|
|
|
|
Chartered accountants Clement Keys, Birmingham says the VAT status of
nursery and Yarburgh Children's Trust and St. Paul's Community Project Ltd contested
claims by Judgements were handed down in favour of the charities on the basis that the nature of their respective enterprises was a genuine social concern for the welfare of disadvantaged children. This was supported by the fact that the charities deliberately set their fees at a low level with the objective of simply covering costs. "If the ruling had gone the other way there would have been serious implications for charities and not-for-profit organisations, not least because treating those activities as business activities would have prevented them from acquiring new premises free of VAT," says Steven Simmonds, director of VAT services at Clement Keys, Birmingham. "Despite these High Court judgements Customs continues to maintain that a business activity is possible even where there is no profit motive," "So, while Customs accepts that organisations operating children's nurseries broadly in line with Yarburgh Children's Trust and St. Paul's Community Project will not be classed as business activities for VAT purposes, in other instances they will apply a six-point test to determine whether a not-for-profit organisation's activities bear the characteristics of a business." In the High Court cases both organisations were seeking the zero VAT rate on the construction of new nursery premises. While such supplies would usually be subject to VAT, UK law does make provision for construction work to be zero-rated where buildings are used by charities for activities other than business. Zero-rating can be highly beneficial to charities because if their activities are classed as exempt, the amount of VAT they can recover is strictly limited. Customs denied Yarburgh Children's Trust and St. Paul's Community Project zero-rating because they considered they were making business supplies despite the fact that the charities' fees were subsidised by government grants, fundraising activities and donations. "The essence of Customs' argument is that organisations in a similar
position to Yarburgh and St. Paul's benefit from being classed as businesses
and it would not be in the interests of the charity sector in general
if all charitable activities were viewed as non-business," adds "Charities and not for profit organisations should review their
activities in the light of these decisions and determine whether they
would be better off seeking a non-business status or whether the status
quo should be maintained." |