VAT updates: November 2019

In this month’s VAT updates, Graham Elliott, director at City & Cambridge Consultancy, considers whether direct patient contact is necessary for medical services, how waiting for a single document lost a self-builder’s tax claim, and whether a husband and wife’s businesses were one or two businesses

Case: medical services

Two cases have recently been decided which deal with the same general issue, one being a First Tier Tribunal (FTT) decision, and the other the decision of the Court of Justice of the European Union (CJEU). The issue is whether the medical exemption can extend to cases where there appears to be a supply of staff rather than actual medical services.

In Medacy (TC07370), an agency provided pharmacological services by means of arranging for pharmacists to be placed within GP practices. The company is paid fixed sums and the GP practice directs patients to the pharmacists for attention as necessary.

Your free features:

Breaking news and expert analysis
Customisable daily newsletters
Six free CPD learning modules each year
Personalised CPD tracker
Top 75 Firms league tables
Regulatory changes
Hardman’s Tax Data

Tax | Bolt loses TOMS dispute with HMRC over charging VAT on fares

Finance | Legal updates: tail clauses, engagement letters and advisor fees

Tax | Hair extension business wins £277k VAT dispute as lack of explanation

Tax | Hotel La Tour loses £76k input VAT appeal over fees at Supreme Court

Finance | Legal updates: danger of digital handshake via email in binding contracts

Navigate

Tax Services

Case: medical services

Your free features:

Sign up to Business & Accountancy Daily