Ordinarily a supply is assessed in terms of “what service is received” by the customer. Irrespective of the motive of the supplier, customers visiting a student operated restaurant or salon are not themselves receiving education (as HMRC argued unsuccessfully in the Brockenhurst case).
Article 134(b) was not written into UK law, presumably because the need to do so was not envisaged. There is a long-standing principle that EU law can be used to interpret ambiguities in UK law but HMRC cannot act as if EU law applies simply because it failed to adopt it correctly into domestic legislation. If it is now necessary to pretend the UK law contains an enactment of Article 134(b) that seems to cross a boundary. Logically, one would also need to consider the “basic purpose” of all supplies covered by Article 134(b), not only supplies within one narrow subset. There are in UK law nine different Items within Group 5 to Schedule 9 VAT Act 1994 (Education) and Article 134(b) covers several exemptions, not only education.
Source Constable
Follow us on
Latest Posts in "United Kingdom"
- Guernsey Seeks Companies to Support New GST Administration, Tender Deadline Approaches
- Navigating UK VAT: Key Considerations and Pitfalls in Exporting Goods
- HMRC’s New VAT Error Correction Rules: Stricter Penalties and Reporting Changes Explained
- Supreme Court Clarifies VAT Grouping and Time of Supply Rules in Prudential Assurance Case
- UK Supreme Court Confirms VAT on Intragroup Fees for Former VAT Group Members
