In HMRC v Roger Skinner (FTC/32/2013 – 15 May 2014) the Upper Tribunal held that dog food sold by the taxpayer was zero-rated.
Under VATA 1994 sch 8 group 1 ‘animal feeding stuffs’ are zero-rated unless they are ‘pet foods … and meals for cats and dogs’ (Note 6).
Notice 701/15/02 provides: ‘if a specifically formulated food is held out for sale exclusively for working dogs it will come within the scope of the VAT relief – unless it is biscuit or meal’.
The issue was therefore whether the dog foods sold by Mr Skinner were ‘pet foods’ in which case they should be standard-rated.
Agreeing with the FTT the tribunal observed that a ‘food suitable to be eaten by pet dogs will not necessarily be “pet food” and that whether such a food is “pet food” depends on how...
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 Roger Skinner (FTC/32/2013 – 15 May 2014) the Upper Tribunal held that dog food sold by the taxpayer was zero-rated.
Under VATA 1994 sch 8 group 1 ‘animal feeding stuffs’ are zero-rated unless they are ‘pet foods … and meals for cats and dogs’ (Note 6).
Notice 701/15/02 provides: ‘if a specifically formulated food is held out for sale exclusively for working dogs it will come within the scope of the VAT relief – unless it is biscuit or meal’.
The issue was therefore whether the dog foods sold by Mr Skinner were ‘pet foods’ in which case they should be standard-rated.
Agreeing with the FTT the tribunal observed that a ‘food suitable to be eaten by pet dogs will not necessarily be “pet food” and that whether such a food is “pet food” depends on how...
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:
