In Taylor Wimpey v HMRC [2017] UKUT 34 (7 February 2017) the UT set out the principles to determine whether particular items have been incorporated into a building and are ‘ordinarily incorporated’ for the purpose of the builder’s block.
Taylor Wimpey claimed input tax on appliances (white goods) installed in newly built homes by companies now in its VAT group in the period between 1 April 1973 and 30 April 1997 (the last period to which the three year cap did not apply). The issue was whether the relevant items fell within the scope of the builder’s block (introduced by Input Tax (Exceptions) No. 1 Order SI 1972/1165 art 3) so that any input incurred on these items was not recoverable.
Taylor Wimpey contended that the block was unlawful under EU law. However the UT found that the Second Directive art 17 and...
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 Taylor Wimpey v HMRC [2017] UKUT 34 (7 February 2017) the UT set out the principles to determine whether particular items have been incorporated into a building and are ‘ordinarily incorporated’ for the purpose of the builder’s block.
Taylor Wimpey claimed input tax on appliances (white goods) installed in newly built homes by companies now in its VAT group in the period between 1 April 1973 and 30 April 1997 (the last period to which the three year cap did not apply). The issue was whether the relevant items fell within the scope of the builder’s block (introduced by Input Tax (Exceptions) No. 1 Order SI 1972/1165 art 3) so that any input incurred on these items was not recoverable.
Taylor Wimpey contended that the block was unlawful under EU law. However the UT found that the Second Directive art 17 and...
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:
