Compensating for past errors – HMRC’s retrospective change in approach to VAT on compensation
Last month HMRC announced in a Business Brief (12/20) a change in its view of the VAT treatment of certain compensation payments relating to the termination of contracts pursuant to recent case law at EU level. Previously, HMRC’s view of the law was generally that compensation payments paid on the termination of an agreement were outside the scope of VAT.
The new guidance – which updates HMRC’s Manual – makes it clear that certain payments made on the termination of contracts, which previously would have been viewed as compensation, should instead be subject to VAT. In addition, the new guidance can be read as applying more broadly and at face value applies to many types of compensation payments and damages. Clarification is being sought from HMRC as to whether the changes are actually intended to be that broad, and we understand that HMRC is reviewing the guidance to consider its scope. It is not clear that the change should be applied broadly as the case law giving rise to the change in approach by HMRC seems to apply more narrowly. We comment further on certain types of payment below. Most unfortunately of all, HMRC is of the view that taxpayers are required to apply this change of practice retrospectively, meaning that payments under contracts made in the past must now be revisited (subject to the general VAT time limits for correcting past errors, which in practice should mean four years). Until HMRC has completed its review of the scope of the new guidance, we do not expect HMRC to be proactive in applying the changes. Taxpayers are not required to do this if a specific ruling was obtained from HMRC in relation to a particular payment, but this is unlikely to be relevant to many taxpayers.
As noted above, HMRC will apply the new approach to most payments that have been made in the past and all new payments made in future. As a result taxpayers should review payments that they have received from customers that have been treated as compensation, and consider whether VAT should be accounted for on these sums. If the original VAT treatment was incorrect (under HMRC’s new view), the supplier should pay the output VAT due to HMRC and amend their VAT returns. At that point, it will be essential to consider the contractual arrangements to determine whether the cost can be passed on to the recipient of the supply.
The wording of the guidance is such that HMRC appear to say that all termination payments are subject to VAT even if the main supply is exempt (say, in relation to a lease where the landlord had not opted to tax). This does not seem likely to be correct, as the underlying analysis in the case law is that the termination payment is a further payment for the main supply, and so it must take the same VAT treatment.
The obligation to look back over past payments and transactions applies to the period to 2 September 2020. Clearly, for many businesses reviewing four years’ worth of transactions will be an onerous obligation. All payments made on or after 2 September 2020 are also caught.
Recipients of supplies (customers, tenants etc) will of course also be affected by these changes. If an amount of compensation has been paid, the supplier may seek to issue a VAT invoice and request that the amount equal to VAT is paid. This may be a cash flow cost only for the payer, but it would be an absolute cost to any VAT exempt businesses. Before making any additional payments or considering if VAT recovery if possible, recipients of supplies should check that the VAT is properly charged. This would include checking the new guidance, taking a view on any grey areas and confirming the contractual position.
Given that HMRC is reviewing the scope of the new guidance, suppliers and recipients of supplies may choose to wait for clarification from HMRC before making payments (either to HMRC or suppliers) or amending their VAT accounts. However, businesses would be well advised to review termination and compensation payments to understand the extent of any potential payments and changes to VAT accounts that may be required. This will allow businesses to act promptly once HMRC’s views are clarified.
Specific types of payment
If VAT would be payable in respect of the supplies made under the contract, a payment made by the customer to bring the contract to an end early is now subject to VAT. HMRC’s guidance gives the example from the case of Vodafone Portugal C - 43/19 of payments made to end a mobile phone contract before the end of the contractual period. This would also apply to payments to terminate agreements for the supply of other goods or services, such as the payment of a break fee to end a lease.
HMRC will treat payments made to upgrade the goods or services supplied as a termination of the original agreement, and so VAT may be payable on the upgrade fee.
Liquidated damages and payments for loss of earnings
Agreements often include provisions setting out the amounts payable if the agreement is terminated early which are expressed to be payments of liquidated damages, being a measure of the loss and costs that the supplier would incur as a result of the termination. Under HMRC’s guidance, VAT is now due on these payments where VAT is due on the consideration for the supply under the agreement. However, VAT should not be due on payments of compensation made by the supplier to their customer.
Contracts for construction services can include similar obligations. If a contract for construction services is terminated, payments of liquidated damages and payments for delay may be due. If the employer makes payment to the contractor to compensate them for wasted time or costs (and this payment was envisaged by the contract) VAT would be chargeable at the same rate as the main supply. However, if the contractor makes payments to the employer, this payment should not have a direct link to the supply of the construction services, and should remain outside the scope of VAT.
Breach of contract leading to termination
If there is a breach of contract, and this brings the agreement to an end, payments may be due in respect of the termination. VAT is now due on these payments where they are made to the supplier and VAT was due on the original supply of goods or services. HMRC give the example of a lease automatically terminating due to the insolvency of the tenant or another company connected to the tenant. Payments made by the tenant to the landlord on the breach and consequential termination would be subject to VAT if the landlord had opted to tax.
Dilapidations and other compensatory payments
Another common payment due on termination of a lease is in respect of dilapidations, which have always been treated as outside the scope of VAT on the basis that they are compensatory payments for breach of contract.
HMRC’s guidance is so widely cast that it is possible to interpret it as requiring VAT to be charged on these types of compensatory payments, but as noted above it seems at odds with the underlying case law and it is hoped that HMRC will soon clarify the scope of the change by amending the guidance.
In the meantime, contact us for specialist advice if you may be affected by this change.
Strategic Planning for Modern Landed Estates
The second in our series of articles on succession planning for landed estates covering a wide variety of matters.
When can you set off claims against different elements of a project
The Court’s decision raises important drafting considerations for construction contracts involving multiple elements of a project.
Drafting terms and conditions or negotiating a contract? Be wary of "unusual" and "exorbitant" exclusion clauses
When drafting a set of terms and conditions, companies must adhere to the requirements contained in the Unfair Contract Terms Act 1977
Stop, collaborate and listen: Top 10 Tips with Collaboration Agreements
Providing you with the top ten tips on collaboration agreements - what should you know?
Preparing your company for sale
We set out here some initial steps to consider in anticipation of a sale.
ESG investment and the challenges for trustees
What challenges does the ESG revolution present for trustees of private family trusts?
The impact of COVID-19 on commercial and residential tenancies
What impact has COVID-19 had on commercial and residential tenancies? Read more here.
Charles Russell Speechlys advises discoverIE on its acquisition of Antenova
discoverIE is a leading international designer, manufacturer and supplier of customised electronics to industry.
Q&A: Separate blocks, common parts and enfranchisement
Miriam Seitler and Lauren Fraser answer queries relating to leaseholders seeking to acquire the freehold.
Coded messages for landlords and tenants
“What does the code of practice mean for landlords and tenants? Read more here”
The family court’s role in micro managing 'trivial' disputes
The recent decision has dealt with the family court’s role in micro managing “trivial” disputes in relation to children
Taxing horizons and fiscal black holes
A super-massive black hole at the centre of the nation’s finances means that tax reform and rates rises look increasingly likely.
Charles Russell Speechlys advises Acora on acquisition of Westgate IT
Westgate IT specialises in providing IT support to businesses in the South West.
Q&A: Wrestling with restrictive covenants
Camilla Lamont (barrister at Landmark Chambers) and Real Estate Disputes Partner Emma Humphreys answer a pair of covenant queries
Charles Russell Speechlys advises Grape Paradise on the acquisition of a fine wine business
Charles Russell Speechlys has advised Grape Paradise on the acquisition of the Sarment Group in the China Mainland territories.
Grab the tail by the horns - Why is tail spend so critical in today’s outsourced portfolio?
It’s usually invisible, but in all likelihood, you’ve got tail spend.
Property Patter: post-pandemic lease renewals
Here we discuss some of the trends in the cases we have seen so far on rent, interim rents, pandemic clauses and other issues.
Property Professionals: Big Sheds and Logistics
Join us as we discuss the the key challenges facing operators and investors in the logistics space.
Jessica Arrol Caws
Good news for offshore private banks: the overseas persons exclusion is here to stay
The Business Magazine, Insider Media, Business South and The Surrey Chambers of Commerce report on the firm's involvement in Appital's £2.5m growth capital investment
The injection will accelerate the development of Appital’s technology infrastructure, integration with financial institutions.