Summaries of interesting VAT cases for the SME owner.
In Ancient & Modern Jewellers Limited & Anor v HMRC [2024] TC9270, HMRC worked with the assistance of foreign tax authorities to assess £8.5m in VAT and penalties on a watch retailer. It used the VAT second-hand margin scheme to avoid tax on the sale of new imported watches.
Gregory Sewell v HMRC [2023] T9269 is a cautionary tale. A taxpayer's appeal against HMRC’s decision to refuse a VAT refund was not drafted in any way that allowed the FTT to review HMRC's decision. His lack of knowledge of the appeals process led to his appeal being denied.
In Jeneruhl Trading Limited and Vivek Nayar v HMRC [2024] TC09260, a company director was unsuccessful in an attempt to debar HMRC for pursuing him for his company's debts using a company officer liability notice. His company was partly successful on the case management issue of disclosure of HMRC information related to the timing of HMRC's assessments.
In Mark Glenn Ltd v HMRC [2024] TC09255, the First Tier Tribunal (FTT) found that the supply of a female hair loss treatment system could not be zero-rated for VAT purposes as hair loss was not a disability.
From 1 January 2025, all education services and vocational training supplied by a private school or a 'connected person', for a fee, will be subject to VAT at the standard rate of 20%. This also applies to boarding services closely related to this type of supply.
In Bottled Science Limited v HMRC [2024] TC09231, the First Tier Tribunal found that the collagen drink product 'Skinade' was not food for VAT purposes and therefore could not be zero-rated.
HMRC announced that from 5 August 2024, any changes to clients’ VAT registration details must be made using the Agent Services Account, not by using form VAT484 or any other postal or electronic means.
Loving our content? 😍
Sign up Now!
For free tax news, cases,
discounts & special tax briefings
We hope you are enjoying this amazing Practical Tax Database here at www.rossmartin.co.uk.
.
