Member Since: 16th Nov 2011
19th Jul 2018
Re: VAT liability - most probably - and put much more succinctly. Respect.
Re: you-know-who sounding knowledgeable - a little knowledge can be a dangerous thing, and frequently is...
18th Jul 2018
HMRC's Notice (701/49 at para 9.3) sets out HMRC's view of what preparatory work should involve, as follows:
"Work preparatory to the completion of a contract refers to work done of a specialised nature. This could include helping to set the terms of the contract or making representations on behalf of a client, but would not include work done of a general nature such as administrative or clerical formalities."
An accountant's reference may suffice, assuming it is in the form of "making representations" on your client's behalf and if it considers and deals with the specific mortgage being applied for in the context of the client's individual circumstances. I doubt if HMRC would consider a generic reference would satisfy the "work preparatory" condition.
Hope this helps.
9th Jul 2018
Contrary to the view expressed below by "atleastisoundknowledgeable..." it does not automatically follow that simply because the IFA's commission may be exempt from VAT that the portion of his commission which he pays you is also exempt; and, indeed, it may well be properly standard rated. To qualify for exemption you not only need to be "one of the intermediaries" between the person looking for a mortgage and the mortgage provider but you must also undertake "work preparatory to the conclusion of contracts for the provision of [the mortgage]". So, if all you do is introduce or refer a customer to the IFA and you have not undertaken any preparatory work, your services will be standard rated, in which case it would appear that you have been accounting for VAT correctly. This is not to say that you could not qualify for exemption if you did things differently but you would need to have regard not only to the VAT requirements but would also need to determine whether you would then need to be regulated (regulation is not within my sphere of knowledge, so I can't comment beyond raising it as a potential issue to be considered).
9th Jul 2018
I would suggest exercising extreme caution before automatically completing and submitting a VAT 68... If the VAT number is transferred (which is what happens when the VAT 68 route is used) then so is the transferor's "VAT history", which mean's the transferee will be liable for any VAT previously underdeclared by the transferor (whether or not identified at the time of transfer); and if the transferor is under the default surcharge regime then that history is also picked up... A little due diligence should be undertaken, especially where there is a partnership created of the previous sole trader owner plus A N Other, which is taking over the business of the sole trader. Otherwise A N Other may find himself/herself taking on more than was first thought.
17th Jul 2017
What type of warehouse is it? If it is a customs or fiscal warehouse the VAT treatment of supplies into and within the warehouse will differ to transactions in a warehouse which has no special VAT/customs status.
Who are the UK Co's customers and where are they located?B2C and B2B transactions are treated differently and the answer will also vary depending on the country of location of the buyer, e.g. are any of the goods exported outside of the EU?
17th Jul 2017
How is the transfer of the property due to take place? Is there any change in the legal or beneficial ownership? As someone else has already said, you need first to focus on the VAT treatment of the transfer out of the property.
29th Feb 2016
Perhaps I am missing something totally obvious and, if so, I trust I will not be judged too harshly.
One of the advantages of being on the FRS is that one accounts for VAT at a rate - the flat rate - appropriate to the business. The FRS rates are set so as to take into account both the likely mix of supplies made by a business and the likely incidence of VAT on purchases. The flat rate is lower than the usual VAT rate so as to compensate a business for the input VAT that it incurs on relevant supplies. I see nothing in the FRS rules which would exclude the repairs from the definition of "relevant supplies" and so, surely, the fact that the business is not entitled to claim for the VAT on the repairs is because the FRS rate already compensates the business for that VAT? Under that analysis, therefore, the VAT on repairs is not a cost to the business because the business has an allowance to cover it. This brings us back to the question of whether the business truly suffered a loss in relation to the VAT on repairs if the FRS rate is set at a level to compensate for the VAT?
I believe that this could make for a very interesting court case if ever it was to get that far.
The only sensible position to take is to make a disclosure to the insurer and if the insurer suggests it won't reimburse the VAT, ask why not.
16th Mar 2015
The additional charge for paying by credit card...
...takes on the same VAT liability as the underlying supply of goods or services. So, if selling standard rated widgets for £500 plus 20% VAT and a further 2% is added as a c/c charge then the 2% is also liable to VAT. If the 2% is VAT exclusive it means that the actual extra charged is 2.4% (inc VAT).
16th Mar 2015
Please spell out the detail(s) of the transactions...
1. If the building was sold as part of a TOGC it may - subject to fulfilment of a number of conditions - correctly not be subject to VAT but this is not possible to tell from the information provided.
2. In general, one cannot simply "opt out" of VAT.
3. A VAT expert says the sale was exempt from VAT - but on what basis? Has the vendor ever opted to tax? Is the sale of a "new" commercial building?
4. Why was VAT charged on the sale?
5. Are you saying that the person who sold the property also surrendered a lease in it?
6. How has there been a part disposal?
7. One would not normally expect the buyer of a building to be the person who surrendered an interest in it...
8. Perhaps you can identify the parties in terms of party, A, B C etc and set out clearly which party did what and who the counterparty(ies) were?
Before anyone can provide any advice, a clear statement of the facts is needed.
16th Mar 2015
Take a look at the single v multiple supply cases
Many of the cases which dealt with whether or not a supply was single or multiple said that this needs to be determined from the perspective of the typical consumer, e.g. Court of Appeal in Baxendale (diet food), ECJ in Bog (catering).