ICAS ICAS logo

Quicklinks

  1. About Us

    Find out about who we are and what we do here at ICAS.

  2. Find a CA

    Search our directory of individual CAs and Member organisations by name, location and professional criteria.

  3. CA Magazine

    View the latest issues of the dedicated magazine for ICAS Chartered Accountants.

  4. Contact Us

    Get in touch with ICAS by phone, email or post, with dedicated contacts for Members, Students and firms.

Login
  • Annual renewal
  • About us
  • Contact us
  • Find a CA
  1. About us
    1. Governance
  2. Members
    1. Become a member
    2. Newly qualified
    3. Manage my membership
    4. Benefits of membership
    5. Careers support
    6. Mentoring
    7. CA Wellbeing
    8. More for Members
    9. Area networks
    10. International communities
    11. Get involved
    12. Top Young CAs
    13. Career breaks
    14. ICAS podcast
    15. Newly admitted members 2022
    16. Newly admitted members 2023
  3. CA Students
    1. Student information
    2. Student resources
    3. Learning requirements
    4. Learning updates
    5. Learning blog
    6. Totum Pro | Student discount card
    7. CA Student wellbeing
  4. Become a CA
    1. How to become a CA
    2. Routes to becoming a CA
    3. CA Stories
    4. Find a training agreement
    5. Why become a CA
    6. Qualification information
    7. University exemptions
  5. Employers
    1. Become an Authorised Training Office
    2. Resources for Authorised Training Offices
    3. Professional entry
    4. Apprenticeships
  6. Find a CA
  7. ICAS events
    1. CA Summit
  8. CA magazine
  9. Insight
    1. Finance + Trust
    2. Finance + Technology
    3. Finance + EDI
    4. Finance + Mental Fitness
    5. Finance + Leadership
    6. Finance + Sustainability
  10. Professional resources
    1. Anti-money laundering
    2. Audit and assurance
    3. Brexit
    4. Business and governance
    5. Charities
    6. Coronavirus
    7. Corporate and financial reporting
    8. Cyber security
    9. Ethics
    10. Insolvency
    11. ICAS Research
    12. Pensions
    13. Practice
    14. Public sector
    15. Sustainability
    16. Tax
  11. CPD - professional development
    1. CPD courses and qualifications
    2. CPD news and updates
    3. CPD support and advice
  12. Regulation
    1. Complaints and sanctions
    2. Regulatory authorisations
    3. Guidance and help sheets
    4. Regulatory monitoring
  13. CA jobs
    1. CA jobs partner: Rutherford Cross
    2. Resources for your job search
    3. Advertise with CA jobs
    4. Hays | A Trusted ICAS CA Jobs Partner
    5. Azets | What's your ambition?
  14. Work at ICAS
    1. Business centres
    2. Meet our team
    3. Benefits
    4. Vacancies
    5. Imagine your career at ICAS
  15. Contact us
    1. Technical and regulation queries
    2. ICAS logo request

VAT dispute: supply of insurance or insurance intermediary services?

Canary wharf skyline
  • LinkedIn (opens new window)
  • Twitter (opens new window)
By Jan Garioch CA

18 June 2019

Main points:

  • HMRC dispute a claim for input VAT recovery by a company which contended that it provided intermediary services to a Guernsey resident insurance captive.

  • Card Protection Plan case features large in the arguments.

  • FTT consider whether CPP is distinguished in this case.

Jan Garioch CA discusses a recent case about the VAT treatment of insurance provided to self-storage customers. The Tribunal considered the CJEU decision in Card Protection Plan.

The dispute

When Safestore Limited v HMRC was heard by the First Tier Tribunal, the opposing sides rolled onto the battlefield and took up their positions. Safestore argued that it provided intermediary services to its Guernsey resident insurance captive, Assay Insurance Services Limited. It held that such a supply to a non-EU resident gave entitlement to recover, which justified a reclaim of £793,830 of underclaimed input VAT. HMRC’s counterargument was that Safestore itself supplied insurance to its UK customers. In a belt and braces approach, if that argument failed to land a fatal blow for HMRC, its subsidiary argument was that Safestore provided insurance intermediary services to a fixed establishment of Assay in the UK. Therefore, HMRC rejected the input VAT reclaim and raised an assessment for £72,615 of over recovered input VAT.

Commercial background

The commercial background is that Safestore stores goods for its customers in a number of depots around the country. (Prior to 1 October 2012, its supplies of storage facilities were exempt, but after that date Item 1(k) Grp 1 Sch 9 VATA rendered them taxable).

Safestore insists that stored goods are insured by the customers. Whilst commercial customers can choose their own insurer and make their own arrangements, Safestore insists that domestic customers use Assay for their insurance cover. (Assay reinsures with Royal & Sun Alliance, and it is the latter which deals with all claims, and makes payments to customers from funds provided by Assay). The insurance premium plus IPT is initially collected from customers by Safestore. Thereafter, 70% of the premium plus 100% of the IPT is passed to Assay which accounts for the IPT and submits IPT returns. The remaining 30% of the premium is retained by Safestore.

Card Protection Plan (CPP) case

The Tribunal considered the relevant legislation and case law at length. Unsurprisingly, the Card Protection Plan (CPP) case loomed large in arguments brought in this case. To recap, CPP was the holder of a block insurance policy under which its customers were insured. The ECJ held that CPP “procures for [its] customers, for payment, in its own name and on its own account… insurance cover by having recourse to an insurer. Consequently, for the purposes of VAT, there is a supply of services between [the insurer] and CPP on the one hand, and between CPP and its customers on the other. It is true that the exemptions …are to be construed strictly. However, the expression 'insurance transactions’ is broad enough to include the provision of insurance cover by a taxable person who is not himself an insurer but, in the context of a block policy, procures such cover for his customers by making use of the supplies of an insurer who assumes the risk insured.”

Safestore’s position

Safestore’s counsel approached from the angle that CPP had a cake which is shared with the insureds. He sought to distinguish Safestore, arguing that it is not a ‘cake sharer’ because it is not insured under the policy itself. Instead there is a direct contractual relationship between Safestore’s customers and Assay. Therefore, he sought to differentiate its position from a linear relationship where an insurance company has a contract with a middleman and the middleman can disseminate benefit of the contract to third parties.

The HMRC view

HMRC objected that this was a false distinction from the CPP case because CPP was not an insured person under the relevant contract either. Cardholders were added to the policy and could claim directly against the insurer, which matches how Safestore customers can claim directly against the insurer. Multiple insurance contracts are not produced in the Safestore scenario. Instead Assay produces one group policy at the start of the year and Safestore is the legal holder and it extends the benefits to its customers.

Conclusions

The Tribunal concluded that Safestore supplies insurance services rather than acts as an insurance intermediary. Factors which convinced them included the following. They found there was an agreement between Safestore and Assay, and that was evidenced by the fact some of the terms were of more interest to Safestore itself than to its customers. They found evidence to support that insurance cover was provided to Safestore’s customers under Safestore’s master insurance policy/open cover. Additionally, study of the reinsurance arrangements showed there was one policy of insurance under which cover would be extended to each customer to whom a confirmation of insurance cover was issued rather than a series of individual insurance contracts taken out with each Safestore customer.

The Tribunal was not shaken from its view by Safestore’s arguments that CPP provided a package of services, whilst it did not. The distinction was not persuasive, and in any event Safestore customers were sold a package of storage services plus compulsory insurance. Nor was it impressed by the argument that CPP customers received a multiple supply and did not pay a specific insurance premium. In its CPP decision the ECJ had focused on the fact CPP procured insurance under a block policy, which happened in the Safestore case too. The Tribunal regarded the terminology used (block, open cover, master or group) as immaterial.

Finally, it dismissed attempts to distinguish CPP’s promise to provide insurance to its members backed up by an enforceable contract, and concluded that Safestore’s insistence that its customers take out insurance which it had obtained from Assay on per agreed terms was not sufficiently different to result in a different VAT treatment.

2022-11-mitigo 2022-11-mitigo
ICAS logo

Footer links

  • Contact us
  • Terms and conditions
  • Modern slavery statement
  • Privacy notice
  • CA magazine

Connect with ICAS

  • Facebook (opens new window) Facebook Icon
  • Twitter (opens new window) Twitter Icon
  • LinkedIn (opens new window) LinkedIn Icon
  • Instagram (opens new window) Instagram Icon

ICAS is a member of the following bodies

  • Consultative Committee of Accountancy Bodies (opens new window) Consultative Committee of Accountancy Bodies logo
  • Chartered Accountants Worldwide (opens new window) Chartered Accountants Worldwide logo
  • Global Accounting Alliance (opens new window) Global Accounting Alliance
  • International Federation of Accountants (opens new window) IFAC
  • Access Accountancy (opens new window) Access Acountancy

Charities

  • ICAS Foundation (opens new window) ICAS Foundation
  • SCABA (opens new window) scaba

Accreditations

  • ISO 9001 - RGB (opens new window)
© ICAS 2022

The mark and designation “CA” is a registered trade mark of The Institute of Chartered Accountants of Scotland (ICAS), and is available for use in the UK and EU only to members of ICAS. If you are not a member of ICAS, you should not use the “CA” mark and designation in the UK or EU in relation to accountancy, tax or insolvency services. The mark and designation “Chartered Accountant” is a registered trade mark of ICAS, the Institute of Chartered Accountants of England and Wales and Chartered Accountants Ireland. If you are not a member of one of these organisations, you should not use the “Chartered Accountant” mark and designation in the UK or EU in relation to these services. Further restrictions on the use of these marks also apply where you are a member.

ICAS logo

Our cookie policy

ICAS.com uses cookies which are essential for our website to work. We would also like to use analytical cookies to help us improve our website and your user experience. Any data collected is anonymised. Please have a look at the further information in our cookie policy and confirm if you are happy for us to use analytical cookies: