- The case began as a VAT dispute over KFC dip pots, but its bigger impact is on the rules for single vs multiple supplies, which matters to many businesses beyond food.
- Queenscourt argued meal deals should be split into separate supplies, making some items zero-rated; HMRC and the FTT largely disagreed, treating the dip pots as ancillary to the chicken and therefore standard-rated.
- The Upper Tribunal rejected Queenscourt’s arguments that the FTT made legal errors about multiple supplies, sourcing from third parties, and HMRC changing its mind.
- However, the Tribunal did accept one key point: once a transaction is found to be a multiple supply, some components can still be treated separately while others may be ancillary to a principal supply.
- The main takeaway is that the case offers useful guidance on VAT treatment of bundled sales, not just fast food.
Source: crowe.com
Note that this post was (partially) written with the help of AI. It is always useful to review the original source material, and where needed to obtain (local) advice from a specialist.
Latest Posts in "United Kingdom"
- UK VAT on Marketplace Sales: HBS Enterprises Ltd v HMRC
- Changes to VAT Capital Goods Scheme
- Funded Pension Schemes (VAT Notice 700/17)
- UK VAT Consultation 2026: HMRC Proposes Expanding Deemed Supplier Rules for Online Marketplaces
- Dental Aligners Are Not VAT-Exempt Dental Prostheses, UK Tribunal Confirms
