This site uses cookies. By continuing to browse the site you are agreeing to our use of cookies. Find out more here.
X
MM+Cover+small+181214
Categories:Regulation

Poor wording blamed for VAT contradictions

  • Print
  • Comments (2)

Consultancy firm Engage Partnership says concerns that HM Revenue & Customs’ latest VAT guidance is contradictory are the result of poor wording rather than a change of position.

Last week, Money Marketing revealed the FSA is concerned that HMRC’s guidance, circulated to industry stakeholders last month, is contradictory.

The guidance states investment management or portfolio advice services where an adviser suggests particular transactions will be subject to VAT. It also says ongoing advice will be subject to VAT but will be exempt where the ongoing advice includes portfolio rebalancing.

In September, Engage chaired a meeting on adviser charging and VAT attended by HMRC, the FSA, the Tax Incentivised Savings Association, Aifa and the Investment Management Association.

Following the meeting, HMRC said VAT liability will be determined by the intention of the service when advice is originally arranged.

If the intention is to provide intermediation, then it will be subject to VAT while a transaction will be exempt.

Engage director Les Cantlay says he has spoken to HMRC and is confident there has been no change to this position.

He says: “The guidance was very much a working draft in search of appropriate words, which has given rise to this unfortunate impression that there is a contradiction. Advisers do not need to worry, the intention is there will be no change to the VAT position.

“I do not expect that draft was in any way a move from the position that we all arrived at in September. Any contradictions that appear to be there because of wording will be resolved before formal issue of the guidance.”

HMRC is aiming to publish its final guidance early next year.

Financial Escape director Phil Castle says: “The wording is problematic. Hopefully, this will be resolved in the new year.”

HMRC declined to comment.

  • Print
  • Comments (2)

Daily Email Updates
If you enjoyed this article, sign up to receive the latest news and analysis from Money Marketing.

The Money Marketing CPD Centre
Build your annual CPD - you can log and plan your CPD hours for free with The Money Marketing CPD Centre.

Money Marketing Awards 2015
Put your firm forward as the leading practitioner in your field. Adviser and Advertising categories are open to entries - Enter Now.

Readers' comments (2)

  • It seems to me that most of the contradiction and confusion to date has actually been propagated by ill-informed comments posted by the likes of Engage and others.

    While the HMRC draft guidance isn't word perfect, at least it's a giant step in the right direction and offers advisers a very straightforward way of determining the VAT liability of their services. Hopefully now that there's a consultation process underway, we'll get some proper, grown up debate and a final version of the guidance that provides advisers with the certainty they really need.

    Unsuitable or offensive? Report this comment

  • Happy to meet with you "Sick in the Basin" to allow you to make an informed judgement on how "ill informed" we are.

    Unsuitable or offensive? Report this comment

Have your sayEdit my profile/screen name

You must sign in to make a comment

AXA Wealth


Fund Data

Editor's Pick



Poll

Will providers be forced to pay out compensation over annuity misselling?

Job of the week

Latest jobs

View all jobs

Most recent comments

View more comments