In HMRC v Weald Leasing Ltd (ECJ Case C-103/09) a company (W) purchased some assets which it leased to another company (S) which in turn leased them to two companies (CM and CA) which were associated with W but were part of a separate VAT group making exempt supplies of insurance. W reclaimed input tax on the purchase of the assets. HMRC formed the opinion that the transactions were an ‘abuse’ and issued assessments to recover some of the input tax which W had reclaimed. The CA referred the case to the ECJ for a ruling on whether the adoption of an asset leasing structure gave rise to a ‘tax advantage’ within the Halifax principle whether this was an ‘abusive practice’ within the Halifax principle and if it was an ‘abusive practice’ what should be the appropriate redefinition. Advocate-General Mazák expressed...
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 Weald Leasing Ltd (ECJ Case C-103/09) a company (W) purchased some assets which it leased to another company (S) which in turn leased them to two companies (CM and CA) which were associated with W but were part of a separate VAT group making exempt supplies of insurance. W reclaimed input tax on the purchase of the assets. HMRC formed the opinion that the transactions were an ‘abuse’ and issued assessments to recover some of the input tax which W had reclaimed. The CA referred the case to the ECJ for a ruling on whether the adoption of an asset leasing structure gave rise to a ‘tax advantage’ within the Halifax principle whether this was an ‘abusive practice’ within the Halifax principle and if it was an ‘abusive practice’ what should be the appropriate redefinition. Advocate-General Mazák expressed...
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:
