This podcast concerns an Approved Judgment from the Court of Appeal (Civil Division) concerning a VAT appeal involving Impact Contracting Solutions Limited (ICSL) and His Majesty’s Revenue and Customs (HMRC). The appeal addresses whether HMRC can deregister a company for VAT purposes if it facilitated VAT fraud by another party, even if it didn't commit the fraud itself and made legitimate supplies. The judgment reviews EU case law, particularly the Ablessio, Kittel, and Halifax decisions, regarding the abuse of the VAT system and the principles of proportionality and legal certainty, ultimately upholding the Upper Tribunal's decision that such deregistration is permissible if proportionate.

Impact Contracting Solutions Limited v HMRC [2025] EWCA Civ 623

This podcast examines the interpretation of Article 13B(b) of the Sixth VAT Directive. The case, C-284/03, concerns whether a series of agreements between related companies for the use of a property constitutes exempt "letting of immovable property" or taxable "provision of a service" under Belgian law and EU law. The Court ultimately determined that when contracts essentially involve passively providing space for payment based on area and time, even if termed a "licence to occupy" and involving associated companies, they fall under the definition of "letting of immovable property" for VAT purposes. This ruling emphasizes the need to consider the substance of the transaction over its legal label.

Case C-284/03 Temco Europe (18 November 2004)

This podcast presents a European Court of Justice (ECJ) case, C-8/03, involving Banque Bruxelles Lambert SA (BBL) and the Belgian State, focusing on Value Added Tax (VAT). The central issue is whether open-ended investment companies (SICAVs), which collectively invest public capital in securities, qualify as taxable persons under the Sixth VAT Directive. The court ultimately concludes that SICAVs engaged in this activity are indeed taxable persons, meaning that services provided to them from a different Member State are taxed where the SICAV is established, not where the service provider is located. This ruling clarifies the application of EU VAT law to such investment structures and their activities.

Case C-008/03 BBL (21 October 2004)

This podcast presents a judgment from the European Court of Justice concerning a case brought by the Commission of the European Communities against the Hellenic Republic (Greece). The core issue was whether Greece violated European Union law by applying a lower excise duty to ouzo compared to other alcoholic beverages. The Court ultimately ruled in favor of Greece, finding that the reduced rate was permissible under Council Directive 92/83/EEC, specifically Article 23, which allowed Member States to apply a reduced rate to certain products like ouzo. The judgment emphasizes that Community institutions' acts are presumed lawful, and since Greece acted in accordance with a valid directive, it did not fail to fulfill its obligations.

Case C-475/01 Commission v Greece (5 October 2004)

This podcast presents the interpretation of a European VAT directive concerning exemptions for airline services. The central issue is whether an airline that primarily operates international routes can still receive VAT exemptions for supplies and services provided to its aircraft, even when those aircraft are used for domestic flights. The ruling concludes that these supplies and services are indeed exempt in such cases. The decision also clarifies that national courts are responsible for determining whether an airline chiefly operates on international routes, and they can consider various factors, including turnover, to make this assessment.

Case C-382/02 Cimber Air (16 September 2004)

This podcast presents the European Court of Justice judgment (Case C-292/02) concerning excise duties on mineral oils used in agricultural work. The case centers on a preliminary ruling requested by a German court regarding the interpretation of Article 8a(1) of Council Directive 92/81/EEC. The core issue is whether a Member State can charge excise duty on fuel in the standard tank of agricultural machinery when that fuel was legally obtained in another Member State, even if used for purposes beyond just vehicle movement. The judgment concludes that this is prohibited, broadly interpreting "commercial motor vehicle" to include agricultural machinery and finding that Article 8a(1) has direct effect, allowing individuals to challenge national laws conflicting with it.

Case C-292/02 Meiland Azewijn (9 September 2004)

This podcast presents a judgment from the European Court of Justice regarding a Luxembourg VAT case. The case involved a company, Vermietungsgesellschaft Objekt Kirchberg SARL (VOK), that leased immovable property and sought to deduct input VAT. The core issue was whether Luxembourg's requirement for prior, non-retroactive approval from tax authorities to opt for VAT taxation on property leasing transactions was consistent with the Sixth VAT Directive, particularly concerning the right to deduct VAT. The Court ultimately ruled that the Directive does not prevent a Member State from requiring such prior approval as a condition for full input VAT deduction, viewing it as a valid detail for implementing the option to tax.

Case C-269/03 Vermietungsgesellschaft Objekt Kirchberg (9 September 2004)

This podcast addresses a dispute between the European Commission and the Republic of Finland regarding the application of Value Added Tax (VAT) to aid provided in the dried fodder sector under Regulation (EC) No 603/95. The core issue was whether this aid constituted a subsidy directly linked to the price, which would make it subject to VAT under Article 11(A)(1)(a) of Directive 77/388/EEC. The Court of Justice (Second Chamber) ultimately ruled that the aid was not directly linked to the price in the relevant transactions, such as the sale of processed fodder or processing under special-order contracts, and therefore Finland had not failed to fulfill its obligations by not levying VAT on this aid. The judgment clarified that only subsidies that act as consideration for goods or services, paid by a third party to the seller or supplier, qualify as directly linked to the price for VAT purposes.

Case C-495/01 Commission v Finland (15 July 2004)

This podcast presents the Judgment of the Court (Second Chamber) in Case C-463/02, concerning a failure by the Kingdom of Sweden to fulfill obligations related to VAT on aid granted in the dried fodder sector. The European Commission argued that Sweden should have levied Value Added Tax on this aid, considering it a subsidy directly linked to the price under Directive 77/388/EEC. The Court ultimately dismissed the Commission's action, finding that the aid in question did not constitute a subsidy directly linked to the price for the purposes of VAT, whether the fodder was sold after drying or processed under special-order contracts. The Court's analysis hinged on whether the subsidy specifically enabled the supplier to provide goods or services at a reduced price to the purchaser, and whether the beneficiary could freely use the aid.

Case C-463/02 Commission v Sweden (15 July 2004)

This podcast details a European Court of Justice case brought by the Commission of the European Communities against the Kingdom of Belgium. The Commission alleged that Belgium failed to comply with Council Directive 69/335/EEC, which harmonizes indirect taxes on the raising of capital. Specifically, Belgium was accused of improperly levying a tax on stock exchange transactions and a tax on the delivery of bearer securities when new securities were issued. The Court ultimately ruled in favor of the Commission, finding that these taxes, as applied to new issues, violated the directive's prohibition on taxing the creation and issue of securities. The Court clarified that the initial acquisition and physical delivery of newly issued securities are considered integral parts of the issuing process under the directive.

New tracks tagged #tax