Category Archives: Law

VAT: Evidence to claim input tax

By   9 July 2019
0

Latest from the courts

Hot on the heels of my recent article here, a First Tier Tribunal (FTT) case has considered what evidence may be accepted for a claim for input tax.

The Wasteaway case contemplated whether HMRC’s disallowance of the appellant’s claim, (via The VAT Act 1994, section 73) for input tax was correct, or whether they should have allowed the claim based on alternative evidence of receiving the relevant supplies in lieu of missing tax invoices.

It is well known that in order to claim input tax on expenditure a business is required to have a valid tax invoice to support it. But what if there is no VAT invoice? Can, or should HMRC accept any other evidence to support a claim?

Background 

It was stated that the invoices were lost during a time when the business was evicted from its premises. The judge formed the view that the appellant’s approach to record keeping was “slapdash”. Which isn’t a good starting point. HMRC issued an assessment because it was decided that the appellant had “not provided satisfactory evidence of the taxable supply to the business and its direct link to your onward taxable supply for discretion to be considered under Article 182 of the Principal VAT Directive. If no invoice, a pro forma invoice or a document stating ‘this is not a VAT invoice’ has been provided…” along with an offer to provide alternative evidence.

It was also discovered, during the inspection, that not only had output tax been underdeclared, but the appellant had a history of poor record keeping.

Decision

Despite the business providing; records of payments, in some cases weighbridge tickets, detailed bank statements, spreadsheets and Sage accounts information – which it was contended amounted to alternative documentary evidence, it was ruled that this was insufficient, so the assessment stood.

The lack of care in obtaining and retaining documents, poor accounting procedures such that output tax was understated and the past behaviour and history of the taxpayer meant that HMRC was not obliged to accept the proffered alternative evidence, The general unreliability of the records counted against the business and that HMRC acted in best judgement.

It was stated that HMRC were perfectly justified in requiring more detailed and convincing documentary evidence to replace the missing VAT invoices than the appellant provided. And the inspector could not be criticised for refusing to accept the extremely thin evidence supplied as an alternative to the missing VAT invoices.

Commentary

It is clear that every business must keep proper records and retain all documents, especially invoices. It was hardly surprising that failure to do that ensured that this appeal was dismissed. It also didn’t help that the appellant had a poor track record of accounting.

HMRC do have the discretion to accept alternative evidence, however, this is more likely if the relevant invoices have been genuinely misplaced, destroyed or not received. There is also the opportunity to go to the supplier and request a replacement invoice.

So, basically: Keep records properly or it will cost you!

 

I have to charge myself VAT?!

By   9 July 2019
0
How comes?!

Well, normally, the supplier is the person who must account to the tax authorities for any VAT due on the supply. However, in certain situations, the position is reversed and it is the customer who must account for any VAT due. Don’t get caught out!

Here are just some of the situations when you have to charge yourself VAT:

Purchasing services from abroad

These will be obtained free of VAT from an overseas supplier. What is known as the ‘reverse charge’ procedure must be applied. Where the reverse charge procedure applies, the recipient of the services must act as both the supplier and the recipient of the services. On the same VAT return, the recipient must account for output tax, calculated on the full value of the supply received, and (subject to partial exemption and non-business rules) include the VAT charged as input tax. The effect of the provisions is that the reverse charge has no net cost to the recipient if he can attribute the input tax to taxable supplies and can therefore reclaim it in full. If he cannot, the effect is to put him in the same position as if had received the supply from a UK supplier rather than from one outside the UK. Thus creating a level playing field between purchasing from the UK and overseas.

Accounting for VAT and recovery of input tax.
Where the reverse charge procedure applies, the recipient of the services must act as both the supplier and the recipient of the services.  On the same VAT return, the recipient must
      1. account for output tax, calculated on the full value of the supply received, in Box 1;
      2. (subject to partial exemption and non-business rules) include the VAT stated in box 1 as input tax in Box 4; and;
      3. include the full value of the supply in both Boxes 6 and 7.
Value of supply: The value of the deemed supply is to be taken to be the consideration in money for which the services were in fact supplied or, where the consideration did not consist or not wholly consist of money, such amount in money as is equivalent to that consideration.  The consideration payable to the overseas supplier for the services excludes UK VAT but includes any taxes levied abroad.
Time of supply: The time of supply of such services is the date the supplies are paid for or, if the consideration is not in money, the last day of the VAT period in which the services are performed.

Purchasing goods from another EU Member States

Something similar to reverse charge; called acquisition tax, applies to goods purchased from other EC Member States. These are known as acquisitions (they are imports if the goods come from outside the EU and different rules apply). The full value of the goods is subject to output tax and the associated input tax may be recovered by the business acquiring if the goods are used for taxable purposes. If you are not already registered for VAT in the UK and acquire goods worth £85,000 or more in the UK from other EC countries, you will have to register for VAT in the UK on the strength of the value of the acquisition tax. A business will also have to complete an Intrastat Supplementary Declaration (SDs) if its acquisitions of goods from the EC exceed an annual amount – currently £1.5 million.

Intrastat_flow_diagramMore details on Intrastat Supplementary Declarations here

Deregistration

Any goods on hand at deregistration with a total value of over £1,000 on which input tax has been claimed are subject to a self supply. This is a similar mechanism to a reverse charge in that the goods are deemed to be supplied to the business by the business and output tax is due. However, in these circumstances it is not possible to recover any input tax on the self supply.

Flat Rate Scheme

There is a self supply of capital items on which input tax has been claimed when a business leaves the flat rate scheme (and remains VAT registered).

Mobile telephones

In order to counter missing trader intra-community fraud (‘MTIC’), supplies of mobile telephones and computer chips which are made by one VAT registered business to another and valued at £5,000 and over are subject to the reverse charge. This means that the purchaser rather than the seller is responsible for accounting for VAT due.

And not forgetting the new domestic reverse charge for building and construction here.

Land and buildings…. and motor cars

There are certain circumstances where land and buildings must be treated as a self supply… but that is a whole new subject in itself… as is supplies in the motor trade.

Even if the result of a self-supply or reverse charge is VAT neutral HMRC is within its rights to assess and levy penalties and interest in cases where the charge has not been applied; which always seems unfair.  However, more often than not simple accounting entries will deal with the matter…. if the circumstances are recognised and it is remembered to actually make the entries!

HMRC VAT Helpline failures

By   5 July 2019
0

If any of you have had the unfortunate necessity to use the VAT Helpline you will know the frustration, unhelpfulness and general exasperation of trying to get a reasonable response from the department. Well, it isn’t just you.

In correspondence between the Chair of the Treasury Select Committee and the Chief Executive and Permanent Secretary of HMRC here the previously highlighted issue of the deterioration of the performance of the HMRC VAT Helpline is addressed.

The extremely poor performance is ascribed, by the Chartered Institute of Taxation (CIOT) to:

  • the lack of an adequate pilot for the roll-out of Making Tax Digital (MTD) – details here
  • the pressures of Brexit on HMRC resources.

And HMRC state that:

  • their telephony performance has been impacted by ongoing recruitment and staffing shortfalls
  • recruitment for a no deal EU exit was slower than expected
  • they had to divert resources from usual business to issues with a No-Deal Brexit
  • the target of five minutes waiting time for the VAT Helpline has not been met
  • they are developing a new way of measuring performance
  • there are issues with some MTD businesses experiencing problems with paying VAT by direct debit

An annex to the letter, providing VAT call data from January to May 2019, shows

  • helpline demand increased by over 40% between January and May but the number of calls answered fell over this period
  • in May, HMRC answered less than 42% of the calls which made it beyond their recorded messages, compared to 72% in January
  • average speed of answer for those calls which were answered rose from around seven minutes in January to more than 16 minutes in May (in addition to the time spent navigating the initial recorded messages)
  • of the calls answered, the proportion which were answered within ten minutes fell from 64% in January to just 9% in May

Commentary

It is appreciated that some of the excuses are “reasonable” (to use HMRC parlance) and matters are not within HMRC’s influence, however, the service provided is, frankly, unacceptable. Businesses need HMRC assistance for all sorts of reasons and if it is not forthcoming, errors may be made resulting in potential penalties and interest, loss of income, deals failing, accounting compromised and uncertainty and complexity, VAT becoming a cost, and customers lost.

It is not as though HMRC have not been warned about pushing MTD through without adequate testing of systems and software at a time when Brexit was always going to make huge demands of the department. The House of Lords Economic Affairs Committee published  a damning report last year here which recommended delaying the introduction of MTD. Also, the CIOT has consistently warned of the risks of implementing MTD for VAT at the same time as Brexit.

Support for business and tax agents is sadly very lacking and it appears that insufficient resources have been devoted to this. There has been an overall lack of planning, combined with a political will to push ahead with MTD regardless. It really is not good enough. And we are not even yet through the implementation of MTD for VAT with larger and more complex business yet to join the fray. That, added to the fact that many glitches have already been identified, does not give any reason to be optimistic about the future for either MTD or the VAT Helpline.

As CIOT say: while HMRC have the scale to move resources within its organisation, that is a luxury that most businesses do not enjoy.

VAT: Bad Debt Relief – The Total case

By   1 July 2019
0

Latest from the courts

Bad Debt Relief (BDR) is often an area that creates disputes with HMRC. The legislation has changed over the years and the current rules are described here.

Background

Broadly speaking, under normal VAT rules, 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). BDR, as the names suggests, is intended to provide relief on the VAT element of a bad debt. Output tax previously claimed may be “reclaimed” by using the BDR mechanism.

The law which governs the claiming of bad debt relief is The VAT Act 1994, Section 36, and Section 26A which covers the repayment of input tax when a customer fails to pay for supplies received within six months of the relevant date, and The VAT Regulations 1995, Parts XIX, XIXA and XIXB.

Conditions for claiming bad debt relief

  • A business must have accounted for the VAT on the supplies and paid it to HMRC
  • It must have been written off the debt in its day to day VAT accounts and transferred it to a separate bad debt account
  • The value of the supply must not be more than the customary selling price
  • The debt must not have been paid, sold or factored under a valid legal assignment
  • The debt must have remained unpaid for a period of six months after the date of the supply

The case

In the First Tier Tribunal (FTT) case of Total Catering Equipment Ltd [2019] TC 07184, heard on 4 June 2019, the issue was whether payments from customers which were diverted by a dishonest employee should be recognised as a payment for a supply of goods (no BDR available as the money was received then stolen) or whether the fact that the business did not actually receive the payment meant that a BDR was appropriate. Total supplied goods to customers, some of whom paid by credit or debit cards. The member of staff responsible for these transactions, set up a separate (from the business) bank account and fraudulently diverted customers; payments into his own account. A BDR claim was made by the appellant when the crime was discovered. The claim was refused by HMRC on the grounds that the employee had received payment “on behalf” of Total before making payment into his own account.

Decision

The judge found for the appellant. The appeal was allowed – it was decided that Total had never actually received payment for the goods supplied, so BDR was available. A distinction was made between the diversion of monies in this case (where the supplier was deemed to never had received the money) and a theft by an employee from, eg; a till or subsequent withdrawals from the business’ bank account (where a business would have received payment before the money was stolen).

Commentary

I have written about VAT and illegal activities here. There can be a fine line between taxable illegal activities and non-taxable illegal activities, and subtleties around tax points (time of supply) misrepresentation and consideration. If you, or your clients have been in the unfortunate position of being on the receiving end of crime, it would be adding insult to injury to have to account for tax on money you do not have. I would always advise that any demands from HMRC, or refusals to refund VAT should be properly reviewed.

VAT: The transport of disabled persons

By   24 June 2019
0

HMRC have released Revenue and Customs Brief 3 (2019) RCB3 2019 which sets out the treatment of certain transport services, specifically in relation to the Jigsaw Medical Services Upper Tribunal (UT) case. This case considered emergency ambulance services contrasted with patient transport services. It was accepted that they were exempt (“the supply of transport services for sick or injured persons in vehicles specially designed for that purpose” – VAT Act 1994, Schedule 9, Group 7, item 11) but could they “also” be treated as zero rated?

Technical

Zero rating takes precedence over exemption, so if these services qualify for both exemption and zero rating, they will be treated as zero rated. Although both treatments are VAT free, zero rating is beneficial as it provides the suppler the ability to recover input tax attributable to the supplies.

Summary

The Brief clarifies that zero rating applies if the supply of transport is in any vehicle with seating to carry ten or more passengers (including the driver) or if there would be 10 seats if wheelchair adaptations were removed. If the supply is not zero rated, say, because of the number of seats test is failed, the above exemption may apply if the service is the transport of sick or injured persons. If that exemption does not apply, then the default position applies, and the service is standard rated. RCB3 also provides information on how to apply the “ten seat rule” and on adapted vehicles.

VAT: Brexit – Intending Trader registration for overseas businesses

By   14 June 2019
0

With the continuing uncertainty over a No-Deal Brexit, which appears to be a more likely prospect given recent political events, HMRC has made a statement on the process of registering non-UK EU businesses as intending traders in the UK.

Background

What is an intending trader?

An intending trader is a person who, on the date of the registration request:

  • is carrying on a business
  • has not started making taxable supplies
  • has an intention to make taxable supplies in the future

If the business satisfies HMRC of its intention, HMRC must VAT register it. VAT Act 1994, Schedule 1, 9 (b). It is, in some cases, difficult to convince that there is a genuine intention to make taxable supplies. This often comes down to documentary evidence.

Why do overseas businesses need to register as intending traders?

In the event of a No-deal Brexit, it is assumed that the EU VAT simplification that relieves the current obligation to be registered in the UK will no longer available. As a consequence, the EU supplier will itself become responsible for accounting for VAT on sales deemed to be made in the UK. In order to do this, the business will require a UK VAT registration. As the simplification is in place until Brexit, the registration will be required the very day after the UK leaves the EU – currently 1 November 2019.

Therefore, many EU businesses have applied for UK VAT registration as intending traders. That is, they do not currently make supplies, but intend to in the future (from 1 November 2109).

The issue

The Chartered Institute of Taxation has reported that businesses applying for intending trader registrations are experiencing difficulties with the process.

In response, HMRC have stated:

“Businesses in the position you have described can register for VAT using the Advanced Notification facility, by registering online requesting a voluntary registration from an advanced date of 1 November 2019. In the ‘business activity’ section they should enter trade class/SIC code 99000 European Community. In the free text box they should describe accurately what the business does and ensure there is a positive amount entered in the ‘taxable turnover in the next 12 months’ box. If this is not done the application will be rejected. This information will enable the VAT Registration Team (VRT) to identify and actively manage any registration that is conditional on the UK leaving the EU without a deal.

If there is a change to the date of withdrawal from the EU, the VRT will amend the Advanced Notification date to match this new date. If the UK enters a transitional period or agrees a deal with the EU that allows current arrangements to continue then the registration will be cancelled. The approval of an Advanced Notification registration in these circumstances is only made as a contingency for the UK leaving the EU without a deal and the VAT number may not be used unless that happens. The business will receive an automated notification of an Advanced Notification VAT Registration and the VRT may follow this up with a manual letter to further explain the conditions and both.

With the UK having agreed an extension to the date of withdrawal from the EU, we would not expect businesses to use this facility until closer to the 1st November.”

It is clearly prudent for overseas businesses which make certain supplies in the UK to properly prepare for a No-Deal Brexit. However, experience insists that many have not identified or made provisions for this outcome.

We are able to assist and advise other EU Member State businesses on this process.

VAT: Domestic reverse charge for building services – Latest

By   12 June 2019
0

The new domestic reverse charge for building and construction services will be introduced on 1 October 2019. Details here

HMRC have now published comprehensive guidance which appears to cover all scenarios (but almost certainly there will be transactions which will produce disputes).

Brief Overview

The domestic reverse charge is a major change to the way VAT is collected in the building and construction industry.

It means the customer receiving the service will have to pay VAT to HMRC instead of paying the supplier.

It will only apply to individuals or businesses registered for VAT in the UK.

This will affect a business if it supplies specified services reported under the Construction Industry Scheme (CIS). A business will need to prepare for the change by:

  • checking whether the reverse charge affects either sales, purchases or both
  • informing regular clients or suppliers
  • ensuring a business’ accounting systems and software are updated to deal with the reverse charge
  • considering whether the change will have an impact on cashflow

The reverse charge does not apply if the service is zero rated or if the customer is not registered for VAT in the UK. It also does not apply to services which are supplied to end users or intermediaries connected with end users. More details here.

Please contact us if you have any queries.

VAT: When is the building of a house complete? (And why is it important?)

By   11 June 2019
0

Completion of a residential dwelling

A technical point which comes up surprisingly often and seems innocuous is: when is a building “complete”? The following case is helpful, and I thank Les Howard for bringing it to my attention.

The date that the construction of a dwelling is deemed to be complete is important for a number of reasons. The issue in the case of Mr and Mrs James was whether certain works could be zero rated via the VAT Act Schedule 8 Group 5 Item 2 (The supply in the course of the construction of a building designed as a dwelling…) or as HMRC contended, they were the reconstruction or alteration of an existing building and the work should be standard rated.

Background

The James used a contractor to plaster the entire interior of their house in the course of its construction. However, the work was demonstrably defective to such an extent that the James commenced legal proceedings. A surveyor advised that all of the old plaster needed to be hacked off and replaced by new plastering installed by a new firm. The stripping out and replacement works took place after the Certificate of Completion had been issued.

The James claimed input tax on the house construction via the DIY Housebuilders’ Scheme.

Technical

HMRC refused the James’ claim to have the remedial work zero-rated because, in their view, the re-plastering works amounted to the reconstruction or alteration of the house which was, when the supplies were made, an “existing building”. They proffered Note 16 of Schedule 5 which provides that “the construction of a building” does not include “(a) … the conversion, reconstruction or alteration of an existing building”.

They stated that zero-rating only applied if the work formed part of the construction of a zero-rated building. They had previously decided that the work of snagging or correction of faults carried out after the building had been completed could only be zero-rated if it was carried out by the original contractors and correction of faults formed part of the building contract. When the snagging is carried out by a different contractor, the work is to an existing building and does not qualify for zero rating.

The James stated that the Customs’ guidelines on snagging do not take into account extraordinary circumstances. Their contention was that the re-plastering works were zero rated because they had no choice but to engage the services of a different contractor other than the one who carried out the original works.

Decision

The judge found for the appellant – the re-plastering works were zero rated.

There was a query as to why The James applied for a Certificate of Completion before the plastering was completed. In nearly all cases such a certificate would crystallise the date the building was complete.

The reasons were given as:

  • the need for funds. The James could not remortgage the house without the certificate and they needed to borrow a substantial amount
  • they could not reclaim VAT under the DIY Housebuilders’ Scheme until the Certificate of Completion had been issued
  • they were aware that the building inspector was beginning to wonder why the building works were taking such a long time
  • they needed the house assessed for Council Tax which could only happen when the certificate had been issued
  • the Certificate was issued as part of the procedure required by the Building Act 1984 and the Building Regulations of 2000

These reasons were accepted by the judge.

Despite the respondents stating that:

  • for the reasons given above
  • the fact that the James had been living in the house for some time
  • they had obtained the Certificate of Completion
  • the new plastering work had been done by the new plasterer such that the house had been constructed before supply of the new plasterer’s services had been made
  • the house was an “existing building”

the judge was satisfied that in the circumstances the new plastering work was supplied in the course of the construction of the building as a dwelling house and that there was no reconstruction or alteration of an existing building in the sense contemplated by Note (16) to Group 5 Schedule 8.

He observed that the Certificate of Completion records that the substantive requirements of the Building Regulations have been satisfied. But to the naked eye the old plasterwork was obviously inadequate and dangerous ad he could not possibly consider that the construction project had finished until the new plasterwork was installed. The James’ construction project was to build a new dwelling house. Plasterwork of an acceptable standard was an integral part of the construction works. The new plasterwork was done at the earliest practicable opportunity.

Commentary

Care should be taken when considering when the completion of a house build takes place. There are time limits for DIY Housebuilders’ Scheme clams and clearly, as this case illustrates, usually work done to a house after completion does not qualify for zero rating. So, if the owner of a house is thinking of, say, building a conservatory for example, it is more prudent in VAT terms to construct it at the same time as a new house is built, and certainly before completion.

I would say that the appellant in this case achieved a surprisingly good result.

VAT: What is a TOGC? Why is it important?

By   6 June 2019
0

What is a Transfer of a Going Concern (TOGC)?

Normally the sale of the assets of a VAT registered business will be subject to VAT at the appropriate rate. A TOGC, however is the sale of a business including assets which must be treated as a matter of law, as “neither a supply of goods nor a supply of services” by virtue of meeting certain conditions. It is always the seller who is responsible for applying the correct VAT treatment and will be required to support their decision.

Where the sale meets the conditions, the supply is outside the scope of VAT and therefore VAT is not chargeable.

The word ‘business’ has the meaning set out in The VAT Act 1994, section 94 and ‘going concern’ has the meaning that at the point in time to which the description applies, the business is live or operating and has all parts and features necessary to keep it in operation, as distinct from its being only an inert aggregation of assets.

TOGC Conditions

The conditions for VAT free treatment of a TOGC:

  • The assets must be sold as a business, or part of a business, as a going concern
  • The assets must be used by the transferee in carrying on the same kind of business, whether or not as part of any existing business, as that carried on by the transferor in relation to that part (HMRC guidance uses the words “intend to use…” which, in some cases may provide additional comfort)
  • There must be no break in trading
  • Where the seller is a taxable person (VAT registered) the purchaser must be a taxable person already or immediately become, as a result of the transfer, a taxable person
  • Where only part of a business is sold it must be capable of separate operation
  • There must not be a series of immediately consecutive transfers
  • Where the transfer includes property which is standard-rated, either because the seller has opted to tax it or because it is a ‘new’ or uncompleted commercial building the purchaser must opt to tax the property and notify this to HMRC no later than the date of the supply. This may be the date of completion or, if earlier, the date of receipt of payment or part payment (eg; a deposit). There are additional anti-avoidance requirements regarding the buyer’s option to tax

Please note that the above list has been compiled for this article from; the legislation, HMRC guidance and case law. Specific advice must be sought.

Property transfer

The sale of a property may qualify for TOGC if the above tests are met. Usually, but not exclusively, a TOGC sale is the sale of a tenanted building when the sale is with the benefit of the existing lease(s) – (the sale of a property rental business rather than of the property itself). Another example of a property TOGC is where a property under construction is sold (a development business). As may be seen, timing with a property TOGC is of utmost importance. For example, an option to tax one day late will invalidate TOGC treatment. A guide to land and property.

What purpose do the TOGC rules serve?

The TOGC provisions are intended to simplify accounting for VAT when a business changes hands. The main purposes are to:

  • relieve the buyer from the burden of funding VAT on the purchase, helping businesses by improving their cash flow and avoiding the need to separately value assets which may be liable at different rates or are exempt and which have been sold as a whole
  • protect government revenue by removing a charge to tax and entitlement to input tax where the output tax may not be paid to HMRC, for example, where a business charges tax, which is claimed by the new business but not paid by the selling business

What if it goes wrong?

TOGC treatment is not optional. A sale is either a TOGC or it isn’t. It is a rare situation in that the VAT treatment depends on; what the purchaser’s intentions are, what the seller is told, and what the purchaser actually does. All this being outside the seller’s control.

Add VAT when TOGC treatment applies:

Often, the TOGC point can be missed, especially in complex property transactions.

The addition of VAT is sometimes considered a “safe” VAT position. However, output tax will have been charged incorrectly, which means that when the buyer claims VAT shown on the relevant invoice, this will be disallowed. This can lead to;

  • potential penalties and interest from HMRC
  • the buyer having to recover the VAT payment (often the seller, having sold a business can be difficult to track down and then obtain payment from)
  • significant cash flow issues (HMRC will need to be repaid the input tax claim immediately)
  • if a property sale, SDLT is likely to be overpaid

Sale treated as a TOGC when it is a taxable supply:

When VAT free TOGC treatment is applied to a taxable supply (possibly as one, or more of the TOGC conditions are not met) then there is a tax underdeclaration. The seller will be assessed by HMRC and penalties and interest are likely to be levied. There is then the seller’s requirement to attempt to obtain the VAT payment from the buyer. Similarly to above, this is not always straightforward or possible and it may be that the contract prohibits additional payment. There is likely to be unexpected funding issues for the buyer if (s)he does decide to make the payment.

Considering the usually high value of sales of businesses, the VAT cost of getting it wrong can be significant.

Summary

This is a complex area of the tax and an easy issue to miss when there are a considerable number of other factors to consider when a business is sold. Extensive case law (example here and changes to HMRC policy here ) insists that there is often a dichotomy between a commercial interpretation of a going concern and HMRC’s view. I sometimes find that the buyer’s intentions change such that the TOGC initially applied becomes invalid when the change in the use of assets (from what was notified to the seller) actually takes place.  HMRC is not always sympathetic in these situations. One of the questions I am often asked is: “How long does the buyer have to operate the business after purchase so that TOGC treatment applies?” Unsurprisingly, there is no set answer to this and HMRC do not set a specific period. My view, and it is just my view, is that an absolute minimum time is one VAT quarter.

Contracts are important in most TOGC cases, so it really pays to review them from a VAT perspective.

I very strongly advise that specialist advice is obtained in cases where a business, or property is sold. Yes, I know I would say that!

VAT: Land & Property – Option To Tax Update

By   3 June 2019
0

Who opts to tax?

HMRC have published an updated Public Notice 742A The changes are in connection with authorised signatories, in particular; corporate bodies, overseas entities and powers of attorney. It is important to establish who can sign an option to tax (OTT) form VAT1614A as getting it wrong may invalidate an OTT with potentially very expensive consequences.

A guide to the OTT here.

It seems an appropriate time to look at who can sign an OTT form. HMRC guidance states:

“The person responsible for making the decision and notifying the option to tax depends on the type of legal entity holding (or intending to hold) the interest in the land or building, and who within that entity has the authority to make decisions concerning VAT. In most cases it will be the sole proprietor, one or more partners (or trustees), a director or an authorised administrator. If you have appointed a third party to notify an option to tax on your behalf, HMRC requires written confirmation that the third party is authorised to do so.”

Some specific situations:

Beneficial owners

In cases where there is both a beneficial owner and a legal owner of land or buildings for VAT purposes it is the beneficial owner who is making the supply of the land or building. It is therefore the beneficial owner who should OTT. This may not be the case where the beneficiaries are numerous, such as unit trusts and pension funds. In these cases, the person deemed to be making the supply is the trustee who holds the legal interest and receives the immediate benefit of the consideration.

Joint owners

Joint ownership is where two entities purchase land or buildings together, or one party sells a share in property to another party. Usually, a supply may only be made by both entities together. The two entities should OTT together as a single option and register for VAT account for output tax as a single entity (usually a partnership even if it is not a partnership for any other purpose.).

Limited partnerships

Under the Limited Partnership Act 1907 every limited partnership must be registered with Companies House. A limited partnership is made up of one or more general partners, who have unlimited liability, and one or more ‘limited’ partners, who are not liable for debts and obligations of the firm. A limited partner is unable to take part in the management.

If there is only one general partner and one or more limited partners, the general partner is treated as a sole proprietor for VAT registration purposes. If there are two or more general partners and one or more limited partners, the general partners are treated as a partnership. It is the general partners who should OTT.

Limited liability partnerships (LLPs)

An LLP has separate legal status from its members and is able to enter into contracts in its own right. An LLP is a body corporate and is may register for VAT. If the partnership decides to OTT, one or more members, as the authorised signatory must sign the notification.

Authorised persons for particular legal entities 

In order for an OTT to be notified effectively, it must be signed and dated by an authorised person who possesses the legal capacity to notify a decision.

List of authorised signatories

Legal entity Authorised persons
Sole trader (proprietor) Owner of the business
Trust Trustee (or partner if VAT2 is completed)
Partnership (UK) Any partner (on VAT2)
Partnership (Scotland) Any partner
Limited partnership (UK) General partner
Limited partnership (Scotland) General partner
Limited Liability Partnership Designated member or member
Unincorporated Association Chairperson, treasurer, trustee or company secretary
Limited company Company director or company secretary
Community Interest Company (CIC) Company director or company secretary
Charitable Incorporated Organisation Director, chairperson, treasurer, trustee, or company secretary
Community Benefit Society Chairperson, treasurer, trustee or company secretary
Local Authority Section 151 officer (or Section 95 officer in Scotland), town clerk, head of finance, or treasurer
VAT group Director or company secretary of the group member that owns the property
Government department Nominated VAT liaison officer or finance manager (or a person senior to either)
Corporate body acting as a director, trustee or company secretary Any office holder or employee authorised by the corporate body (as long as the corporate body itself has authorisation from the owner the property)
Overseas entity Director or manager
Power of attorney Anyone granted a power of attorney to administer or manage the tax affairs of the owner of a property

Commentary

An invalid OTT may result in, among other things:

  • Input tax recovery being barred
  • A potential Transfer of a Going Concern (TOGC) becoming subject to VAT
  • VAT registration being denied
  • Unwanted complexity in transactions with the potential for a deal to be aborted
  • Costs in unwinding the VAT position (if firefighting is possible)
  • Uncertainty
  • Delays in transactions
  • A dispute between two sides to a transaction
  • Past input tax being the subject of clawback
  • The Capital Goods Scheme (CGS) being triggered resulting in VAT costs and complexity
  • HMRC levying penalties and interest

It is important to get the, seemingly simple, process of OTT right, and right first time!