Save content
Have you found this content useful? Use the button above to save it to your profile.
AIA

Snack attack: Pringles to pay VAT

by
21st May 2009
Save content
Have you found this content useful? Use the button above to save it to your profile.

The makers of Pringles are facing a hefty tax bill after losing a court battle over whether the crunchy snack is potato-y enough to be liable for VAT.

Procter & Gamble will be required to pay around £20 million a year in VAT after the Court of Appeal ruled that Pringles are indeed a potato crisp.

Most food is not subject to VAT (as zero rated supplies), with a number of exceptions being standard rated, including potato crisps. Procter & Gamble has consistently maintained that it should not pay VAT on Pringles and last year a High Court Judge ruled that it is not a 'potato crisp product' due to its 'unnatural shape', the fact that it is packaged in tubes and because potatoes make up just 42% of its ingredients. At this point, the ruling had all the hallmarks of the famous Jaffa Cakes VAT case.

However, the latest ruling by the Court of Appeal concluded that there was 'more than enough potato content for it to be a reasonable view that it is made from potato'. This means HMRC can currently collect 19p in VAT on every £1.45 tube of Pringles sold.

The VAT due on past sales of Pringles is estimated to be around £100 million, but a spokesman for Procter & Gamble said the company had been paying VAT on the snack pending the appeal outcome and so no back taxes are liable. However, any retailers who have made sales without accounting for VAT on them should be aware that they may have VAT to account for - potnetially on both purchases and sales of the snacks. HMRC's Revenue & Customs Brief 32/09 sets out the process for those who may have VAT to declare.

The snack's slogan is 'once you pop, you can't stop'. Perhaps it should be changed to 'once you pop, pay the taxman'...

Tags:

Replies (5)

Please login or register to join the discussion.

avatar
By AnonymousUser
01st Jun 2009 16:52

Chip not dip
Good point. The case refers to regular Pringles only as far as I can tell. I imagine the Dippers are classed as something different.

Thanks (0)
avatar
By Andy3T
01st Jun 2009 11:58

Dippers still avoid VAT?
Hmm, Pringles Dippers are, from recollection treated differently - having been specifically made to taste bland they require preparation (dipping) to consume as otherwise they are unfit for consumption... Given the current to raise the tax take (since the govt is clearly unwilling to cut expenditure) how long until food currently subject to 0% VAT gets shifted to standard rate resolving the continual arguments?

Thanks (0)
avatar
By User deleted
22nd May 2009 20:27

Thank you
Thanks Gina.

My son's response was to tell me I was a saddo who needs to get a life!

Thanks (0)
avatar
By AnonymousUser
22nd May 2009 17:07

Nice one!
I was racking my brains for good pop related puns and not once did that one cross my mind! Well done! I'm sure there are more puns to be had here but they elude me at this point on a Friday afternoon....

Thanks (0)
avatar
By User deleted
22nd May 2009 10:03

Surely it should be
"once you pop, VAT on top"

Yeah, I know, I'll fetch me coat...

Thanks (0)