In an argument concerning the remit of confectionery and cakes, the taxpayer failed to convince the FTT their “healthy balls” were not confectionery, as Max Schofield explains.
Have you found this content useful? Use the button above to save it to your profile.
Corte Diletto UK Limited (TC75790) contended that its product “Nouri Health Balls” (né Nouri Truffles) made of dates, nuts, and other ingredients with flavours such as matcha green tea and chocolate hazelnut was zero-rated food or cakes. The products were promoted and packaged to appeal to customers who might not normally seek out a healthy snack – “to nourish your body, indulge your soul”.
HMRC argued they were confectionery under VATA 1994 Sch 8, group 1, note 5 as an “item of sweetened prepared food which is normally eaten with the fingers”.
Healthy snack
The tribunal recited the oft-mentioned passage in Ferrero [1979] that the words in the statute must be given their ordinary meaning and that what matters is the view of the ordinary man in the street. Concerning the Note 5 definition, the Premier Foods [2007] judgment that relegated the “sweetened” criterion to just “sweet” was referenced. With regard to cakes, the factors set out in the Torq [2005] case were listed, including packaging and marketing.
Register for free to continue reading
It’s 100% free and provides unlimited access to the latest accounting news, advice and insight every day. As well as access to this exclusive article, you can: