In Greenspace Limited v HMRC [2021] UKUT 0290, the Upper Tribunal confirmed that insulated roof panels were roofing products and not insulation. Unlike insulation that could be separately attached to a roof, the panels formed the roof. The supply of panels did not qualify for a reduced rate of VAT.
VAT Cases & News
Summaries of interesting VAT cases for the SME owner.
In Mandarin Consulting Limited v HMRC [2021] UKUT 0292 (TCC), the Upper Tribunal (UT) found that a company supplying career coaching services was unable to demonstrate that all of its students were usually resident outside of the EU, meaning that UK VAT applied.
In Swiss Dawn Consultants Ltd v HMRC [2021] TC08311, a VAT registered taxpayer misunderstood the workings of the VAT flat rate scheme and calculated VAT on net sales. HMRC had no choice but to make best judgement assessments to recover unpaid VAT.
In Cambridge University Boathouse Limited v HMRC [2021] TC08304, the First Tier Tribunal (FTT) decided the beneficiary of a lease to a boathouse was the rowing club rather than the rowers themselves. The sporting exemption did not apply to the supply and input VAT was reclaimable.
In Harley Scott Commercial Ltd v HMRC [2021] TC08299, the First Tier Tribunal (FTT) allowed the taxpayer's appeal. The supply of Store Pods to investors was the exempt supply of a building and not the supply of storage facilities which would have been standard rated.
In Dubrovin & Tröger GbR – Aquatics, VAT case C‑373/19, the European Court of Justice (CJEU) ruled that a business operating as a swimming school was not providing education similar to that provided by a university or school. Its supplies were not exempt and had to be standard rated.
In Mainpay Ltd v HMRC [2021] UKUT270, the Upper Tribunal found that the taxpayer was supplying staff not medical care. The supplies were not exempt and were taxable at the standard rate.