Lee Squires and Fiona Bantock (Hogan Lovells) provide your monthly review of recent VAT developments that matter.
The key VAT developments which have occurred since last month’s briefing are as follows.
Zipvit: input VAT recovery
In Zipvit Ltd v HMRC [2016] UKUT 294 (TCC) (reported in Tax Journal 8 July 2016) the Upper Tribunal (UT) confirmed the decision of the First-tier Tribunal (FTT) that Zipvit was unable to recover input VAT that it claimed to have incurred. Zipvit carried on a mail order business in which it used a number of mail services including Royal Mail. Prior to the CJEU ruling in TNT (C-357/07) supplies made by Royal Mail to Zipvit were treated as VAT exempt and accordingly Royal Mail neither charged VAT nor issued VAT invoices to Zipvit. However following...
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:
Lee Squires and Fiona Bantock (Hogan Lovells) provide your monthly review of recent VAT developments that matter.
The key VAT developments which have occurred since last month’s briefing are as follows.
Zipvit: input VAT recovery
In Zipvit Ltd v HMRC [2016] UKUT 294 (TCC) (reported in Tax Journal 8 July 2016) the Upper Tribunal (UT) confirmed the decision of the First-tier Tribunal (FTT) that Zipvit was unable to recover input VAT that it claimed to have incurred. Zipvit carried on a mail order business in which it used a number of mail services including Royal Mail. Prior to the CJEU ruling in TNT (C-357/07) supplies made by Royal Mail to Zipvit were treated as VAT exempt and accordingly Royal Mail neither charged VAT nor issued VAT invoices to Zipvit. However following...
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:
