Vat

[Funkstar]

you KNOW that Saracen is the DADDY

I thought you were the daddy?

Or is there something you and Sair haven't been telling us?

[Saracen]

Ever thought of applying to be Chancellor mate? You appear to have a much firmer grasp of economics than our current one

Chancellor? You've gotta be kidding? Take the poison chalice? Be the one that gets the blame when our self-famously competent legend-in-his-own-mind ex-Chancellor's efforts come totally unravelled?

What have I ever done to you that you'd wish that on me?



Besides, I have enough trouble with my blood pressure from avoiding breaking the swearing rule here when talking about politicians. I couldn't keep control of it face-to-face over the dispatch box with them, and I'd end up breaking Auntie Beeb's beep machine.

[Saracen]

Oh, and I ought to say that while trying to follow that post about VAT may be quite hard, it's more a case of fiddly explanation than that the core problem is complex. The principle behind VAT is dead simple once you've got it. It's just explaining it that's tricky.

Oh, and though the principle is simple, VAT law itself is ..... arghhhh!!!!

[Funkstar]

Oh, and though the principle is simple, VAT law itself is ..... arghhhh!!!!

Biscuits vs cakes

Yogurt vs. Frozen Yogurt vs. Yogurt frozen for storage

[mycarsavw]

Consider youself lucky - not only do I have my Chartered exams to think back too, but 20 years of filling in VAT returns.

12 years of filling in for me so far.

Is there a way to unthank that epic VAT post, it made my stomach churn.

Never, ever <annoy> off the VAT man....ever.

[Saracen]

Biscuits vs cakes

Yogurt vs. Frozen Yogurt vs. Yogurt frozen for storage

Oh, don't.

In case anyone is wondering what that's all about, ...... brace yourselves

Right, deep breath, and here goes .....

Biscuits and cakes (which in themselves are vague definitions) are treated differently for VAT purposes.

Most bakery products, like bread and cakes, are zero-rated, so the consumer pays no VAT on them. That includes biscuits, generally. However, "luxury" biscuits, such as those with partial or complete chocolate coatings, are not, essentially, "foodstuffs" but luxury items, and as such as VAT-able at standard rate.

So, consider a Jaffa cake.

If it's a "cake", it's zero-rated. If it's a "biscuit" then, because it's partially chocolate covered, it's a "luxury" biscuit and therefore is VAT-able .... which it isn't if it's a cake.

If you take a choc-chip cookie, it's a biscuit because the chocolate is embedded. But that cookie with a chocolate coating could, and probably would, be designated "luxury" because it's a coating, even if it had the same quantity of chocolate as the non-VAT-able chips in the choc-chip cookie.

Arghh!

Oh, and in case anyone thinks this is all a bit trivial, there's the Marks and Spencer teacake farce. For years (about 20 of them) the VAT-man has had M&S charging VAT on their teacakes. This all comes down to an argument with HMRC about the classification of traders between payment and repayment traders. Mostly, mainstream supermarkets sell exempt or zero-rated products, because most foodstuffs are zero-rated, whereas M&S sells a lot of stuff that isn't zero-rated, but also sells foodstuffs. M&S argued that the supermarkets were getting an advantage because of the way HMRC treated payment and repayment traders was different over the VAT on teacakes, and was therefore discriminatory.

And if you still think it's trivial, the amounts involved were several million pounds, and the argument went right up to the European Court of Justice, who ruled against HMRC and in M&S' favour. And then bounced the decision back down to the House of Lords to implement.

It;s also worth pointing out that while it looks like this means M&S will get the several million quid paid in VAT repaid, it wasn't actually M&S that stumped those millions up in the first place - it was you lot, their customers. But there's no practical way of reimbursing the customers that paid that illegally demanded VAT, and it doesn't look like anyone proposes to even try.


And, as Funkstar alluded to, that's only a couple of the phenomenal complexities of the actual implementation of VAT. I seem to remember that basic salted peanuts are treated one way, while honey-roast are another (basic foodstuff v luxury item, again), and there are many, many, MANY such examples.

[Lucio]

Just wait till some bright spark decides to charge VAT based on whether or not the food is "healthy"

[Funkstar]

I didn't know about the peanut one, thanks