Tuesday, August 05, 2008

VATman Begins

Tuesday, August 05, 2008

Doing the tax return at work for the first time led me to begin researching which foodstuffs you can and can't reclaim the VAT on, which in turn led me to this riveting official HM Revenue and Customs document.

Until now I'd assumed the distinction was pretty much luxury items verses staple subsistence, but apparently that would be too straightforward for Her Majesty's esteemed pedants - this tome runs to 24 pages of exceptions, addendums and miscellaneous illogical quibbling!

For instance, biscuits which contain chocolate chips are zero-rated, but if the chocolate forms a partial or complete coating, tax is applicable. Ah, I see. Lots of chocolate = VATable. But wait, cornflake cakes which are drenched in chocolate, chocolate sauce, chocolate spread and even chocolate body paint are VAT free. Chocolate visibility is key too it seems - if the chocolate is wedged between the biscuit layers and hence out of sight as you'd find in a Bourbon, VAT shouldn't be levied. We should also note that you don't need to pay VAT if the chocolate is on the surface, but the manufacturers stick 'cake' on the packaging as in the case of Jaffa Cakes. These definitely aren't biscuits and anyone who dares to make such an absurd claim will be sued out of existence.

Likewise, if you sell sweetened dried fruit and claim it's for snacking and home baking you don't need to charge VAT on it. However, if you sell an identical product and neglect to mention to your befuddled customers - who would never have made the mental leap otherwise - that you could shove the stuff in a cake, you're obliged to charge VAT.

Speaking of cakes, they're tax-free while biscuits and crisps aren't, which explains why Pringles are no longer crisps... up is now down and black is white.

My favourite though is the case of marshmallow teacakes verses Snowballs. Marshmallow teacakes if they have "a crumb, biscuit or cake base topped with a dome of marshmallow coated in either chocolate, sugar strands or coconut" are zero-rated whereas "Snowballs without such a base are classed as confectionary" and so are sold plus VAT. Next time we order anything resembling the above as part of a client entertaining exercise I must remember to interrupt the meeting, clipboard at the ready donned in a lab coat poised to analyse the constituency of the foundations.

4 comments:

Aaron Poeze

It all seems baking related. If they can at all claim it's cakey, bakey goodness it's tax free. Even if it isn't. I just has to be claimed.

dreamkatcha

Ah yes, except where exemption 4658b applies.

What I don't follow is why cake gets the VIP treatment. The VAT zero-rate rule came into play to provide financial relief to consumers when purchasing essentials like basic food groups, children's clothes and shoes and educational reading matter. Wedding cake and marshmallow teacakes aren't really in the same league.

Happy Grandad

I recall having a lighthearted discussion with Aaron some time ago regarding these crazy rules after reading an article on the BBC News website. Also in that article, we hear that the Food and Agricultural Organisation and the World Health Organisation have finally decided what qualifies as a "proper tomato"...after seven years debate!

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/business/7490346.stm

dreamkatcha

Is that who I think it is? How've you been?

I really don't know how we've muddled along all these years without such criteria. We could have been eating putrid elephant flesh and been none the wiser! Thank you WHO/FAO for shining a light on this baffling concept. ;)

 
◄Design by Pocket, BlogBulk