Was not the very idea of a mixed supply knocked on the head by CPP? Then in 2014 there was a draft Information Sheet suggesting an assumption that there was a single supply, except in certain specified situations.
Of course in TOMS world there always has been an uneasy co-existence of the rule in Art 307 "shall be regarded as a single service" with the annual calculation which allows one transaction to produce supplies liable at different rates and with different place of supply rules. Eg a ski holiday in a catered inhouse chalet in France (step 7) packaged up with hotels en route (step 2 and step 3 if via eg Switzerland) and a ferry sold as agent (step 9).
And a similar debate about cost based apportionment vs market value.
My answers
Interesting.
Was not the very idea of a mixed supply knocked on the head by CPP? Then in 2014 there was a draft Information Sheet suggesting an assumption that there was a single supply, except in certain specified situations.
Of course in TOMS world there always has been an uneasy co-existence of the rule in Art 307 "shall be regarded as a single service" with the annual calculation which allows one transaction to produce supplies liable at different rates and with different place of supply rules. Eg a ski holiday in a catered inhouse chalet in France (step 7) packaged up with hotels en route (step 2 and step 3 if via eg Switzerland) and a ferry sold as agent (step 9).
And a similar debate about cost based apportionment vs market value.