Tag Archives: latest-vat-news

VAT Quickie – HMRC change bank details for payments

By Marcus Ward 13 June 2016

HMRC’s new bank details

Most taxpayers who pay electronically will not be affected by the change. However, if a business pays its VAT using HMRC’s IBAN and BIC need to use the new IBAN and BIC with immediate effect. This change will mainly affect overseas businesses. It is observed that HMRC’s efforts to publicise this change have not been very successful.

Details for Overseas payments:

Account Number (IBAN) GB36BARC20051773152391

BIC BARCGB22

Account Name: HMRC VAT

HMRC banking address:

Barclays Bank PLC
1 Churchill Place
London
United Kingdom
E14 5HP

VAT Latest from the courts – what is a business?

By Marcus Ward 8 June 2016

In the CJEU case of * * takes a deep breath * * Lajvér Meliorációs Nonprofit Kft. and Lajvér Csapadékvízrendezési Nonprofit Kft the court considered whether these Not For Profit companies were making taxable supplies (economic activity). This then dictated whether input tax incurred by them was recoverable.

As a starting point, it may be helpful to look at what the words “economic activity”, “business”, “taxable supplies” and “taxable person” mean: The term “business” is only used in UK legislation, The Principal VAT Directive refers to “economic activity” rather than business and since UK domestic legislation must conform to the Directive both terms must be seen as having the same meaning. Since the very first days of VAT there have been disagreements over what constitutes a “business”. I have only recently ended a dispute over this definition for a (as it turns out) very happy client. In the UK the tests were set out as long ago as 1981 and may be summarised as follows:

Is the activity a serious undertaking earnestly pursued?
Is the activity an occupation or function, which is actively pursued with reasonable or recognisable continuity?
Does the activity have a certain measure of substance in terms of the quarterly or annual value of taxable supplies made (bearing in mind that exempt supplies can also be business)?
Is the activity conducted in a regular manner and on sound and recognised business principles?
Is the activity predominately concerned with the making of taxable supplies for a consideration?
Are the taxable supplies that are being made of a kind which, subject to differences of detail, are commonly made by those who seek to profit from them?

If there is no business, an entity cannot be making taxable supplies.

In EC Legislation, Article 9(1) of Directive 2006/112 provides: that “a ‘Taxable person’ shall mean any person who, independently, carries out in any place any economic activity, whatever the purpose or results of that activity.”

The case

The case involved the Not For Profit companies constructing and operating a water disposal system. When complete, it was intended to charge a “modest” fee to users of the system. The companies engaged in economic activities that were not intended to make a profit and only engaged in a commercial activity on an ancillary basis.

The majority of the funding for the work was provided by State (Hungarian) and EC aid. The Hungarian authority formed the view that, because a nominal fee was charged this did not amount to an economic activity and so there was no right to deduct input tax incurred on the costs of getting the system operational. The CJEU went straight to judgement and decided that the construction and operation of the system could rightly be regarded as an economic activity and found for the taxpayer. It also provided a very helpful and clear summary in respect of “business” by commenting that “… the fact that the price paid for an economic transaction is higher or lower than the cost price, and, therefore, higher or lower than the open market value, is irrelevant for the purpose of establishing whether it was a transaction effected for consideration …”.

NB: The one area that the CJEU did refer back to the National Court however, was whether the transaction at issue in the case was a wholly artificial arrangement which did not reflect economic reality and was set up with the sole aim of obtaining a tax advantage.

It is interesting to compare this finding with the UK case law above, especially the points concerning “a certain measure of substance in terms of the quarterly or annual value of taxable supplies made” and “sound and recognised business principles”. I strongly suspect that what constitutes a business will continue to occupy advisers and HMRC and throw up disputes until the end of time (and/or the end of VAT….).

Full case here

VAT Schemes Guide – Alternative ways of accounting for tax

By Marcus Ward 1 June 2016

There are a number of VAT Schemes which are designed to simplify accounting for the tax. They may save a business money, reduce complexity, avoid the need for certain documentation and reduce the time needed to deal with VAT. Some schemes may be used in combination with others, although I recommend that checks should be made first.

It is important to compare the use of each scheme to standard VAT accounting to establish whether a business will benefit. Some schemes are compulsory and there are particular pitfalls for certain businesses using certain schemes.

I thought that it would be useful to consider the schemes all in one place and look at their features and pros and cons.

These schemes reviewed here are:

Cash Accounting Scheme
Annual Accounting Scheme
Flat Rate Scheme
Margin schemes for second-hand goods
Global Accounting
VAT schemes for retailers
Tour Operators’ Margin Scheme

Cash Accounting Scheme

Normally, VAT returns are based on the tax point (usually the VAT invoice date) for sales and purchases. This may mean a business having to pay HMRC the VAT due on sales that its customers have not yet paid for.

The VAT cash accounting scheme instead bases reporting on payment dates, both for purchases and sales. A business will need to ensure its records include payment dates.

A business is only eligible for the Cash Accounting Scheme if its estimated taxable turnover is no more than £1.35m, and can then remain in the scheme as long as it remains below £1.6m.

Advantages

Usually beneficial for cash flow especially if its customers are slow paying
Output tax is not payable at all if a business has a bad debt

Disadvantages

Is generally not beneficial for a repayment business (one which reclaims more VAT than it pays, eg; an exporter or supplier of zero rated goods or services)
Not usually beneficial if a business purchases significant amounts of goods or services on credit

Annual Accounting Scheme

The Annual Accounting Scheme allows a business to pay VAT on account, in either nine monthly or three quarterly payments. These instalments are based on VAT paid in the previous year. It is then required to complete a single, annual VAT return which is used to calculate any balance owed by the business or due from HMRC.

A business is eligible for the scheme if its estimated taxable turnover is no more than £1.35m and is permitted to remain in the scheme as long as it remains below £1.6m.

Advantages

Reduces paperwork as only the need to complete one return instead of four (Although it does not remove the requirement to keep all the normal VAT records and accounts)
Improves management of cash flow

Disadvantages

Not suitable for repayment businesses as they would only receive one repayment at the end of the year
If turnover decreases, the interim payments may be higher than under standard accounting

Flat Rate Scheme

The Flat Rate Scheme is designed to assist smaller businesses reduce the amount of time and complexity required for VAT accounting. The Flat Rate Scheme removes the need to calculate the VAT on every transaction. Instead, a business pays a flat rate percentage of its VAT inclusive turnover. The percentage paid is less than the standard VAT rate because it recognises the fact that no input tax can be claimed on purchases. The flat rate percentage used is dependent on a business’ trade sector.

A business is eligible for this scheme if its estimated taxable turnover in the next year will not exceed £150,000. Once using the scheme, a business is permitted to continue using it until its income exceeds £230,000.

If eligible, a business may combine the Flat Rate Scheme with the Annual Accounting Schemes, additionally, there is an option to effectively use a cash basis so there is no need to use the Cash Accounting Scheme. There has been recent case law on the percentage certain businesses’ use for the FRS, so it is worth checking closely. There is a one percent discount for a business in its first year of trading.

Advantages

Depending on trade sector and circumstances may result in a real VAT saving
Simplified record keeping; no requirement to separate out gross, VAT and net in accounts
Fewer rules; no issues with input tax a business can and cannot recover on purchases
Certainty of knowing how much of income is payable to HMRC

Disadvantages

No reclaim of input tax incurred on purchases
If you buy a significant amount from VAT registered businesses, it is likely to result in more VAT due
Likely to be unattractive for businesses making zero-rated or exempt sales because output tax would also apply to this hitherto VAT free income
Low turnover limit

Margin Scheme for Second Hand Goods

A business normally accounts for output tax on the full value of its taxable supplies and reclaims input tax on its purchases. However, if a business deals in second-hand goods, works of art, antiques or collectibles it may use a Margin Scheme. This scheme enables a business to account for VAT only on the difference between the purchase and selling price of an item; the margin. It is not possible to reclaim input tax on the purchase of an item and there will be no output tax if no profit is achieved. There is a special margin schemes for auctioneers. A variation of the Margin Scheme is considered below.

Advantages

Usually beneficial if buying from (non-VAT registered) members of the public
Applies to EC cross-border sales
Purchaser will not see a VAT charge
Although no input tax claimable on purchases of scheme items, VAT may be claimed in the usual way on overheads and other fees etc

Disadvantages

Record keeping requirements are demanding and closely checked, eg; stock records and invoices which are required for both purchases and sales
Cannot be used for items purchased on a VAT invoice
Can be complex and create a cost if goods exported
Although no VAT due on sales if a loss is made, there is no set-off of the loss

Global Accounting

The problem with the Second Hand Goods Scheme is that full details of each individual item purchased and sold has to be recorded. Global Accounting is an optional, simplified variation of the Second Hand Margin Scheme. It differs from the standard Margin Scheme in that rather than accounting for the margin achieved on the sale of each individual item, output tax is calculated on the margin achieved between the total purchases and total sales in a particular accounting period.

Advantages

Simplified version of the Margin Scheme
Record keeping requirements reduced
Losses made on sales reduce VAT payable
Beneficial for businesses which buy and sell bulk volume, low value eligible goods

Disadvantages

Cannot be used for; aircraft, boats, caravans, horses or motor vehicles
Similar to Margin Scheme disadvantages apart from loss set off

VAT Schemes for Retailers

It is usually difficult for retailers to issue an invoice for each sale made, so various retail schemes have been designed to simplify VAT. The appropriate scheme for a business depends on whether its retail turnover (excluding VAT) is; below £1m, between £1m and £130m and higher.

Smaller businesses may be able to use a retail scheme with Cash Accounting and Annual Accounting but it cannot combine a Retail Scheme with the Flat Rate Scheme. However, retailers may choose to use the Flat Rate Scheme instead of a Retail Scheme.

Using standard VAT accounting, a VAT registered business must record the VAT on each sale. However, via a Retail Scheme, it calculates the value of its total VAT taxable sales for a period, eg; a day, and the proportions of that total that are taxable at different rates of VAT; standard, reduced and zero.

According to the scheme a business uses it then applies the appropriate VAT fraction to that sales figure to calculate the output tax due. A business may only use the Retail Scheme for retail sales and must use the standard accounting procedures for other supplies. It must still issue a VAT invoice to any VAT registered customer who requests one. It is a requirement of any scheme choice that HMRC must consider it fair and reasonable.

Examples of Retail Schemes

Apportionment
Direct calculation
The point of sale scheme

There are special arrangements for caterers, retail pharmacists and florists.

Advantages

No requirement to issue an invoice for each sale
Most schemes are relatively simple to administer once set up. Technology assists in a helpful way with EPOS systems
Simplifies record keeping

Disadvantages

It is usual for each line sold to need to be coded correctly for VAT liability
Smaller businesses without state of the art technology may be at a disadvantage
Time and resources required to set up and maintain systems
In some cases the calculation depends on staff “pressing the right button”

Tour Operators Margin Scheme (TOMS)

This simplifies cross-border supplies by fixing the place of supply where the tour operator is located (rather than applying the usual place of supply rules). Tour operators often buy goods and services from businesses in overseas countries and often cannot reclaim the associated input tax. The TOMS resolves this issue by permitting tour operators to calculate the VAT solely on the value they add. This is, in theory, similar to the Margin Scheme above. The scheme applies to any business that buys in and re-sells; travel, accommodation and certain other services as a principal. It not only affects the normal High Street travel companies, but entities such as; schools, hospitality companies, organisers of events etc. TOMS is compulsory and it applies to supplies made to/in in the UK as well as overseas.

Advantages

Avoids the need for the tour operator to VAT register in every country it makes supplies to/in
Effectively gives credit for input tax incurred overseas as well as the UK
No VAT shown on documents issued to clients

Disadvantages

Often complex calculations and record keeping
Very precise and complicated rules
Lack of understanding by a number of inspectors
Complexity increases the risk of misdeclaration

Overall

As may be seen, there are a lot of choices for a business to consider, especially a start-up. Choosing a scheme which is inappropriate may result in VAT overpayment and a lot of unneeded record keeping and administration. There are real savings to be made by using a beneficial scheme, both in terms of VAT payable and staff time.

We are happy to review a business’ circumstances and calculate what schemes would produce the best outcome.

Please contact us if you require further information.

 Marcus Ward Consultancy Ltd 2016

VAT – New company car fuel rates

By Marcus Ward 31 May 2016

Advisory fuel rates from 1 June 2016

HMRC have published the new rates which apply from 1 June 2016. These rates apply to employees using a company car and HMRC will also accept them for VAT purposes.

Engine size	Petrol – amount per mile	LPG – amount per mile
1400cc or less	10 pence	7 pence
1401cc to 2000cc	13 pence	9 pence
Over 2000cc	20 pence	13 pence

Engine size	Diesel – amount per mile
1600cc or less	9 pence
1601cc to 2000cc	10 pence
Over 2000cc	12 pence

Hybrid cars are treated as either petrol or diesel cars for this purpose.

HMRC website here

VAT – Apportionment issues: complex and costly

By Marcus Ward 24 May 2016

The dictionary definition of the verb to apportion is “to distribute or allocate proportionally; divide and assign according to some rule of proportional distribution”.

So why is apportionment important in the world of VAT and where would a business encounter the need to apportion? I thought that it might be useful to take an overall look at the subject as it is one of, if not the most, contentious areas of VAT. If affects both output tax declarations and input tax claims, so I have looked at these two areas separately. If an apportionment is inaccurate it will either result in paying too much tax, or risking penalties and additional attention from HMRC; both of which are to be avoided!

The overriding point in all these examples is that any apportionment must be “fair and reasonable”.

Supplies

The following are examples of where a business needs to apportion the value of sales:

Retail sales

Retailers find it difficult to account for VAT in the normal way so they use what is known as a retail scheme. There are various schemes but they all provide a formula for calculating VAT on sales at the standard, reduced and zero rate. This is needed for shops that sell goods at different rates, eg; food, clothing and books alongside standard rated supplies. As an example, in Apportionment Scheme 1 a business works out the value of its purchases for retail sale at different rates of VAT and applies those proportions to its sales.

Construction

A good example here is if a developer employs a contractor to construct a new building which contains retail units on the ground floor with flats above. The construction of the commercial part is standard rated, but the building of the residential element is zero rated. The contractor has to apportion his supply between the two VAT rates. This apportionment could be made with reference to floorspace, costs, value or any other method which provides a fair and reasonable result. The value of supplies relating to property is often high, so it is important that the apportionment is accurate and not open to challenge from HMRC. I recommend that agreement on the method used is agreed with HMRC prior to the supply in order to avoid any subsequent issues.

Property letting

Let us assume that in the construction example above, when the construction is complete, the developer lets the whole building to a third party. He chooses to opt to tax the property in order to recover the attributable input tax. The option has no effect on the residential element which will represent an exempt supply. Consequently, an apportionment must be made between the letting income in respect of the shops and flats.

Subscriptions

There has been a great deal of case law on whether subscriptions to certain organisations by which the subscriber obtains various benefits represent a single supply at a certain VAT rate, or separate supplies at different rates. A common example is zero rated printed matter with other exempt or standard rated supplies.

Take away

Most are familiar with the furore over the “pasty tax” and even with the U-turn, the provision of food/catering is often the subject of disputes over apportionment. Broadly; the sale of cold food for take away is zero rated and hot food and eat in (catering) is standard rated. There have been myriad cases on what’s hot and what’s not, what constitutes a premises (for eat in), and how food is “held out” for sale. The recent Subway dispute highlights the subtleties in this area. I have successfully claimed significant amounts of overpaid output tax based on this kind of apportionment and it is always worth reviewing a business’s position. New products are arriving all the time and circumstances of a business can change. A word of warning here; HMRC regularly mount covert observation exercises to record the proportion of customers eating in to those taking away. They also carry out “test eats” so it is crucial that any method used to apportion sales is accurate and supportable.

Opticians

Opticians have a difficult time of it with VAT. Examinations and advice services are exempt healthcare, but the sale of goods; spectacles and contact lenses, is standard rated. Almost always a customer/patient pays a single amount which covers the services as well as the goods. Apportionment in these cases is very difficult and has been the subject of disagreement and tribunal cases for many years; some of which I have been involved in. Not only is the sales value apportionment complex, but many opticians are partly exempt which causes additional difficulties. I recommend that all opticians review their VAT position.

Input tax recovery

Business/Non-Business (BNB)

If an entity is involved in both business and non-business activities, eg; a charity which provides free advice and also has a shop which sells donated goods. It is unable to recover all of the VAT it incurs. VAT attributable to non-business activities is not input tax and cannot be reclaimed. Therefore it is necessary to calculate the quantum of VAT attributable to BNB activities, that VAT which cannot be attributed is called overhead VAT and must be apportioned between BNB activities. There are many varied ways of doing this as the VAT legislation does not specify any particular method. Therefore it is important to consider all of the available alternatives. Examples of these are; income, expenditure, time, floorspace, transaction count etc.

Partial exemption

Similarly to BNB if a business makes exempt supplies, eg; certain property letting, insurance and financial products, it cannot recover input tax attributable to those exempt supplies (unless the value is de minimis). Overhead input tax needs to be apportioned between taxable and exempt supplies. The standard method of doing this is to apply the ratio of taxable versus exempt supply values to the overhead tax. However, there are many “special methods” available, but these have to be agreed with HMRC. Partial exemption is often complex and always results in an actual VAT cost to a business, so it is always worthwhile to review the position regularly. Exemption is not a relief to a business.

Attribution

In both BNB and partial exemption situations before considering overheads all VAT must, as far as possible, be attributed to either taxable or exempt and non-business activities. This in itself is a form of apportionment and it is often not clear how the supply received has been used by a business, that is; of which activity is it a cost component?

Business entertainment

At certain events staff may attend along with other guests who are not employed. The recovery of input tax in respect of staff entertainment is recoverable but (generally) entertaining non staff members is blocked. Therefore an apportionment of the VAT incurred on such entertainment is required.

Business and private use of an asset

If a company owns, say, a yacht or a helicopter and uses it for a director’s own private use, but it is chartered to third parties when not being used (business use) an apportionment must be made between the two activities. The most usual way of doing this is on a time basis. Apportionment will also be required in the example of a business owning a holiday home used for both business and private purposes. Input tax relating to private (non-business) use is always blocked.

Motoring expenses

It is common for a staff member to use a car for both business and private purposes. Input tax is only recoverable in respect of the business use so an apportionment is required. This may be done by keeping detailed mileage records, or more simply by applying the Road Fuel Scale Charge which is a set figure per month which represents a disallowance for private use.

The above examples are not exhaustive but I hope they give a flavour to the subject.

If your business apportions, or should apportion, values for either income or expenditure I strongly recommend a review on the method. There is often no “right answer” for an apportionment and I often find that HMRC impose unnecessarily harsh demands on a taxpayer. Additionally, many business are unaware of alternatives or are resistant to challenging HMRC even when they have a good case.

New approach to VAT inspections by HMRC

By Marcus Ward 16 May 2016

A VAT quickie.

We understand that HMRC are about to introduce new plans to change the way some VAT inspections are carried out.

The intention is that when a business is selected to an inspection, rather than arranging and visiting the business in the traditional way, initial contact will be made with the responsible person. At this point a short telephone questionnaire will take place. If this option is taken then it is possible that HMRC will reconsider the need for a full inspection. This appears to be along the lines of some pre-credibility processes. It is a pilot exercise and will be entirely voluntary for the taxpayer.

If this approach enables HMRC to focus on evasion and high risk business while reducing the burden for the majority of businesses who always try to be accurate with VAT declarations it is to be welcomed. We shall see how the pilot goes and whether this is rolled out to more businesses. HMRC expects that this will be a benefit for both them and taxpayers and it is to be hoped that this is the case.

We have no knowledge currently how “brief” the questionnaire will be and how much information and preparation will be required. However, it is likely that they will focus on industry specific questions rather than on processes and controls.

If contacted by HMRC our usual advice is to contact us to ensure everything is as it should be. This may avoid penalties and ensure any enquires are concluded smoothly.

VAT – Liability of works carried out under Permitted Development Rights

By Marcus Ward 10 May 2016

HMRC has clarified its views on the zero and reduced rating of conversion construction work carried out under Permitted Development Rights (PDRs).

Who is affected?

Builders and developers who convert non-residential buildings into dwellings for which individual statutory planning consent is not required because the development is covered by PDRs. Additionally, it applies to any person carrying out a similar conversion who will be making a claim for a refund of VAT under the DIY Housebuilders’ Scheme.

What are PDRs?

PDRs are a national grant of planning permission for particular types of development. They are intended to streamline the planning process by removing the need for a full planning application, therefore reducing the amount of information required.

What has changed?

To zero-rate the sale of all newly converted dwellings (from non-residential buildings) or to make a valid claim under the DIY Housebuilders’ Scheme, the converted building must meet the requirements of a building “designed as a dwelling”. One of these conditions is that the developer, builder or DIY Housebuilders’ Scheme claimant must be able to demonstrate that statutory planning consent has been granted for a dwelling and that its construction has been carried out in accordance with that consent. In addition, part of the conditions for some supplies of construction services to be eligible for the reduced rate of VAT of 5% for the conversion of a non-residential building into a dwelling requires individual statutory planning consent.

HMRC have announced that following the introduction of PDRs, individual statutory planning consent will no longer be required for some developments making the meeting of this condition difficult.

HMRC Brief 9 (2016) sets out that when certain conditions are met, zero rating and/or reduced rating where applicable is additionally available when converting non-residential buildings to dwellings when work is carried out under a PDR. This is in contrast to work undertaken via planning consent.

Relevant parties will still be required to provide evidence that the work has been undertaken legally and that it qualifies as a permitted development.

The full guidance is here

VAT – Spot The Ball – Latest from the courts

By Marcus Ward 9 May 2016

Is Spot The Ball a game? And if it is, is it a game of chance? (And therefore exempt from VAT).

In the case of IFX Investment Company Ltd & ORS the main issue was whether the First-tier Tribunal (FtT) were wrong to hold that the appellants’ “Spot The Ball” competitions was exempt under the gaming exemption in Value Added Tax Act 1994, Schedule 9 Group 4. To fall within the gaming exemption, Spot The Ball must be a “game of chance” within the meaning of the Gaming Act 1968. The dispute was over the word “game” and the words “of chance”.

The Court of Appeal (CoA) considered whether the FtT decision in favour of the appellant that the supply was exempt or whether HMRC’s successful appeal to the Upper-tier Tribunal (UtT) should stand.

The court heard form the promoters that while there was an element of skill in determining roughly where the panel that decided where the ball should be would actually place it, the precise placement of the cross was essentially a matter of chance. HMRC insisted that the competitors were not “playing a game” as they advanced the argument that a “game” required interaction between the players. and therefore Spot The Ball could not be considered playing a game of chance such that the supply is standard rated.

The UtT deemed that Spot The Ball is “played” in “solitary isolation” and does not involve any interaction between competitors. The only contract is between the operator and the individual competitor. Additionally the act of placing a cross on the coupon was not “playing”

The CoA disagreed with the UtT’s decision and concluded that the FtT made a finding that Spot The Ball was a game of chance and there was no reason to disturb this decision. The FtT was correct to hold that there is no inter-player interaction rule. Previous case law clearly contemplates that there can be a game without the contestants being in communication with each other. Consequently, it restored the FtT’s decision and the supplies are exempt.

This case has brought home to me two (non-VAT) things; 1) That Spot The Ball is still around, and that 2) I always thought that one had to actually put a cross where the ball actually was, rather than where a judging panel thought the ball was likely to be. One lives and learns. I’m also constantly surprised that “the pools” still exist in these days of lotteries and lotto and other promotions.

Case here

VAT – Latest from the courts; use and enjoyment provisions

By Marcus Ward 25 April 2016

Telefonica Europe Plc and Telefonica UK Limited

The VAT Use and Enjoyment provisions set out an additional layer of rules which establish the place of supply of certain services. They apply to; telecommunications and broadcasting services; electronically supplied services (for business customers); hired goods; and hired means of transport. Broadly, effective use and enjoyment takes place where a recipient actually consumes the services, regardless of any contractual arrangements, payment, or beneficial interest. The intention of this provision is to correct instances of distortion which remain as a result of considering only where the provider and the customer belong. HMRC give the example of supplies such as telecommunications services which are actually consumed outside the EC, to be subject to UK VAT. Of course, the converse is that it would be distortive for there to be no EC VAT on such services where they are consumed in the UK.

In the Upper Tribunal case of Telefonica Europe Plc and Telefonica UK Limited the dispute involved the way in which the appellant calculated the value of its mobile telephone services which were used and enjoyed outside the EC (and thus UK VAT free). Over a number of years Telefonica had an agreement with HMRC whereby the amount of outside the EC supplies was calculated by reference to revenue, ie; comparing call, text and data income relating to non-EC supplies to total income.

HMRC subsequently formed the view that this method of calculation was distortive because higher charges were made to non-EC users than EC consumers. HMRC proposed a “usage methodology” which used call times, texts sent and volume of data used. As may be expected, this resulted in a lower percentage of supplies that were outside the scope of UK VAT thus increasing HMRC’s VAT take.

The appellant contended that the usage methodology was contrary to EC and UK VAT legislation. Not surprisingly, the UTT rejected this argument, deciding that Telefonica had not established that HMRC’s proposal was unlawful.

So then the outcome would be expected to be that the usage methodology should be used, but no. It was decided that the most accurate method would be one based on the time a customer has access to the network outside the EC; which differs from both the usage and revenue methods.

This type of dispute is quite common and also appears regularly in partial exemption situations. There are nearly always alternative ways to view apportionment calculations and it pays to obtain professional advice; not only to ensure that a fair result is achieved, but as assistance with negotiations (which may avoid having to go to Tribunal).

VAT Latest from the courts: Stocks Fly Fishery – single or multiple supply?

By Marcus Ward 19 April 2016

As many will know, there is a significant amount of case law concerning what may be treated as a composite supply at one VAT rate, and what are separate supplies at different VAT rates. The latest in this series is the First Tier Tribunal case of Stocks Fly Fishery

The appellant is a trout fishery in the Forest of Bowland. They argued that they supplied standard rated fishing and a distinct zero rated supply of fish for human consumption.

They provided two types of daily ticket which was required to fish the reservoir. The first was a sporting ticket, which entitled an angler to fish, but any fish caught must be returned to the water. The second was a take ticket which also enabled a person to fish but any fish caught (up to a certain number) may be taken away for food. A take ticket was more expensive than a sporting ticket. The more fish that were taken away, the more expensive the take ticket was. The taxpayer formed the opinion that it made two supplies; one of fishing which was agreed to be standard rated, and one of food for human consumption (the trout) which was zero rated. The value of the zero rated element was said to be the difference between the sporting ticket price and that of the take ticket.

The issue was whether the ability to take away the fish for food was a separate supply, or ancillary to the substantive supply of fishing.

The appellant cited Hughes v Pendragon Sabre Ltd (t/a Porsche Centre Bolton) while HMRC relied on Chalk Springs Fisheries (1987) (LON/86/706) Roger Cambrai Haynes (1988) (LON/87/624) and Card Protection Plan Ltd v Commissioners of Customs and Excise.

As an observation, the chairman in the Chalk Springs Fisheries case stated “…No trout is, in my view, supplied to him at all. Instead the fisherman must go out and catch them, if he can.” This was obviously quite unhelpful to the appellant. Additionally, the chairman was obliged to follow the well-known Card Protection Plan case which sets out guidance on matters such as this.

Decision

The FTT decided that the essential feature of the transaction was fishing and the dominant motive of anglers going to the fishery was to fish, regardless of which type of ticket was purchased. Therefore, the right to fish had to be regarded as constituting the principal service and the right to kill and keep the trout fish, if caught, should be regarded as ancillary to that principal purpose. Therefore there was a single standard rated supply of fishing.

It is always worth reviewing whether supplies made by a business can, and ought, to be treated separately, or as a single bundle. The existence of such a massive amount of case law on this subject indicates that this issue will continue to run and run.

Please contact us should this matter raise any concerns or present a possible opportunity.