Cross-border VAT

A supply of goods or services from one country to another will have a number of value added tax (VAT) implications.

Place of supply

The place where a supply takes place for VAT purposes is important because only supplies taking place in the UK are within the scope of UK VAT. Taxable supplies taking place outside the UK may be subject to VAT in another EU country, or outside the scope of VAT altogether.

For services, the general place of supply rule (where no exceptions apply) is:

  1. if the recipient is a business that is, or should be, registered for VAT (known as business to business or B2B supplies), the country in which the recipient belongs, and

  2. for other recipients (known as business to consumer or B2C supplies), the country in which the supplier belongs

For goods, the general rule is that if the supply does not involve their removal from or to the UK, then the place of supply will be:

  1. the UK if the goods are in the UK, or

  2. outside the UK if the goods are not in the UK

If

To view the latest version of this document and thousands of others like it, sign-in with LexisNexis or register for a free trial.

Powered by Lexis+®
Latest Tax News

Market value, distributions and notional transactions—key SDLT lessons from Tower One St George Wharf Ltd v HMRC

Tax analysis: In Tower One St George Wharf Ltd v HMRC, the Court of Appeal considered the basis on which stamp duty land tax (SDLT) should be assessed and whether that resulted in SDLT being paid on the market value, the actual consideration paid, or on some other basis for a complex transaction within a corporate group. The taxpayer argued that the ‘Case 3’ exception under section 54(4) of the Finance Act 2003 (FA 2003) applied, which would result in SDLT being charged on the actual consideration. HMRC argued that the exception did not apply, which would result in SDLT being paid on the market value of the property. Alternatively, HMRC argued that if the exception did apply then the anti-avoidance provisions at section 75A FA 2003 applied, potentially resulting in an even higher SDLT charge. The Court of Appeal held that although the Case 3 exception applied, the anti-avoidance provision in FA 2003, s 75A also applied. This resulted in SDLT being assessed on an aggregate amount that was even higher than the property's market value (although HMRC did not seek to increase its assessment beyond market value). Therefore, the appeal was dismissed. As explained by Jon Stevens, partner, and Rory Clarke, solicitor, at DWF Law LLP, this decision deals with the interaction of a number of complex SDLT provisions and clarifies the SDLT provisions relating to transfers to connected companies and the SDLT anti-avoidance provisions, with implications for corporate structuring and tax planning.

View Tax by content type :

Popular documents