In Shanklin Conservative and Unionist Club v HMRC[2016] UKFTT 135 (25 February 2016) the FTT found that club’s membership subscription did not fall within the exemption for a body whose objects were ‘in the public domain’ and of a ‘political nature’ (VATA 1994 Sch 9 Group 9 item 1 (e)).
The club was a not for profit organisation whose stated object was to ‘promote by all proper means the principles of Conservatism and the implementation of the Conservative Party’s policies.’ It contended that its membership fee were exempt.
The FTT observed that it must decide ‘what the members actually got in return for their subscription.’ It considered that members received the right to attend the premises of the club with its low-price bar to read the magazines to take part in the various social and political activities to use the...
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 Shanklin Conservative and Unionist Club v HMRC[2016] UKFTT 135 (25 February 2016) the FTT found that club’s membership subscription did not fall within the exemption for a body whose objects were ‘in the public domain’ and of a ‘political nature’ (VATA 1994 Sch 9 Group 9 item 1 (e)).
The club was a not for profit organisation whose stated object was to ‘promote by all proper means the principles of Conservatism and the implementation of the Conservative Party’s policies.’ It contended that its membership fee were exempt.
The FTT observed that it must decide ‘what the members actually got in return for their subscription.’ It considered that members received the right to attend the premises of the club with its low-price bar to read the magazines to take part in the various social and political activities to use the...
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:
