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

Were HMRC correct to deny VAT grouping to a Scottish Partnership?

Buildings
  • LinkedIn (opens new window)
  • Twitter (opens new window)
By Jan Garioch CA

4 September 2019

Key points:

  • HMRC wanted to refuse VAT grouping for a Scottish Partnership under the legislation which applied prior to the enactment of Finance Act 2019.
  • They argued a Scottish Partnership is not a body corporate and could not be included in a VAT group at that time.
  • Could the appellant successfully appeal for conforming construction applying the principles of equal treatment and fiscal neutrality?

Jan Garioch CA discusses a recent case, Baillie Gifford & Co v HMRC, which saw Scottish Partnerships hold centre stage.

Baillie Gifford & Co (BG&Co) is a Scottish Partnership which is in the business of providing investment management services.

Due to regulatory requirements governing financial services and investments providers, the group’s business cannot be provided solely through the structure of a partnership.

Consequently, BG&Co is the sole shareholder of Baillie Gifford & Co Limited, Baillie Gifford Savings Management Limited and Baillie Gifford Life Limited In the absence of VAT grouping, the VAT due on intra-group supplies, to the extent that it is irrecoverable, represents an artificial cost to the group’s business. In 2013, that led to a request for VAT grouping with BG&Co as the representative member.

HMRC refused that request back in February 2014 on the grounds that a Scottish partnership is not a body corporate. While HMRC accepted that a Scottish partnership is distinct from other partnerships, in that it is a legal person in its own right, it is not a body corporate, which in their view made it ineligible for registration to form a VAT group at that time.

It should be noted that in 2019 s43 VATA was amended to widen the eligibility for VAT grouping to individuals and partnerships and, from the time of that amendment, BG&Co is eligible to form a VAT group. Consequently, the effect of this decision is most likely to be limited to this particular appellant, and to the period from 12 November 2013, when the group application was made, until s43 VATA was amended in 2019.

The long passage of time between appealing HMRC’s decision, and the case having its day in court, arises because the appeal was stood over pending the decision of the ECJ in the joined cases of Larentia + Minerva and Marenave Schiffart (L+M). When the ECJ produced its judgement in July 2015, the UK government recognised that there would have to be changes to UK law and VAT grouping provisions.

However, that change did not come in rapidly. There was a consultation period, followed by a further extension period. Ultimately the FTT informed BG&Co that the stay on the proceedings had expired, and the case proceeded, with leave to amend grounds of appeal to incorporate the ECJ’s decision in L+M.

BG&Co’s case

The principle thrust of BG&Co’s case was that UK law on VAT grouping would breach EU law (including the principles of equal treatment and fiscal neutrality) if it were to restrict VAT grouping to bodies corporate. UK legislation can and should be given a conforming construction, with the result that Scottish partnerships can form a VAT group.

Following L+M, it is clear that the UK legislation at the relevant time, in limiting the application of VAT grouping to bodies corporate, is contrary to EU law, in particular the principles of equal treatment and fiscal neutrality.  (It would not infringe EU law if it were justified as necessary and appropriate to prevent abuse, but there is no such justification.)

The restriction in UK legislation allows BG&Co’s competitors to enjoy the commercial advantage of VAT grouping, whilst BG&Co cannot. A conforming construction that permits a Scottish partnership to form part of a VAT group is perfectly possible in this case.

HMRC’s case

HMRC’s case submits that a Scottish partnership is not a body corporate. HMRC argue that it is not possible to apply a conforming interpretation to the VAT grouping provisions to enable a Scottish partnership to be given VAT grouping treatment.

Firstly, it lacks legal certainty because there would be no basis for saying when a non-corporate body could be controlled by another member of the group.

Secondly, the proposed alteration will amount to ‘judicial legislation’ disrupting the tests set down by Parliament for inclusion in a VAT group which are a fundamental feature of the legislation.

Thirdly, there is doubt as to the alteration being conforming interpretation because it is only ‘conforming’ if it is compliant with EU law. A conforming interpretation which would benefit only some of those affected by the incompatibility would itself be a breach of the principle of fiscal neutrality.

Fourthly, any conforming interpretation would have to relate to the ‘control tests’ that would enable the legislation to define entities that are ‘closely bound to each other by financial, economic and organisational links’.

The Tribunal’s deliberations

The Tribunal took a deep dive into L+M to find the pearls. The ECJ ruled it is not consistent with the Sixth Directive for a country to reserve VAT grouping solely to entities with legal personality and subordinate to the controlling company of that group unless it is necessary to prevent abuse.

It is for the referring court to determine whether such a measure in domestic law is necessary to combat abuse, tax evasion or tax avoidance. The L+M ruling made clear that the existing VAT grouping legislation infringed the principle of fiscal neutrality by excluding the appellant from participating in a VAT group.

The Tribunal recognised their decision was likely to be limited to this case alone or any outstanding VAT grouping appeal in similar circumstances.

The judgement

The Tribunal picked out the control test as the central feature in the UK’s law on VAT grouping. That was trying to implement the VAT Directive’s grouping provisions for  ‘persons … who, while legally independent, are closely bound to one another by financial, economic and organisational links’.

The Tribunal considered that a conforming interpretation which goes with the grain of the legislation is by extending the deeming of the controlling non-corporate body under subsection 43A (3) as if he or they were a company.

They were not deflected from this on the grounds of protection against abuse. They acknowledged that restriction to bodies corporate could shield against abuse it was not ‘the panacea for prevention’. The appeal succeeded and this allowed BG&Co to be VAT grouped.

2-23-marsh 2-23-marsh
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: