If a Belgian supplier dispatches goods to a warehouse in the Netherlands, then acquisition VAT accounting typically takes place in the Netherlands. The customer will normally quote its Dutch VAT number, but it could (pre-Brexit) have provided its UK VAT number. It just needed to be aware that (under the “fallback” provisions) HMRC could have collected UK VAT unless it could be shown that Dutch VAT had been accounted for.
In Ampleaward, the Court of Appeal has considered further complications that arise when the goods involved were alcoholic drinks transferred between bonded warehouses in the EU.
The CA thought that EU Member States were only able, under the Principal VAT Directive, to exempt sales in bonded warehouses in their own territory. The fallback provisions gave the UK competence to tax transactions which took place elsewhere, but could not extend the exemption to them. This meant that UK legislation, if it allowed exemption, went further than it should have done.
HMRC suggested three ways that VATA 1994 should be read so as to conform with the PVD. However, the CA rejected all three, on the basis that the Marleasing principle of interpretation could not be used to rewrite legislation laid down by Parliament. HMRC’s appeal was dismissed.
Source
Latest Posts in "United Kingdom"
- SAP Selected by HMRC to Lead Major Technology Transformation of the UK Tax System
- Supreme Court Clarifies VAT Recovery Rules for Corporate Groups After Hotel La Tour Decision
- Appeal Dismissed: Input VAT Denial and Personal Liability Upheld on Kittel Grounds for One Call Consultants
- Input VAT Denial Upheld: Kittel Assessment and Penalties Made Within Statutory Time Limit
- Boehringer Ruling: Could £2.5bn VAT Reclaims Transform UK Pharma and Healthcare Forever?
