One minute with Philippe Gamito, senior VAT adviser at Baker McKenzie.
What’s keeping you busy at work?
I am lucky enough to have lots happening right now. In short, when I am not drinking coffee, I spend most of my time dealing with VAT issues relating to cross-border reorganisations for financial and insurance businesses, which often includes insightful conversations with my transfer pricing colleagues.
If you could make one change to VAT, what would it be?
I’m not sure how I would make this change to be honest, but I would create a parallel VAT world (a metaverse?) in which the CJEU judgment in Skandia (Case C-7/13) would simply not exist (and thus Danske Bank would not exist (Case C-812/19) either). Thereby allowing, among others, UK and EU financial and insurance businesses to fully enjoy the benefits of ‘cross-border’ VAT grouping and make their VAT affairs less burdensome whilst being in line with the objective of VAT grouping provisions: to simplify VAT and mitigate the VAT cost. Wishful thinking, sadly.
What do you know now that you wish you’d known at the start of your career?
I wish I had known the importance of keeping in touch with former colleagues. It takes a long time to build relationships, but they can fade quickly if you don’t put the effort in when your paths change. Figuring this out early in your career can be of extreme value.
Are there any new rules that are causing a particular problem in practice?
Although we are only at the consultation stage, the potential new VAT rules on investment management and how to define a special investment fund are interesting. However, these rules do not seem to tackle the issue of what constitutes ‘management’ and may therefore not solve all the problems.
Has a recent VAT case caught your eye?
I was struck by the convoluted AG opinion in Fund O (Case C-250/21) in which the AG opined that sub-participation did not amount to the granting of credit as it primarily involves the transfer of risk. Luckily, the CJEU overruled the opinion and concluded that the provision of funds against remuneration was VAT exempt. What a relief for market participants!
What development should we look out for later this year?
We should pay attention to the judgment in Target in which the Supreme Court is expected to provide its views on the issue of retained EU law. It may result in defining what constitutes a payment for VAT, which is never too late given that we are 50 years after the introduction of VAT (!).
Finally, you might not know this about me but…
I am a keen cyclist and chocolate enthusiast (perhaps due to my Belgian roots), even though I must be spending most of my time listening to podcasts of all sorts!
One minute with Philippe Gamito, senior VAT adviser at Baker McKenzie.
What’s keeping you busy at work?
I am lucky enough to have lots happening right now. In short, when I am not drinking coffee, I spend most of my time dealing with VAT issues relating to cross-border reorganisations for financial and insurance businesses, which often includes insightful conversations with my transfer pricing colleagues.
If you could make one change to VAT, what would it be?
I’m not sure how I would make this change to be honest, but I would create a parallel VAT world (a metaverse?) in which the CJEU judgment in Skandia (Case C-7/13) would simply not exist (and thus Danske Bank would not exist (Case C-812/19) either). Thereby allowing, among others, UK and EU financial and insurance businesses to fully enjoy the benefits of ‘cross-border’ VAT grouping and make their VAT affairs less burdensome whilst being in line with the objective of VAT grouping provisions: to simplify VAT and mitigate the VAT cost. Wishful thinking, sadly.
What do you know now that you wish you’d known at the start of your career?
I wish I had known the importance of keeping in touch with former colleagues. It takes a long time to build relationships, but they can fade quickly if you don’t put the effort in when your paths change. Figuring this out early in your career can be of extreme value.
Are there any new rules that are causing a particular problem in practice?
Although we are only at the consultation stage, the potential new VAT rules on investment management and how to define a special investment fund are interesting. However, these rules do not seem to tackle the issue of what constitutes ‘management’ and may therefore not solve all the problems.
Has a recent VAT case caught your eye?
I was struck by the convoluted AG opinion in Fund O (Case C-250/21) in which the AG opined that sub-participation did not amount to the granting of credit as it primarily involves the transfer of risk. Luckily, the CJEU overruled the opinion and concluded that the provision of funds against remuneration was VAT exempt. What a relief for market participants!
What development should we look out for later this year?
We should pay attention to the judgment in Target in which the Supreme Court is expected to provide its views on the issue of retained EU law. It may result in defining what constitutes a payment for VAT, which is never too late given that we are 50 years after the introduction of VAT (!).
Finally, you might not know this about me but…
I am a keen cyclist and chocolate enthusiast (perhaps due to my Belgian roots), even though I must be spending most of my time listening to podcasts of all sorts!
