Commentary

BB/4B/03 VAT on property—clarification of recent judgments

Part V16 Forms and other HMRC material

BB/4B/03 VAT on property—clarification of recent judgments

BB/4B/03 VAT on property—clarification of recent judgments

Business Brief, Issue 4. 27 May 2003

This article highlights the implications arising from the European Court of Justice judgments given in the cases of Trinity Mirror plc [2003] EWHC 480 (Ch) (Part V10) and C-409/98, (formerly known as Mirror Group plc) (Part V11) and Cantor Fitzgerald International (C-108/99) (Part V11).

The issue

Both cases concerned the VAT liability of a payment described as an “inducement”. In the case of Trinity Mirror plc it was a payment made by a landlord to its prospective tenant (Trinity Mirror plc). In the case of Cantor Fitzgerald International, a payment was made by a tenant to Cantor Fitzgerald International to take an assignment of (and the obligations contained in) an existing lease. In both cases the appellants argued that the supplies made by them in return for the inducement paid to them was exempt from VAT by VATA 1994 Sch 9 Group 1 item 1. Customs considered the inducements were taxable at the standard

To continue reading
View the latest version of this document, as well as thousands of others like it, sign in to TolleyLibrary or register for a free trial