Tag Archives: EC

VAT: New rules for registration and reporting in the EU from 1 January 2025

By   6 November 2023
0

EU Member States have agreed to extend similar VAT registration thresholds utilised by domestic businesses to EU non-resident taxpayers.

VAT scheme for Small Businesses

New simplification rules will open the VAT exemption to small businesses established in other member states and help reduce VAT compliance costs. The new regime should reduce red tape and administrative burdens for SMEs and create a level playing field for businesses regardless of where they are established in the EU. The new VAT scheme for SMEs will apply from 1 January 2025.

The new scheme

Current rules on the exemption of supplies under a certain threshold:

  • Member States are allowed to exempt supplies by small enterprises with an annual turnover not exceeding a given threshold, different in each Member State.
  • Small enterprises not established in a certain Member State have, however, no access to such an exemption.

New rules on the exemption of supplies under a certain threshold

  • Member States will be allowed to continue exempting small businesses with an annual turnover not exceeding a given threshold, which cannot be higher than € 85,000 (maximum exemption threshold).
  • The new rules will open the exemption to small enterprises established in other Member States than the one in which the VAT is due. The exemption will apply if the turnover in Member State where the SME is not established is below the national threshold and if the annual turnover in all of the EU is below €100,000. This is a safeguard threshold preventing companies with large turnover to benefit from the SME exemption in other Member States. For this purpose, SMEs will be able to use the single registration window in their own Member State.

The new rules will provide exempt SMEs with simplifications in terms of registration and reporting. These rules should reduce the overall VAT compliance costs for SMEs by up to 18% per year.

A VAT Did you know?

By   20 September 2023
0

Dance classes in some EU countries are subject to different VAT rates depending on whether the dance style is considered artistic or entertainment. In the UK, belly dancing and ceroc lessons are standard rated, but ballet is exempt.

VAT: B2B and B2C – The distinction and importance

By   1 August 2023
0

A key feature of the place of supply rules is the distinction between B2B (business to business) and B2C (business to consumer) supplies. The distinction is important because it determines, inter alia, whether GB VAT is applicable to a supply made by a GB supplier.

Status of the customer:

  • B2C: A supply is B2C when the customer is a private individual, an organisation with only non-business activities or the supply is wholly for private use (eg for the private use of a business owner)
  • B2B: A supply is B2B when the customer has any level of business activity (though if a supply is wholly for private use it remains B2C). It does not matter if the supply is for a non-business activity of the customer or if the customer is not VAT registered. All that matters is the customer has some level of business activity – this includes VAT exempt activity and taxable activity below the VAT registration threshold VAT place of supply.

To apply the B2B treatment a GB supplier must obtain evidence that the customer has business activities. If the supplier cannot obtain any evidence, they should apply B2C treatment.

  • If the customer is VAT registered, the customer’s VAT number is evidence of status and it is good practice to quote this on the supplier’s invoice. A GB supplier should check the customer’s VAT registration number is in the correct format for the country concerned. This can be done via the EC Vies website. for EU customers. NB: Special evidence rules apply to electronically supplied services.
  • If the customer is not VAT registered, a GB supplier should obtain and retain evidence that the customer has business activities. HMRC state “If your customer is unable to provide a VAT number, you can accept alternative evidence.This includes certificates from fiscal authorities, business letterheads or other commercial documents indicating the nature of the customer’s activities”.

A supplier needs to identify where his customer belongs in order to establish the place of supply.

VERY broadly, depending on the nature of the supply, the rule of thumb is that a B2B service is GB VAT free (it is subject to a reverse charge by the recipient as it is deemed to be “supplied where received”) but a B2C service is generally subject to GB VAT, regardless of the place of belonging of the recipient. There are exceptions to these rules however, such as the use and enjoyment provisions, land related services, hire of transport and admission to events.

Digital Euro introduction delayed

By   21 June 2023
0
The European Commission’s proposal for the introduction of a digital Euro has been delayed.
The adoption was planned for 28 June 2023, but this has now been postponed. There is currently no news on a new date.

What is digital Euro?

As a digital form of central bank money, the digital Euro will offer greater choice to consumers and businesses in situations where physical cash cannot be used. However, the digital euro would be a complement to cash, which should remain widely available and useable.

A digital Euro would offer an electronic means of payment that anyone could use in the euro area. It would be secure and user-friendly, like cash is today. As central bank money issued by the ECB, it would be different from “private money”, but you could also use a card or a phone app to pay with digital euro. It is intended to provide an anchor of stability for our money in the digital age.

Further details here.

VAT: Place of supply – The Sports Invest case

By   5 May 2023
0

Latest from the courts

In the First-Tier Tribunal case of Sports Invest UK Ltd the issue was the place of supply (POS) of a football agent’s services (commission received for a player’s transfer).

The POS is often complex from a VAT perspective and depends on the place of belonging (POB) of the supplier and the recipient of the supply. These rules determine if VAT is charged, where VAT is charged and the rate of VAT applicable, additionally, they may impose requirements to register for VAT in different jurisdictions.

Background

Sports Invest was a football agent based in the UK. It received fees in respect of negotiating the transfer of a player: João Mário from a Portuguese club: Sporting Lisbon to an Italian club: Internazionale (Inter Milan). The appellant signed a representation contract with the player which entitled it to commission, and a separate agreement with Inter Milan entitling it to a fee because the player was permanently transferred.

The Issues

To whom did Sports Invest make a supply – club or player? What was the supply? Was there one or two separate supplies? What was the POS?

As appears normal for transactions in the world of football the contractual arrangements were complex, but, in essence as a matter of commercial and economic reality, Sports Invest had agreed the commission with the player in case it was excluded from the deal. However, this did not occur, and the deal was concluded as anticipated. Inter Milan paid The Appellant’s fee in full, but did this affect the agreement between Sports Invest and the player? That is, as HMRC contended, did Inter Milan pay Sports Invest on the player’s behalf (third party consideration) such that there were two supplies; one to the player and one to the cub?

The FTT stated that there was no suggestion that the contracts were “sham documents”.

VAT Liability

The arrangements mattered, as pre-Brexit, a supply of services by a business with a POB in the UK to an individual (B2C) in another EU Member State would have been subject to UK VAT; the POS being where the supplier belonged. HMRC assessed for an element of the fee that it saw related to the supply to the player. The remainder of the fee paid by the club was accepted to be consideration for a UK VAT free supply by the agent to the club (B2B).

Decision

The court found that there was one single supply by The Appellant to Inter Milan. This being the case, the supply was B2B and the POS was where the recipient belonged and so that the entire supply was UK VAT free. There was no (UK) supply to the individual player as that agreement was superseded by the contractual arrangements which were actually put in place and the player owed the agent nothing as the potential payment under that contract was waived.

The appeal against the assessment was upheld.

Commentary

The court’s decision appears to be logical as the supply was to the club who were receiving “something” (the employment contract with the player) and paying for it. The other “safeguarding” agreement appeared to be simple good commercial practice and was ultimately “not required”. This case highlights the often complex issues of; establishing the nature of transactions, the identity of the recipient(s), agency arrangements, the POS and the legal, commercial and economic reality of contracts.

 

 

VAT: Charging EVs ruled to be goods not services

By   24 April 2023
0

Latest from the courts

In the Court of Justice of the European Union (CJEU) it was ruled that electric vehicle charging via public charging points, was a supply of goods, regardless that some elements of the supply were services, ie; access technical support, reservation of a charging point, and a parking space while charging. The overriding supply was the provision of electricity which is classified as goods.

The full P. In W. case here.

It is unlikely that the UK authorities will form a different view.

Although in most cases there is unlikely to be a significant difference, although there could be issues with the time of supply (tax point).

VAT: New HMRC guidance on duty deferment and guarantee waivers

By   3 November 2020
0

HMRC has published guidance on a number of issues relating to duty and guarantee waivers:

  • How to apply for duty deferment when importing goods. This will apply to businesses bringing in goods from the EU from 1 January 2021. This means that the duty and customs payments may be delayed

We recommend any business importing goods checks all the requirements and puts plans in place to defer VAT, duties and customs payments wherever possible. Despite political promises, this significant additional red tape as a result of Brexit helps nobody and will be a costly burden.  However, at least the government have put a structure in place which will aid cashflow.

VAT: Post Brexit UK Tariffs

By   15 October 2020
0

Further to my recent article on the Border Operating Model, we now know what Tariffs the UK will apply.

Currently, goods are able to move from country to country inside the EU completely Tariff free. This means that there is no need for import and export formalities which add delays and red tape. Unfortunately, as a result of Brexit, from 1 January 2021, EU/UK trade will be subject to Tariffs as the UK will be a “third country” (third country refers to any country outside the EU, and in this case outside its economic structures – the single market and the customs union).

Commercially, Tariffs add to the cost of importing goods into the UK by UK businesses and increase the price of exports to overseas customers. It is not possible to reclaim the cost of Tariffs (unlike VAT) so these will always represent a real cost to a buyer. The government has now announced what the UK Tariffs will be here.

Overview

The UK has broadly retained the existing Tariff for goods brought into the EU from third countries. However, there are some changes for; important industrial components (nuts, bolts, tubes and screws etc) some consumer products, the removal of Tariffs below 2% and the rounding of Tariffs with a decimal point.

Action

Businesses should review their exposure to these tariffs and what the related customs duty burden will be. They will also need to consider; budgets, pricing and alternative business structures – which may include manufacturing in the EU rather than the UK. We also recommend reviewing Commodity Codes, values for Customs Duties and the origin of the goods. Please also note that the use of incoterms will become increasingly important.

VAT: Additional time for zero rating exported goods due to the coronavirus

By   19 May 2020
0

COVID-19 Update 

HMRC has published concessions in VEXP30310 relating to the conditions for the zero rating of exports.

Background

Most exports of goods from the UK are subject to zero rating. However, in order for VAT free treatment to apply, certain conditions must be met, otherwise 20% VAT applies to the sale. One of the conditions is that the goods must be exported within specified time limits.

Time limits

Generally, goods can be zero rated provided that:

  • they are exported within 3 months of the time of supply, and;
  • valid evidence of export is obtained within 3 months of the time of supply

COVID-19

During the pandemic, it may not be possible for businesses to export goods within the prescribed time. HMRC recognises that some intended exports have been delayed due to circumstances outside a business’ control. Therefore, the guidance sets out the circumstances in which HMRC may agree to additional time for the export before any tax is collected.

Additional time

The time limits for the export of goods from the UK are set out in legislation. However, HMRC has discretion to permit non-observance of the conditions and time limits for export of goods – VAT Act 1994, Section 30(10). HMRC has said that it will use its discretion to temporarily waive the prescribed time limits for export on a case by case basis.  The goods must, however, have either already been exported or will be as soon as is reasonably practicable after the date a business is notified that HMRC is temporarily waiving the tax. An application for HMRC to waive the time limits must be made in writing.

Conditions

HMRC will permit a temporary waiver of time limits if the following conditions are met:

  1. it has not been possible to export goods within the prescribed time limit due to the COVID-19 emergency

Examples include:

  •   the UK or another Government has imposed restrictions on the movement of goods or people due to COVID-19 that prevent the goods          being exported to the intended destination
  •   cancellation of the intended mode of transport for reasons directly related to COVID-19
  •   a participant in the export is ill due to COVID-19 and a substitute cannot be found

This list is not exhaustive.

2. the goods have been/will be exported or removed at the earliest opportunity

3. all other conditions for zero rating exports or removals are met – exporters’ responsibilities here

Expiry

Any waiver will expire

  • one month after any government-imposed restrictions are lifted or
  • one month after any COVID-19 impediment to the export or removal ceases, or
  • there ceases to be an intention to export or remove the goods from the UK (Information on intention here)

whichever is the earlier.

If a business considers there are extenuating circumstances that mean additional time is needed to export goods beyond that permitted by the extension, it should contact HMRC setting out the details in full.

Evidence

A business must retain evidence that supports its case for the waiver (eg; cancellation notes demonstrating that the transport intended to use to take goods out of the UK did not take place, or screen shots of government rules preventing the export or removal of the goods).

Please contact us if you require any further advice or assistance.







VAT: Intention is crucial – The Sonaecom case

By   18 May 2020
0

We cannot control the future…

The Sonaecom case

In the opinion* of the CJEU AG (C-42/19) the importance of a taxpayer’s intention was of utmost importance, regardless of whether that intention was achieved.

Background

Sonaecom intended to acquire a telecoms provider company. As is usual in such cases, input tax was incurred on consultancy received, from, amongst others; accountants and legal service providers. The intention post acquisition was for Sonaecom to make certain charges to the acquired co. These would have been taxable supplies.

Unfortunately, the intended purchase was aborted.

 The issue

The issue before the AG was; as no taxable supplies took place as the deal fell through – to what should the input tax incurred on advice be attributed?

Opinion

In the AG’s view the fact that the acquisition was aborted was no reason for the claim for input tax to denied. This was based on the fact that:

  • Sonaecom was not a “pure holding company”
  • There was a genuine intention to make taxable supplies (to the acquired co)
  • There was a direct and immediate link between the costs and the intended supplies
  • Although the acquisition costs would exceed the proposed management charges, this was not a reason to invalidate the claim
  • The above analysis was not affected by the fact that the transaction did not take place

Commentary

There are often issues in relation to intentions of a taxpayer. It is clear, and was emphasised in this case, that intention is all important. Of course, intentions can change over a period of time and commercial and political events may thwart or cause intentions to be re-evaluated. There is often an issue about evidencing an intention. HMRC usually require comprehensive documentary evidence to demonstrate an objective. Such evidence is sometime not available for various reasons. Consequently, it is prudent for businesses to record (board meeting minutes etc at the very least) the commercial reasons for taking a certain course of action. This issue quite often arises in transactions in land and property – which can create additional technical issues.

There is legislation in place to cover situations when intentions, or actual events change and which affect the original input tax position: The Capital Goods Scheme (CGS) and The Value Added Tax Regulations 1995, Regs 108 and 109.

Other areas of VAT which often to raise issues are management charges and holding companies. HMRC apparently continue to be eager to attack taxpayers in these areas and I have looked at the role of holding companies and the VAT treatment here, here and here.

I think it is useful to bear in mind a question which, in itself does not evidence an intention, but provides commercial coherence – Why were the costs incurred if there was no intention to make the acquisition? This does leave aside the future management charges position but goes some way to provide business logic.

It will be interesting to see how this case proceeds, but I would find it very surprising if the court diverges from this AG opinion.

*  AG’s Opinion

The Court of Justice of the European Union (CJEU) consists of one judge from each Member State, assisted by eleven Advocates General whose role is to consider the written and oral submissions to the court in every case that raises a new point of law, and deliver an impartial opinion to the court on the legal solution.