In HMRC v British Telecommunications (A3/2012/3096 – 11 April 2014) BT lost its £62m claim (under bad debt relief VATA 1983 s 22) for a refund of VAT accounted for on supplies made before 31 March 1989 in respect of amounts unpaid by its defaulting customers.
A condition of the relief was that the customer must be insolvent. This condition was not satisfied in some cases and so BT claimed that it had a directly enforceable right under the Principal VAT Directive 2006/112/EC art 11C(1). BT also asserted this right in respect of pre-April 1989 periods in relation to which claims under national legislation were barred by FA 1997 s 39(5).
The first issue was therefore whether art 11C(1) had been capable of having direct effect. Art 11C(1) provided that in cases of partial or total non-payment by customers ‘the taxable amount...
If you or your firm subscribes to Taxjournal.com, please click the login box below:
If you do not subscribe but are a registered user, please enter your details in the following boxes:
In HMRC v British Telecommunications (A3/2012/3096 – 11 April 2014) BT lost its £62m claim (under bad debt relief VATA 1983 s 22) for a refund of VAT accounted for on supplies made before 31 March 1989 in respect of amounts unpaid by its defaulting customers.
A condition of the relief was that the customer must be insolvent. This condition was not satisfied in some cases and so BT claimed that it had a directly enforceable right under the Principal VAT Directive 2006/112/EC art 11C(1). BT also asserted this right in respect of pre-April 1989 periods in relation to which claims under national legislation were barred by FA 1997 s 39(5).
The first issue was therefore whether art 11C(1) had been capable of having direct effect. Art 11C(1) provided that in cases of partial or total non-payment by customers ‘the taxable amount...
If you or your firm subscribes to Taxjournal.com, please click the login box below:
If you do not subscribe but are a registered user, please enter your details in the following boxes:
