of which, the services are most directly used or to be used.

A guide to belonging here 

Property rental in the UK

Property rental is treated as a business for VAT purposes.  We must decide whether a rented property here creates a business establishment in the UK for the landlord.  If a person has an establishment overseas and owns a property in the UK which it leases to tenants; the property does not in itself create a business establishment.  However, if the entity has UK offices and staff or appoints a UK agency to carry on its business by managing the property, this creates a business establishment (place of belonging) in the UK. VAT Act 1994 s. 9 (5) (a).  In these cases, the professional services would likely be UK to UK and be standard-rated.

Difference between business and non-business:

Services provided to an individual are likely to be non-business unless the services are linked to that individual’s business activities, eg; as a sole proprietor.  Therefore, an individual’s tax return is, in most cases, likely to be in the recipient’s non-business capacity (although it may be prudent to identify why a UK tax return is required for a non-UK resident individual, ie; what UK activities have taken place and do these activities amount to a business or create a business establishment?)

This is an area that often gives rise to uncertainties and differences in interpretation (particularly when deciding which establishment has most directly used the services).  It may be helpful to reproduce a specific example provided by HMRC:

Example

“A UK accountant supplies accountancy services to a UK incorporated company which has its business establishment abroad.  However, the services are received in connection with the company’s UK tax obligations and therefore the UK fixed establishment, created by the registered office, receives the supply.”

As always, please contact us should you have any queries.

VAT: Adecco Court of Appeal case. Agent or principal?

By   6 August 2018
0

Latest from the courts

In the recent Court of Appeal (CA) case of Adecco here the issue was whether the services provided by Adecco – an employment bureau which supplied its clients with temporary staff (temps) were by way of it acting as principal or agent.

Background

Details of the issues as considered in the FTT and UT were covered here 

Overview

As is often the case in these types of arrangements, there are some matters that point towards the appellant acting as agent, and others indicating that the proper VAT treatment is that of principal. The important difference, of course, being whether output tax is due on the “commission” received by Adecco or on the full payment made to it (which includes the salaries of the relevant workers).

Decision

The CA decided that the supply of temporary staff by Adecco was as principal and consequently, VAT was due on the full amount received, not just the commission retained.

Reasoning

The CA focussed on the contractual position. Among the reasons provided for this decision were as follows (I have somewhat summarised). I think it worthwhile looking in some detail at these:

  • There was no question of the temps having provided their services under contracts with the clients: no such contracts existed. The contractual position must be that the temps’ services were provided to clients in pursuance of the contracts between Adecco and its clients and Adecco and the temps.
  • Although the contract between Adecco and a temp referred to the temp undertaking an assignment “for a client” and providing services “to the client”, it also spoke of the client requiring the temp’s services “through Adecco” and of the temp being supplied “through Adecco”.
  • While temps were to be subject to the control of clients, that was something that the temps agreed with Adecco, not the clients. The fact that the contract between Adecco and a temp barred any third party from having rights under the Contracts (Rights of Third Parties) Act 1999 confirms that the relevant provisions were to be enforceable only by Adecco, which, on the strength of them, was able to agree with its clients that the temps should be under their control. Adecco can fairly be described as conferring such control on its clients. (Broadly; the employment regulations required Adecco to treat itself as a principal with the result that that it could not therefore treat itself as an agent).
  • Adecco paid temps on its own behalf, not as agent for the clients.
  • Adecco by did not drop out of the picture once it had introduced a temp to a client. It was responsible for paying the temp (and for handling national insurance contributions and the like) and had to do so regardless of whether it received payment from the client Adecco also enjoyed rights of termination and suspension. It is noteworthy (as the UT said) that the contract between Adecco and a temp proceeded on the basis that a temp’s unauthorised absence could “result in a breach of obligations which we owe to the client”.
  • Adecco did not perform just administrative functions in relation to the temps. The temps, after all, were entitled to be paid by Adecco, not the clients.
  • Adecco charged a client a single sum for each hour a temp worked. It did not split its fees into remuneration for the temp and commission for itself.
  • The fact that Adecco had no control over a temp in advance of his taking up his assignment with the client did not matter.
  • Adecco undoubtedly supplied the services of employed temps to its clients.
  • In all the circumstances, both contractually and as a matter of economic and commercial reality, the temps’ services were supplied to clients via Adecco. In other words, Adecco did not merely supply its clients with introductory and ancillary services, and VAT was payable on the totality of what it was paid by clients.

Action

Clearly this was not the outcome the appellant desired, and it may impact similar arrangements in place for other businesses.  Although found on the precise nature of the relevant contracts, the outcome of this case is not limited to employment bureaux and similar but must be considered in most cases where commission is received by an “agent”. These may include, inter alia; taxi services, driving schools, transport, travel agents, training/education, online services, repairs, warrantee work and many other types of business. It is crucial that contracts are regularly reviewed the ensure that the appropriate VAT treatment is applied and that they are clear on the agent/principal relationship. If there is any doubt, please contact us as it is often one of the most ambiguous areas of VAT.