Tag Archives: EC

VAT – Overseas Holiday Lets; a warning

By   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.

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

By   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 Compound Interest – Latest

By   24 November 2015

Proposed introduction of a new tax.

The Littlewoods case is slowly making its way through the court system with the CJEU ruling that there is a right to the taxpayer of adequate indemnity in respect of tax incorrectly collected via a mistake of law.  There are myriad claims to which this will apply, especially “Fleming” claims where they covered a significant period of time a number of years ago.

HMRC has now applied to Supreme Court’s decision for permission to appeal the decision and we expect the Supreme Court’s verdict within the next month.

HMRC appear very concerned that it will ultimately be required to pay large amounts of interest to taxpayers who have suffered as a result of HMRC applying the relevant law incorrectly.  Consequently, it has announced that the Summer Finance Bill 2015 will impose a 45% corporation tax charge on compound interest.  There will be no right of set off or deduction for other losses. HMRC will withhold the corporation tax from any payment of interest made. This will take effect on 21 October 2015 (although the relevant legislation will not become law until 2016 indicating that HMRC is indeed running scared).

It is understood that there are a number of parties currently working on ways to challenge the legality of the proposed legislation.

Action

Claims already submitted

No immediate action is required, although it may be beneficial to review the basis of the claim, how it was made and what the status of it is currently.

New claims

For businesses which have received repayments due to HMRC error, it may be worthwhile reviewing the position to determine whether a claim for compound interest is appropriate and if so, to make a claim as soon as possible.  We would, of course, be happy to advise on this and assist where necessary.

VAT – Where do I belong?!

By   16 November 2015
The concept of “belonging” is very important in VAT as it determines where a supply takes place and thus the rate applicable and the country in which is due. (The so-called “Place Of Supply, or POS). It is necessary, for most supplies, to establish where both the supplier, and the recipient belongs. Because this is a complex area of VAT it is not difficult to be overpaying tax in one country, not paying tax where it is properly due, or missing the tax issue completely. 

A relevant business person `belongs’ in the relevant country. A `relevant country’ means:

  •  the country in which the person has a business establishment, or some other fixed establishment (if it has none in any other country);
  •  if the person has a business establishment, or some other fixed establishment or establishments, in more than one country, the country  of the relevant establishment (ie; the establishment most directly concerned with the supply); and
  •  otherwise, the country of the person’s usual place of residence (in the case of a body corporate, where it is legally constituted).

A person who is not a relevant business person `belongs’ in the country of his usual place of residence. The `belonging’ definition applies equally to the recipient of a supply, where relevant.

Business establishment is not defined in the legislation but is taken by HMRC to mean the principal place of business. It is usually the head office, headquarters or ‘seat’ from which the business is run. There can only be one such place and it may take the form of an office, showroom or factory.

Fixed establishment is not defined in the legislation but is taken by HMRC to mean an establishment (other than the business establishment) which has both the technical and human resources necessary for providing and receiving services on a permanent basis. A business may therefore have several fixed establishments, including a branch of the business or an agency. A temporary presence of human and technical resources does not create a fixed establishment in the UK.

Usual place of residence. A body corporate has its usual place of residence where it is legally constituted. The usual place of residence of an individual is not defined in the legislation. HMRC interpret the phrase according to the ordinary usage of the words, ie; normally the country where the individual has set up home with his/her family and is in full-time employment. An individual is not resident in a country if only visiting as a tourist.

More than one establishment. Where the supplier/recipient has establishments in more than one country, the supplies made from/received at each establishment must be considered separately. For each supply of services, the establishment which is actually providing/receiving the services is normally the one most directly connected with the supply but all facts should be considered including

  •  for suppliers, from which establishment the services are actually provided;
  •  for recipients, at which establishment the services are actually consumed, effectively used or enjoyed;
  •  which establishment appears on the contracts, correspondence and invoices;
  •  where directors or others who entered into the contract are permanently based; and
  •  at which establishment decisions are taken and controls are exercised over the performance of the contract.

However, where an establishment is actually providing/receiving the supply of services, it is normally that establishment which is most directly connected with the supply, even if the contractual position is different.

VAT groups

A VAT group is treated as a single entity. This also applies when applying the ‘place of belonging’. As a result, a group has establishments wherever any member of the group has establishments.

This is an area which often leads to uncertainty, and therefore VAT issues.  It is also an area where VAT planning may; save time, resources and avoid unexpected VAT costs, either in the UK or another country.

For more on our International Services

VAT – An important ECJ case which will affect charities – Sveda

By   28 October 2015

A benefit to charities?

In the case of Sveda (C-126/14) which was recently heard by the European Court of Justice (ECJ) the issue was whether input tax was recoverable on the construction of a recreational woodland path which ended at a shop that Sveda owned and made taxable supplies from. Full case here

90% of the construction costs were met by Grant received from the Lithuanian Ministry of Agriculture on the condition that the path was made available free of charge to the public for a period of five years.  There was no dispute that the grant was outside the scope income for Sveda.

The authorities disallowed the VAT claimed on 100% of the costs on the grounds there was no link to taxable supplies since free access is a non-economic activity because there was no consideration paid to use the path.  Alternatively, there was a contention that only 10% of the VAT should be reclaimed, since the company only met 10% of the cost.

Sveda argued that, although the path could be used free of charge, the purpose was increase taxable sales from its shop (food, drink and souvenirs). This meant there was a link between the VAT incurred and its economic activity as a whole.

The ECJ rejected the view that the input tax should be blocked in its entirety or in part. Its view was that the expenditure was incurred with the intention of carrying out an economic taxable activity, even if there was no direct link to any one specific supply and use of the path was free. The VAT was overhead VAT. No exempt supplies (that would break the chain of deduction) took place.

So, although the path was used for a non-business activity (free access) the ECJ deemed that the input tax incurred on the costs of building the path was deductible. As there was a link to economic activities the VAT is treated as overhead and, in this case, fully recoverable.

Although Sveda is a commercial company and the decision will no doubt be of assistance to commercial entities, there may be a significant impact on charities and NFP organisations.  This judgment highlights the basic right to deduct VAT where a link to taxable supplies made by a taxable person can be demonstrated. It does not matter whether the link is to one taxable supply or to all the taxable economic activities. The non-business use of the asset did not prevent recovery.  The outcome would no doubt have been different if Sveda was only involved in building the path and just providing free access to it without also selling items form the shop.

On a personal note, this case has echoes of one I took to Tribunal for The Imperial War Museum – with a similar successful outcome. HMRC views here

Let’s hope it will be just as useful for the taxpayer as the landmark IWM decision.

If you think you, or a charity you are aware of, or a client of yours may be affected by this decision, please contact me. This may be the case if the charity undertakes both business and non-activities.  I would always counsel that a charity should have its activities reviewed from a VAT perspective.  There are usually savings that could be made.

More on our charity services here

VAT – Trading in Bitcoin ruled exempt by ECJ

By   22 October 2015

VAT – Trading in Bitcoin ruled exempt by ECJ

Further to my article of 13 March 2014 here

The European Court of Justice (ECJ), the highest court of appeal for EC matters, has ruled that trading in digital, such as bitcoin, is exempt. this is on the basis that they are a method of payment with no intrinsic value, like goods or commodities.  They are therefore covered by the exemption relating to “currency, bank notes and coins used as legal tender” – (Article 135 (1) of the VAT directive). 

This confirms that the UK authority’s approach is correct and that the VAT treatment applied in Germany, Poland and Sweden where those authorities treated the relevant transactions as subject to VAT, is erroneous.

This is good news for the UK as it is a big (if not the biggest) player in the bitcoin sector.

VAT – Proof of evidence of Intra-EC supplies

By   23 September 2015

A B2B supply of goods from one Member State to another (a dispatch) is VAT free (with the recipient dealing with acquisition tax in the Member State of receipt). However, in order to VAT free treatment to apply evidence that the goods have moved cross-border must be provided and satisfy the authorities in the Member State of dispatch.

The level of evidence and type of documents required to support the right to VAT free treatment varies significantly between Member States. This has led to confusion and difficulties for businesses.

As a result the EC VAT Expert Group* have, this week, produced a paper (paper 46) named “‘Proof of evidence of Intra-EU supplies’” Here: 46 – Proof of IC Supplies

As well as identifying the wide discretion afforded to Member States as to the type of documents required, it notes that this discretion and lack of clarity often leads to disproportionate compliance burdens for businesses involved in the cross border supply of goods. This also results in the fundamental principle of fiscal neutrality and the free movements of goods being impaired.

In summary

 The Group’s findings may be summarised:

  •  Diversity of documentation

Most Member States rely on a myriad of documents which may not be listed in national legislation. Such diversity is a problem and may require businesses to provide documentary evidence that cannot be reasonably obtained. This practice does not reconcile with principles established by the ECJ. The paper adds that tax authorities tend to focus on certain formalities and not permit alternative evidence.

  •  Local initiatives

The paper notes that based on Article 131 of the VAT Directive, and often in light of the fight against fraud, tax authorities are introducing local initiatives. The compatibility of these with the EC framework may be questioned and is causing increasing burdens and costs on legitimate taxpayers.

  •  Importance given by tax authorities to the “knowledge test”

The paper considers that the level of demand from tax authorities to document intra-EC trade should not be upgraded because of fraud cases. Documentary evidence is of a type fraudsters would typically provide. The wide margin of interpretation left to tax authorities and judges regarding concepts such as “good faith” means that further guidance may be required. This, however, should not extend up to a requirement for suppliers to show evidence to authorities that their customers acted in good faith.

  •  Diversity of practices; timing versus legal certainty

The diversity of approaches across EC Member States generates costs and increase risks for businesses operating in different Member States.

Conclusion

The paper considered some recent ECJ case law on cross-border transactions and concluded VAT free treatment should be granted to the supplier when:

1)    It demonstrates that the transaction meets the substantive criteria of that provision, namely that it is entered into with another taxable person in a Member State other than that in which dispatch or transport of the goods begins. This would be done with the supplier holding at least three non-contradictory documents or elements certifying the transport or dispatch to another Member State.

2)    In this context, a reasonable customer assessment could be expected from taxpayers when tax authorities audit whether the transactions are taking place in the context of fraud and/or abuse.

Next Steps

It is recommended that new guidance could be adopted in an Implementing Regulation or an explanatory note to the relevant Articles in the VAT Directive could be prepared by the Commission.

It will be interesting to see if these recommendations are adopted.  It would make life a lot more straightforward for businesses who trade cross-border in the EC.  Although the UK has one of the most practical regimes in this respect, even genuine movements of goods from the UK can result in an unexpected and unwelcome VAT charge because of a lack of specific documentation.

* The VAT Expert Group assists and advises the European Commission on VAT matters. Details here 

VAT – Intrastat; what is it? If you don’t know, you may be committing a criminal offence…

By   15 July 2015

Although often viewed as a necessary evil, Intrastat can be used by a business to obtain valuable information on markets in the EC. …Oh, and it may be quite useful to understand it to avoid getting a criminal record!  In this article I summarise the basics, provide useful links and look at the pros and cons of the regime.

So, what is Intrastat?

Intrastat is the name given to the system used for collecting statistics on the trade in goods between all 28 Member States of the EC. If certain conditions are met a business must, by law, submit monthly Intrastat Supplementary Declarations (SDs). Intrastat does not cover services, nor is it required for exports to recipients outside the EC.

The data collected under the Intrastat system forms a large part of overall UK trade statistics totals which in turn are an important part of the UK Balance of Payment account and an important indicator of the health of ‘UK plc’. This data is published at uktradeinfo and is used by a wide range of government and international organisations and is particularly useful in helping businesses gauge import penetration and establish new markets for their goods.

Intrastat responsibilities

If a VAT registered business trades with any of the other EC Member States, it will have a responsibility to report the trade to HMRC. How detailed that report is required to be depends on the value of its trade with other EC Member States for either purchases (arrivals) or sales (dispatches). If a business’ trade in goods falls below the Intrastat thresholds then EC Sales Lists may be required.

Reporting Thresholds for SDs

The limits are:

  • £1,500,000 for arrivals, and;
  • £250,000 for dispatches

In a calendar year.

Intrastat should not be confused with EC Sales Lists which are used to collect information on all sales from UK VAT registered businesses to business recipients in other EC Member States.  A guide to EC Sales Lists here

Classification of goods for Intrastat

Finding the right commodity code for goods is one of the most important aspects of Intrastat. An online classification tool, the Intrastat Classification Nomenclature (ICN) is available to assist businesses find the right commodity code for its goods. Here

The ICN is a fully searchable facility which can be used by everyone from beginner to expert.

Value for SDs

Only the value of goods are included in SDs (plus any related freight or insurance charges where they form part of the invoice or contract price of the goods).

The value does not include:

  • Commission, legal and financial services
  • Insurance, freight and/or carriage (unless it is included with the cost of the goods)
  • Labour
  • Goods bought and sold within the EU but which do not actually enter or leave the UK
  • Maintenance costs
  • Repairs

Submission of SDs

This may be done online or offline (which is preferred for large amounts of data).

Online submission details here

Offline submissions are via pre-prepared Excel spreadsheets available here

Via an email attachment – the file must be converted into the message format Electronic Data Interchange for Commerce and Transport (EDIFACT). Details here

Deadlines for submission of SDs

Intrastat declarations must be submitted on a monthly basis. Complete and accurate declarations must be received by the 21st day of the month following the reference period to which they relate.

Now, the scary part.

Penalties

It is perhaps surprising that if you fail to submit SDs by the due date, or send data that is inaccurate, a business will be committing a criminal offence (Statistics of Trade [C&E] Regulations 1992).

Penalties may be levied in cases where SDs are persistently late, missing, inaccurate or incomplete.

Although the penalty regime is a criminal one and could result in proceedings in a Magistrates Court, HMRC state that it normally prefers to “compound” alleged offences. This involves the offer of an administrative fine in lieu of Court proceedings. However, an administrative fine is only offered when, after receiving a Warning of Possible Criminal Proceedings letter, a business has brought its Intrastat declarations completely up to date. If any declarations remain outstanding Court proceedings will be instigated.

The plus side.

How to use Intrastat for your business

It is possible for a business to find out about; trade markets, competition, suppliers, customers and competitors using data collected via Intrastat.  Additionally, the information may be used to create a bespoke data table to suit a business’ specific needs. Information here

Intrastat pros and cons

Yes, businesses are being used as unpaid providers of trade information as well as unpaid collectors of tax.  It then does seem rather draconian that HMRC “coerce” businesses to provide information on pain of a criminal record. But the information is then there for a business trading within the EC to use for its commercial advantage.  It’s another chore on the VAT checklist I’m afraid.

VAT on Crowdfunding?

By   28 May 2015

The EC is has begun an investigation into whether VAT should apply to crowdfunding activities.

An alternative is for the Commission to consider whether crowdfunding should be covered by the exemption for financial services.  In my view this seems unlikely.

So what could the outcome be if VAT is applicable to crowdfunding?  Well, a large number of UK projects will face a 20% VAT liability on investor returns. This is especially relevant to the popular “rewards crowdfunding”, where payments by investors are made in return for products or services to be developed as a result of the fundraising. These rewards projects may include; films, albums, or software development, which are offered “free” or at a reduced rate. It would appear that in these cases, consideration is flowing in both directions.

The Commission may also decide that crowdfunding intermediary services offered by many platforms will become liable to VAT.

The current position is that the Commission has now referred the question of crowdfunding to the EU VAT Committee.

More on this subject as soon as we have it.

VAT – The Future for the EC Digital Single Market

By   11 May 2015

VAT – The Future for the EC Digital Single Market

The EC has announced its plans for its VAT digital single market in respect of online sales. Full details are here and here.

The highlights are:

• Extension of MOSS to intra-EC and third country online B2C sales of goods.

• Introduction of a new EC-wide VAT threshold to help start-up businesses.

• Ending current distance selling thresholds.

• Allowing for domestic controls, including a single audit of cross-border sales.

• Removal of the VAT exemption for the import of small consignments form third countries.

• Removal of barriers to cross-border sales eg; geo-blocking and costs.

This is likely to have a huge impact on the way businesses deal with VAT on sales of goods to individuals overseas. If the introduction of MOSS is anything to go by, we may be in for a bumpy ride.