Carousel_Arrow Chat IHT_trust_wills IR35 Login Mobile Menu Share Share Email SubMenuMobile VAT View_Gallery View_List capital_allow Triangle 2 Copy Close construction cyberpro employment_tax_shares emplyer_solutions entrepreneurs_corps fee_protect Go grant_fund Group i_Clock i_Consult i_Done i_Eligibility_Tick i_Enter i_Filter i_HMRC i_Negative i_Play i_Plus i_Reset i_Support_Legal i_Support_TaxDesk i_Support_VAT i_Tick noun_marketing_1872083 noun_online_2126759 i_download i_meet Group Copy 24 Group 18 noun_electrical_1240755 copy noun_Technology_2125422 noun_Science_2031115 i_tick_bullet_block international_tax patent_box private_client property_sdlt r_and_d reliefs_incentives Search specialist_tax status tax_indemnity valuation
icon_cookie Created with Sketch. Cookies

We use cookies on this website. You can choose to accept them all or to opt out of some. You can change your consent at any time by opening this window again

This includes all necessary technical and session cookies, plus performance, tracking and persistent cookies.

If you choose this option, we will block all performance, targeting and persistent cookies. Many parts of this site will then not work.

Please read the full details in our Cookie Statement.
Markel Tax

23 Aug 2017

When should a sub-contractor charge VAT and when can they zero-rate?

In a case released on 14 July 2017, Summit Electrical Installations Limited v Revenue and Customs Commissioners [2017] UKFTT 564 (TC), the First-tier Tribunal found that the same supplies could be zero rated either as supplies for the construction of dwellings or as supplies for the construction of relevant residential accommodation (eg student accommodation).

The appellant had made supplies as an electrical sub-contractor in connection with the construction of student accommodation. The issue was whether the supplies were zero-rated as supplies in the course of construction of buildings designed as a  of dwellings or as supplies for the construction of student accommodation.

The student blocks were designed as self-contained living accommodation including kitchenettes and en suite bathrooms. While the planning consent restricted use to students, there was no clause preventing each unit from being separately used or sold.  The main contractor refused to pay VAT on the sub-contractor’s services, on the basis that  what was supplied was the construction of dwellings and should therefore be VAT zero-rated.  The main contractor had received a certificate from the developer claiming relief from VAT on the basis that the new building would be used for a relevant residential purpose (RRP), namely a communal building for students.  Ordinarily sub-contractors working on RRP buildings are not entitled to zero-rate their services – VAT has to be charged at the standard rate which the main contractor must then reclaim on its VAT return.  HMRC considered that the issue of the certificate meant that sub-contractors could not zero rate their supplies to the main contractor.

The Tribunal agreed with the appellant that the student accommodation could be treated as ‘dwellings’ for VAT purposes. The Tribunal then considered HMRC’s published policy which is that subcontractors must charge VAT if a certificate has been issued to the main contractor claiming zero-rating under the RRP relief, even if the construction would also meet the definition of dwellings.  The judge dismissed that policy as entirely wrong.

This ruling can save significant cash flow benefit for both sub-contractors and main contractors in that VAT would not require to be charged, paid and reclaimed.

Tagged Value added tax (VAT) services
Next article in series

27 Jul 2017

Good work: the Taylor report on modern working practices

Strategic partners

  • Tolleys
  • Institute of Financial Accountants
  • BTC Software
  • Lovell Consulting