The UT disagreed with HMRC’s analysis and, in essence, endorsed the view of the FTT. It considered that the case-law had evolved since BLP and that BLP alone therefore ceased to accurately reflect the legal status quo. In particular, it now follows from SKF that the ultimate purpose of fundraising needs to be considered not only where the fundraising transaction itself is out of scope, but also where it is a VAT exempt supply (e.g., a sale of shares).SKF instructed the national court to determine whether the costs for the incoming services were likely incorporated in the sale price of the shares. In the UT’s view, this is unlikely to be the case where that price is determined by common share value techniques such as a multiple of earnings or a net asset value.
Source: ey.com
Latest Posts in "United Kingdom"
- UK Considers VAT Cut on Domestic Fuel: Targeted Relief or Broad Measure?
- Supreme Court Clarifies VAT Grouping and Time of Supply Rules in Prudential Assurance Case
- Guernsey Seeks Companies to Support New GST Administration, Tender Deadline Approaches
- Navigating UK VAT: Key Considerations and Pitfalls in Exporting Goods
- HMRC’s New VAT Error Correction Rules: Stricter Penalties and Reporting Changes Explained
