The Pre-Budget Submission 2024 tackles challenges in Ireland, from the ‘green’ transition to inflation and housing supply, offering recommendations to benefit businesses, says Gearóid O’Sullivan Each year, Pre-Budget Submission is prepared under the auspices of the Consultative Committee of Accountancy Bodies – Ireland (CCAB-I).  It is a particularly influential document as it represents not only the views of Chartered Accountants but also our peers in other professional accountancy organisations. The Pre-Budget Submission is overseen by the CCAB-I’s Tax Committee South, of which the membership is predominantly Chartered Accountants. Pre-Budget Submission 2024 This year’s Pre-Budget Submission addresses several key issues impacting business in Ireland, from the so-called ‘green’ transition to the impact of inflationary pressures and, of course, ongoing supply issues on all sides of the residential property market.  The aim of any tax measure is ultimately to support the economy and wider society. Therefore, to the extent a measure represents an initial cost to the Exchequer, the hope and intention is that there is a corresponding benefit that exceeds the cost.  In some instances, the benefit is purely financial, e.g. our recommendation to permanently legislate for the Special Assignee Relief Program (SARP) and, in others, the benefit is a desired change in behaviour, e.g. our recommendation to introduce a ‘Help-to-Insulate’ scheme. Measures to alleviate capacity issues in the residential property market The residential property market faces issues on both the rental and retail sides.  On the rental side, we continue to advocate for measures to make renting more attractive, particularly for small-scale and accidental landlords.  Despite tax legislation recognising taxable profits in many cases, often small-scale and accidental landlords find themselves in a cash-flow negative position when the tax bill and any loans on the property are taken into account.  While it is reasonable to mention the economic benefit achieved through property ownership over the longer term, the cash-flow impact is often driving these small-scale and accidental landlords out of the rental market.  If this cohort of landlords were, in turn, selling their investment properties, there could be a sound basis from a policy perspective in maintaining the rules in their current iteration.  However, landlords will often have to first seek to evict and then sell. As such, vacancy represents a key policy issue for government when designing appropriate taxation rules for landlords. With the above in mind, CCAB-I has made several recommendations that we suggest will make letting sufficiently attractive for smaller-scale and accidental landlords: Local property tax should be available as a deduction against rental income. Expenses deductible under section 97 TCA 1997 should be aligned with Case I/II principles. Expenses that are revenue in nature and incurred wholly and exclusively for the purpose of the rental business should be deductible, and rental losses should be available for offset against other income. Capital allowance rates for fixtures and fittings should be increased from 12.5 percent to 25 percent per annum to facilitate landlords investing in the maintenance of properties, providing the works do not result in the termination of an existing tenancy. Landlords who retrofit a property to enhance the property’s energy rating should be able to claim a 100 percent capital allowance where the renovations do not result in the termination of an existing tenancy. The Government should introduce measures to bring parity to the taxation of corporate and individual professional landlords by introducing a flat rate of 25 percent on Case V income for small landlords who opted to become ‘professional landlords’ by waiving their rights under Section 34 of the Residential Tenancy Act (2014), giving additional security to their tenants. We have also suggested a reasonable capital gains tax (CGT) relief to incentivise property sales with tenants in-situ: Professional landlords should be given access to succession reliefs (e.g. CGT retirement relief) to improve the long-term investment proposition of the residential rental business. To encourage landlords to remain in the private rental market, CGT relief of four percent per annum should accrue for the length of time the asset remains a rental property. (This was specifically examined in a 2017 Report of the Working Group on the Tax and Fiscal Treatment of Rental Accommodation Providers.) In addition to the above, we are also recommending that Government increases ‘Rent-a-Room’ relief to match standardised average rents and to remove the ‘cliff-edge’ over which relief is completely removed. Measures to combat inflationary pressures The level of inflation in the Irish economy is putting significant pressure on households.  The European Central Bank began increasing interest rates in a bid to dampen inflation. There is a balance to be struck between tax measures to combat inflation and the policy aim of reducing spending capacity. With that said, there is scope for a reasonable change in the personal tax regime, which should not be incongruent with the policy objectives of the European Central Bank.  Earlier this year, CCAB-I responded to the Department of Finance’s consultation on Ireland’s personal tax system. The Pre-Budget Submission includes many of the points raised in that earlier submission, including a recommendation to move to indexation of the income tax bands and credits.  In Ireland, a taxpayer begins to pay tax at the higher rate from €40,000, although the average industrial wage is €46,800. Therefore, the application of an indexed approach to increasing bands and credits should ensure that tax bands and credits remain valuable year to year. Otherwise, while the Government may not raise bands and credits in a particular year, the real value of after-tax wage is likely to have decreased due to the impact of inflation. We also recommend changes to other areas of the personal tax system, including several changes to the CGT and capital acquisition tax (CAT) regimes. These include: The CGT annual exempt amount available under section 601 TCA 1997 should be increased to €5,000.  The CGT indexation tables in section 556 TCA 1997 should be extended beyond 2003 to the present day. The rates of CGT and CAT should be reduced to 20 percent. The lifetime limit for claiming revised entrepreneur relief under section 597AA TCA 1997 should be increased to €5 million. The category A threshold for CAT should be increased to €350,000 in line with a rate reduction. The CAT small gift exemption should be increased to €5,000. Employers’ PRSI should not be increased at this time. As in 2022, we are also recommending that further consideration is given to an intermediate rate of income tax. This is a longer-term ambition.  However, the current system is complicated by the fact that we have three separate taxes on personal income (income tax, USC and PRSI). As such, all these taxes could be redesigned into a single tax, and in this scenario, an intermediate rate of tax becomes a key tool. Further recommendations Pre-Budget Submission includes further recommendations on measures to assist climate change, support foreign direct investment, SMEs and entrepreneurs, and enhance the tax system generally.  The document is a key feature of the tax department’s annual output. It reflects the views of professional accountants across the country and is presented directly to the Department of Finance each year.  While the Government faces several challenges in this year’s Budget as it balances a substantial surplus with increasing societal needs, it is hoped that our recommendations will be considered in terms of the benefit we believe they will bring to businesses in Ireland. Gearóid O’Sullivan is a Tax Manager at Chartered Accountants Ireland 

Irish Government finances are in surplus and Ireland’s debt-to-GDP ratio has stabilised, so why are there calls for higher taxes? asks Dr Brian Keegan It’s hard to avoid concern fatigue setting in. What with the war in Ukraine, the cost-of-living crisis, the continued Northern political stalemate, multiple dire warnings amplified at COP27 over climate change and another possible COVID-19 surge—the list of concerns seems particularly endless at the moment.   Some time ago, the commentator Marc Coleman projected that population growth—and, by implication, skills growth—would drive prosperity in Ireland. Coleman’s ideas have been given additional credence by the current situation in the UK. Chancellor Jeremy Hunt’s November budget looks towards an extended period of economic stagnation. British productivity has not grown in line with government spending in recent years. In the moribund British economy, there is a record low level of people out of work while the number of job vacancies is at a record high.   There is a straightforward, one-to-one relationship between economic growth and the growth in tax yield, which permits more government spending without further borrowing. When the growth in gross domestic product (GDP) stalls, so too do the tax figures.   In his book The Best is Yet to Come, Coleman pointed out some of the links between more workers, growth and greater resources for public services and benefits. Though the timing was unfortunate (the book was published just months before the 2008 financial crisis), Ireland is now indeed in a better place, at least economically, than it has been for many years. Government finances are in surplus and the debt-to-GDP ratio, at around 50 percent, is back under control.   Unlike the British situation where a Budget bordering on the austere was required to meet existing public spending commitments, without an intolerably high borrowing requirement, the recent Irish Budget took a cost-of-living crisis in its stride, with grant aid against soaring energy bills for households and businesses alike being met through current tax receipts. Nevertheless, a narrative has emerged that the burden of taxation in Ireland will have to increase.   Why this should be the case is not always specified. There are unquestionably problems with housing, health, and education, but it does not automatically follow that these problems arise from underinvestment. At the time of writing, close to half a billion euros set aside in 2022 for local authority housing remains unspent. This points to management or capacity problems, not funding challenges.   The much-heralded report of the Commission on Taxation and Welfare has not had a huge impact on the political debate. This may be because it presents solutions in search of a problem. As research from the Irish Fiscal Advisory Council has pointed out, “its work was not framed around any specific shortfall in funding that needed to be filled. Instead, it was guided by a broad intention to generate additional revenue”.   Even government politicians, who are rarely scathing about the output of an expert group, which the government itself commissioned, were dismissive of the recommendations. Clearly, there are some areas of the economy where additional tax funding will be required, if not immediately, in the medium-term.   Unless there is an unforeseen level of immigration of people of working age, the ratio of workers to pensioners is going in the wrong direction. Climate change management, ironically being driven more by energy security concerns than global altruism, will come with a price tag. The sustained high corporation tax take may have peaked. In Britain, the urgent need for higher taxation has been unanswerable. In Ireland, there needs to be a clear business case for any form of new or additional taxation. We have enough to be concerned about without the prospect of unnecessary taxes. Dr Brian Keegan is Director of Advocacy and Voice at Chartered Accountants Ireland

As the dust settles on the Government’s recent Budget, Norah Collender and Brian Brennan consider the tax measures announced for businesses in Ireland Although the cost of living crisis dominated Budget 2023, announced by Finance Minister Paschal Donohoe and Public Expenditure Minister Michael McGrath on 27 September, it also heralded some interesting tax measures for business. The finer details of these measures—along with possible additional business tax measures—will be set out in the Finance Bill, due to be published on 20 October. For now, here is a rundown of what we know so far. R&D tax credit & KDB Budget 2023 outlines amendments to the payment provisions of the Research and Development (R&D) tax credit, aligning it with new international definitions of refundable tax credits. The changes include the removal of caps on the payable element of the credit and a new fixed three-year payment system. Under the new payment system, a company will have an option to request either payment of its R&D tax credit, or for it to be offset against other tax liabilities. The first €25,000 of the credit claim will be payable in the first year. This will provide a welcome cash-flow benefit for small companies, which make up two-thirds of claimants. The Knowledge Development Box (KDB) regime was due to expire at the end of this year, but Budget 2023 has extended the scheme for a further four years to accounting periods commencing before 1 January 2027. The extension is welcome, but companies need a long-term incentive to make investment decisions, so it would be preferable if the regime was to become a permanent fixture of the tax system. The KDB will be impacted by changes under the Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development’s Pillar Two rules for a global minimum effective tax rate of 15 percent. The Government is taking initial steps to prepare for the OECD changes by increasing the effective tax rate of the regime from 6.25 percent to 10 percent (subject to a Commencement Order). In our view, more amendments will be required to ensure the KDB’s viability as an incentive in light of Pillar Two. It is also worth noting that, for companies not impacted by the proposed minimum effective tax rate of 15 percent, the increased rate of 10 percent will significantly reduce the benefit of the regime. Given the low numbers currently availing of the KDB, this change is unlikely to help with the uptake of the relief. Film relief/multimedia industry The film corporation tax credit was scheduled to cease on 31 December 2024. Recognising the long production cycle for audio-visual productions, however, Budget 2023 has extended the credit to 31 December 2028. Minister Donohoe has also signaled an intention to explore opportunities to encourage international players in new and innovative multimedia industries to locate to Ireland. Bank levy The bank levy, due to expire in 2022, is to be extended to the end of 2023. The levy was originally designed to produce a fixed annual yield of €150 million, but just €87 million will be raised in 2022 due to the exclusion of Ulster Bank and KBC Bank on their exit from the Irish market. The same yield is projected for 2023. The future of the levy is being assessed by the Department of Finance as part of the Retail Banking Review. Investment products and section 110 The Government will establish a working group to consider the taxation of funds, life assurance policies, and other investment products. The Commission on Taxation and Welfare suggested that such a review should consider how to simplify the tax treatment of investment products, and identify opportunities for horizontal equity and neutrality in the tax system when it comes to investment decisions. Currently, funds and life assurance policy providers are obliged to deduct 41 percent tax on both income and gains, which is higher than the rate of income tax and capital gains tax. It is hoped that the working group will focus on the scope and possible impact of reducing these rates. Minister Donohoe also announced plans to review the section 110 regime. The Commission on Taxation and Welfare’s report referenced the section 110 regime in the context of the role of institutional investors in the Irish property market. However, acknowledging that the regime applies to a broader range of assets than debt secured on Irish property, the report went on to recommend a wider review of the regime. Agri-business measures Budget 2023 outlined the extension of several agricultural reliefs set to expire at the end of this year. The proposed extensions are dependent on the outcome of negotiations at EU level on the Agricultural Block Exemption Regulation. Stamp duty reliefs for young, trained farmers and farm consolidations are to be extended to the end of 2025. Farm restructuring capital gains tax relief is also to be extended until the end of 2025. Stock relief enhancements for young, trained farmers and registered farm partnerships are being extended until the end of 2024. A new accelerated capital allowance scheme for the construction of slurry storage facilities is set to be introduced from 1 January 2023 and will run for three years.

The government’s new auto-enrolment scheme has been described as a ‘once-in-a-generation’ pension policy. Clare O’Sullivan examines how it will change our retirement  landscape. Andrew Glenn was 20 and an undergraduate studying in Adelaide when the Australian government’s Superannuation Guarantee (SG) came into effect in 1992, making it compulsory for employers to pay a percentage of their employees earnings into a retirement fund. In the three decades since, Glenn has become “passionate” about the scheme—dubbed the “Super”—which has, he says, created a positive culture around pension savings in Australia. “I remember when superannuation came in, I had a part-time job at university and, all of a sudden, I had money going into this separate retirement account. It wasn’t coming out of my pay. It was an additional payment, so, straight away, I felt good about it,” says Glenn. The idea behind the SG was that it would provide income in retirement for as many Australians as possible, substituting or supplementing the government pension. “There is definitely a mindset here now where people value their Super. It is pervasive throughout Australian culture and it can add up to quite a significant amount of money over time. If you are a home-owner, your Super would tend to be your second biggest asset, so people care about it,” says Glenn. Although not quite the same as Australia’s SG, the Automatic Enrolment Retirement Savings System announced recently by the Irish government has a similar aim to “build a culture” of saving for retirement, according to Minister for Social Protection, Heather Humphreys. Speaking in March at the announcement of the final design principles for the auto-enrolment regime, Humphreys described it as a “major reform” of the Irish pensions landscape. “It is intended not just to get people saving earlier, but to support them in that saving process by simplifying the pension choices and, importantly, by providing for significant employer and State contributions as well,” Humphreys said. Due to come into effect in 2024, the scheme will see some 750,000 workers enrolled automatically into a new workplace pension scheme with matching employer contributions and a state top-up. For every €3 saved by a worker, a further €4 will be credited to their pension savings account.  According to the Government, this means that, when the scheme is fully established, a worker earning €35,000 per annum will accumulate a fund (excluding investment returns) of €293,000 over their working life. Participation in the new scheme will be voluntary, however. Workers will have the ability to opt-out. Given the success of the Superannuation Guarantee in Australia, and the pension auto-enrolment systems since introduced in other countries, including Britain and New Zealand, the Irish scheme is expected to be a welcome addition to the pension landscape here. Although welcome, the government’s pension auto-enrolment scheme has been a long time coming, however.  “This goes back a long way. Pension policy in Ireland was first reviewed about 20 years ago and, today, we are the only OECD country that doesn’t yet operate an auto-enrolment or similar system as a means of promoting pension savings,” says Munro O’Dwyer, Partner, Pension Services, PwC Ireland. “In countries without such schemes, retirement savings tend to be quite low. In the UK, the introduction of an auto-enrolment system similar to that planned for Ireland doubled the rate of participation in private pension savings. The behavioural change was really quite significant. “If you dig further into the UK figures, you can see an even higher jump in the number of people in low-pay or low-security employment participating in private pension savings.  “We will see the same thing happening in Ireland once our auto-enrolment scheme is introduced, so, I think the benefit to society as a whole is really quite positive.”    Focus so far To date, much of the focus in Ireland has been on reducing future spending in the area of pensions, rather than working on incentives to increase private pension coverage, according to Miriam Donald, Public Policy Manager, Advocacy and Voice, Chartered Accountants Ireland. “This isn’t surprising given that the State Pension is the single biggest cost to the State in terms of benefits,” Donald says. Recent figures show that close to €6 billion was spent on the State Pension in 2020.  “This figure far exceeded the €4.5 billion spent on the COVID-19 Employment Wage Subsidy Scheme in the same year,” Donald says. Cultural shift As a result, the government has faced mounting pressure to change the “culture around pensions savings” in Ireland by introducing measures to encourage private pension coverage. “Recent studies show that life expectancy in Ireland is currently 90 years for men and 92.6 years for women,” says Donald. “This means workers, on average, will be retired for more than a quarter of their lives, with one third of the population depending solely on the State to fund their later years.” Figures released last year by the Central Statistics Office, meanwhile, showed that 34 percent of Irish workers had no pension coverage outside the State Pension. “The existing annual State Pension of some €13,000 might seem reasonable if you have paid off your mortgage, but Ireland’s home ownership rate in 2021 was reported to be 68.7 percent,” says Donald. “This means that many will pay high rents long after their peers own their own home and, with average annual rents lying north of €15,000 according to the Residential Tenancy Board’s 2021 rent index, sole reliance on the State Pension will not be sustainable.” Encouraging retirement savings By introducing auto-enrolment, Donald says the government has taken an important step in encouraging more people to save for their retirement over the course of their working lives. “At the moment, starting a pension requires taking an active decision to do so. The attraction of auto-enrolment is that, if a worker does nothing, a portion of their pay will automatically go into a pension fund,” she says. This means that the new scheme will overcome an existing barrier to pension savings whereby people simply overlook the need to put money aside for retirement over the course of their working lives, according to Donald. “Employees who do opt out after six months of being enrolled will be re-enrolled after two years, meaning private pension coverage could be increased considerably,” she says, “but the scheme also relies on behavioural inertia – i.e. trusting that some people will not get around to opting out of a pension scheme and will simply stay invested.” Challenges ahead Overall, Donald sees the introduction of auto-enrolment as a viable solution to increasing private pension coverage in Ireland. “It incentivises people to save, reduces the risk of people entering poverty in retirement and reduces the reliance on the State pension. Its introduction could even result in long-term savings for the State,” she says. Getting the scheme up-and-running by early 2024 will be challenging, however, according to Cróna Clohisey, Tax and Public Policy Lead at Chartered Accountants Ireland.  “A significant amount of work needs to be done—not just to develop the legislation underpinning the scheme, but also to finalise its design, and to establish the various mechanisms that will be required for it to function,” says Clohisey. As the legislation progresses, the government will need to work closely with businesses to advise and help them prepare for the introduction of automatic enrolment. Payroll providers, in particular, will face an uphill battle preparing for the planned introduction of the new scheme. “We know that this is going to be a considerable challenge for payroll providers to implement,” says Clohisey. “They are telling us that a lead-in time of at least 18 months would be required to properly develop, test, and deploy a fully operational system.  “January 2024 is not far away, and businesses will need time and guidance to get ready for this change. Sustained momentum will be needed to meet this ambitious timeline.” Central processing agency Jerry Moriarty, Chief Executive of the Irish Association of Pensions Funds, agreed that the planned introduction of the new scheme in early 2024 could give rise to significant challenges. “There is a huge amount to be done in a relatively short period of time, including the setting up of a central processing agency to do the job of auto-enrolling people—getting them on board and then dealing with all the administration that goes with making sure the contributions are passed on to the right investment managers,” he says. In the government’s favour is the fact that “we’ve been able to learn a lot from what’s happened with similar schemes in other countries,” Moriarty says. “In the UK, for example, the system focused on auto-enrolling employers rather than employees. That caused a huge problem with payroll systems, so they ended up having to phase in participation, starting with big employers.” Ireland’s new scheme will, by contrast, focus on auto-enrolling individual employees, Moriarty says. “It makes more sense because it means employers won’t have to deal with all of this extra admin and that, when people move from one employer to another, they won’t have to switch pension provider.”

Jane O’Hanlon explains the common tax-related issues facing members in business and how to deal with them before Revenue comes knocking. As a tax advisor working in a specialised tax practice, I encounter similar tax issues in various businesses. This article will focus on the most critical issues and help ensure that your business is tax compliant. What should I do when Revenue knocks on my door? The answer to this depends on the nature of the knock! Any correspondence issued by Revenue must be looked at carefully to understand the purpose of the query. A letter might issue from Revenue with queries due to an incorrect entry on a tax return (referred to as an ‘Aspect Query’ letter). Where a business files a VAT return and is in a VAT recovery position, standard VAT verification letters are often issued by Revenue seeking documentation to support the VAT refund due. This type of correspondence is routine and while it should be dealt with promptly, it should not result in undue concern. If an error is discovered as you prepare your response, it is usually possible to make a ‘qualifying disclosure’ to Revenue. By making a qualifying disclosure, you can reduce the penalties payable, avoid prosecution, and avoid publication in the list of tax defaulters. A disclosure is unprompted if it is made before notification of a Revenue audit is received. Any disclosures in relation to items covered by the audit made after the audit notice is received is prompted, and the penalty reductions for unprompted disclosures are higher than for prompted disclosures. However, Revenue recently indicated that it intends to move disclosures made by a business under an ‘Aspect Query’ to the ‘Prompted Disclosure’ category. Although publication can still be avoided, higher rates will be applicable if penalties apply. When a Revenue audit letter issues, depending on the tax head and the period covered, the taxpayer should conduct a full review of all tax matters. Common problems include businesses making cash payments to casual staff without PAYE, incorrect claiming of VAT input credits, incorrect operation of benefit-in-kind (BIK), and incorrectly claiming a tax deduction for income or corporation tax purposes. When that audit letter is received, it is essential to at once consider whether the business will need to make a prompted qualifying disclosure. If it does, it can write to the Revenue auditor requesting time to prepare the disclosure. In my experience, the time spent at this stage is well worth it as it often results in the audit running more smoothly and concluding promptly. It is not in the interest of any business to have an audit process continue any longer than it needs to. Therefore, it is crucial to ensure that a full disclosure, if needed, is made and that all supporting documentation is gathered and available to the auditor. Cooperation is the best policy. * Review your tax compliance position on VAT and PAYE. Cooperation is the best policy when dealing with Revenue and, if necessary, make a voluntary disclosure. What VAT can I recover? At a high level, VAT can only be recovered by a business providing VATable products or services. This means that the business charges VAT on sales to customers. You may think that a business providing only products or services subject to VAT can recover all VAT charged by its suppliers. However, that is not the case. It is never possible to recover VAT on the purchase of food and drink items for use in an office kitchen. I frequently encounter cases where VAT is being reclaimed on bottled water purchased by the business, for example. Similarly, if a business owner purchases items for personal use, VAT should not be recovered as that purchase has not been made to provide taxable (i.e. VATable) supplies. Furthermore, if a company carries on a trade and owns several rental properties, you must determine if the expense relates to the trade or the rental properties. For example, if repairs are carried out on the business premises and all supplies by the business are liable to VAT, the VAT charged can be recovered. However, if repairs are carried out on a rented residential apartment owned by the business, the VAT cannot be recovered as the rental income from the residential apartment is not liable to VAT. In summary, consideration must be given to each invoice to determine if the business can recover the VAT charged. In addition, businesses can recover 20% of the VAT incurred on the acquisition or leasing of a car, provided it is used for business purposes at least 60% of the time. Businesses must also be aware that, in most cases, the supplier will not have charged VAT when the business purchases goods or services from outside Ireland. The business must self-account for Irish VAT at the appropriate rate and claim an input credit if it is entitled to do so. If foreign VAT has been charged, the business should satisfy itself that this is correct before payment is made to the supplier. A business cannot include an input credit in an Irish VAT return for foreign VAT charged. A business can only include a claim for a VAT input credit where a valid VAT invoice has been received. Accounts payable staff should be trained to ensure that all invoices are valid VAT invoices before settling them. It is easier to seek a proper invoice from a supplier when the invoice has not yet been paid. * Check that you are correctly claiming VAT input credit on cars and foreign purchases. How long do I need to keep documentation for? In general, documents must be kept for six years after the tax year in question. However, that is not as straightforward as it may sound. For example, I know of one situation where an individual claimed capital allowances on a building, with the capital allowances available over seven years. The tax return covering the sixth year in which the allowances were available was selected for verification three years after the return was filed, and Revenue sought copies of documentation to confirm the nature and the availability of the allowances. In this case, the taxpayer needed to provide documentation from nine years earlier. The key point from a tax perspective is that the burden of proof rests with the taxpayer. Therefore, you need to ensure that you can prove your entitlement to a deduction for any expenses or any capital allowance claimed in your tax return. Many recent tax appeals decisions have referred to this point. An Appeals Commissioner cannot decide a case in favour of a taxpayer where the taxpayer cannot discharge the burden of proof. Regarding an asset that is a capital asset, it will be necessary to keep documentation for six years after the property is disposed of. If a property was bought in 2000 and sold in 2021, for example, documentation regarding the purchase of that asset must be retained until 2027. Doing so enables you to prove your entitlement to a deduction for the costs of acquisition incurred in 2000 in determining the capital gains tax payable (or indeed the capital loss) on the disposal of the asset. The retention of documentation is also important in the context of VAT and the Capital Goods Scheme. When an asset is disposed of, the vendor is often obliged to complete Pre-Contract VAT Enquiries (PCVE) as part of the sales process. The PCVE contain full details of the purchase/development of the property, how it has been used since it was acquired, and how it is currently being used. To determine the correct VAT treatment of the sale, there can be no gaps in terms of how the property has been used. It is easier to maintain this information on a contemporaneous basis rather than pulling together information on all prior years as you prepare to sell the property. * Review your document retention policy as in some cases, you may need to keep certain records for more than six years. How do I ensure compliance with BIK rules on the provision of company cars? Employers who provide employees with company cars are obliged to keep contemporaneous records of business mileage. BIK operates by applying a percentage rate to the original market value of the car provided to the employee (other than electric cars, where different rules apply). The applicable percentage depends on the annual business mileage driven by the employee and ranges from 30% down to 6%. If any rate other than 30% is used, the employer must be able to prove the business mileage. Where an employee is provided with a car, they must complete a monthly log of the business journeys for their employers. While the tax is payable by the employee, the obligation is on the employer to operate the tax correctly. In addition, if the vehicle provided is a commercial vehicle or a van, the appropriate BIK rate is 5% regardless of the business mileage. * Review how you are calculating PAYE on the BIK on company cars and keep appropriate contemporaneous records of staff business mileage. What information does my tax advisor need to prepare my tax return? Where your accountant prepares your business’s financial statements, they will generally have sufficient information to prepare an accurate tax return. Where the financial statements are prepared by the business and provided to the tax advisor, however, they will generally need answers to the following questions: Are all expenses incurred wholly and exclusively for the purpose of the trade? For example, consider business entertainment, charitable and political donations, personal expenditure, and expenses paid for by the business that may not relate to that business. Was the employer’s pension contribution paid during the year, or is there an accrual in the profit and loss account? A tax deduction is only available on a paid basis. Can you provide an analysis of professional and legal fees? Fees that relate to capital transactions (e.g. asset purchases/sales) are not deductible in calculating trading profits. Can you provide a schedule of fixed asset additions to include the date of acquisition, the cost of acquisition, and the nature of the asset? Also, can you provide a schedule of fixed asset disposals so that accurate capital allowances claims and balancing charges/allowances can be prepared? Can you provide a reconciliation of any finance lease creditors from the opening position to the closing position? Can you provide a schedule of directors’ remuneration split by director? Can you provide details of any dividends or distributions paid during the year? Can you provide details of any non-trading income? Where medical insurance is paid on behalf of the staff, can you provide details of the tax relief at source (TRS) amount and confirm whether the gross or net amount has been included in the profit and loss account? * Save time and fees by completing the checklist your tax advisor will need to prepare your tax return. These issues occur in a wide range of businesses. You should aim to ensure that your business is compliant with tax legislation on an ongoing basis. Careful consideration should be given to amending any errors you discover – before you get that knock on the door. Jane O’Hanlon is a Director at Purcell McQuillan and a Fellow of Chartered Accountants Ireland.

In response to requests from charities and their lead bodies, Benefacts produced a special report on Irish charities last May. Patricia Quinn explains the findings. In Ireland’s charity sector, just as across the rest of the economy, the COVID-19 pandemic cast a long shadow. A sector of predominantly small and micro entities, charities experienced the full gamut of disruption to their not-for-profit businesses in 2020, ranging from temporary closure to rapid adaptation to digital working and developing new solutions to meet the needs of vulnerable people in local communities. For some – especially providers of hospital, hospice, residential care, and homelessness charities – the impact for their staff and served communities was a matter of life and death. Other charities – especially in emergency relief, mental health, local development, and social care – experienced increased demand for their services. In some sectors such as the arts, heritage, and museums, charities without the capacity to move to digital working methods could not operate, or only to a minimal degree. They report staff cutbacks and other cost-saving measures, but most have limited reserves and cannot avoid fixed costs. Fundraised income, which is a significant proportion of the revenues of some Irish charities, was expected to take a severe hit. In some sectors that rely predominantly on traditional fundraising, including door-to-door or church gate collections, charity shops, fun runs and other event-based approaches, this has been the case. Where charities were already geared up to appeal to donors and collect gifts digitally, or transitioned successfully to online giving, some reported an increase in income from this source. What do we know about charities? Charities form a subset of all non-profits in Ireland, which number more than 32,000 if you drill down to the level of local clubs, societies, and associations. The 11,405 charities on the Register of Charities today include just under 3,600 primary and secondary schools. For practical purposes, they are regulated elsewhere. The Register also includes about 2,700 unincorporated associations, trusts, and non-incorporated bodies that file accounts to the Charities Regulator which – for various reasons – are not published on the Regulator’s website. Anybody wanting to study the financial and governance profile of the charity sector therefore relies mainly on the CRO (Companies Registration Office) filings of incorporated charities, of which there are about 5,000. These form the basis for a new benchmark report on the charity sector in Ireland released by Benefacts last month. Benchmarking the state of the sector There has never been a time when current, reliable data was more relevant to charities. In boardrooms around the country, trustee directors have been grappling with tough choices. Even the best risk register was unlikely to include a worldwide pandemic involving the near-total shut-down of whole sectors of the economy. And most charities are particularly ill-equipped to cope with financial adversity; by definition, they have no equity, no investors, and limited capacity to trade their way out of financial trouble. Few charities entered 2020 with significant financial reserves. Although the aggregate reported value of reserves in the sectors under review in the Benefacts report was €3.73 billion based on available data for 3,628 incorporated charities, most of these reserves (€2.5 billion) are held by just 80 larger charities – in particular, voluntary hospitals and social housing providers. The remaining €1.2 billion in reserves is distributed across smaller charities, primarily in local development, social housing, health, and services for people with a disability. Moreover, charities’ assets – unlike most commercial organisations – typically cannot readily be liquidated as they are essential for delivering services or may be of a heritage or highly specialised nature. When reserves are converted to the number of weeks of average weekly expenditure (using data from full accounts), our analysis found that more than one-third of charities have fewer than ten weeks’ reserves, with arts charities particularly heavily exposed. Not all bleak In preparing its report, Benefacts reviewed more than a dozen surveys and other reports prepared by sector lead bodies, policy-makers, and regulators. Many positive effects have been reported. These include heightened public awareness of the value of charities’ work, better engagement across geographic divides, cost and time savings, a better quality of life for staff, and the adoption of more diversified fundraising solutions – especially digital ones. In fact, it appears that a small percentage of charities that were already well-geared for digital fundraising will be reporting 2020 as a better year than usual. Philanthropists stepped up in response, especially to pandemic-related causes, and social enterprises were encouraged to bid for new additional funding. The State permitted some charity employees to avail of pandemic unemployment benefits and allocated additional funding to address areas of acute need. Using financial reporting data shared with us in advance of the publication of their own financial statements by the nine State bodies that are the principal funders of charities, we were able to identify a 10.7% year-on-year uplift in funding for charities – mainly in health, social care, arts, and culture. But in 2020, there were nearly ten pandemic-free weeks at the start of the year and lockdowns were partially lifted mid-year. Additional State support will undoubtedly have sustained some charities that might otherwise have gone under. But there’s already a recognition that 2021 – with the exit from full lockdowns only starting in the middle of the second quarter – will be a tougher year, and 2022 probably tougher again. Planning for better The last 30 years have seen considerable professionalisation in the charity sector. The 5,000 charities whose financial statements form the basis for this new report employ more than 101,000 people. Fundraising, a critical discipline in the 273 charities that rely on this as their principal source of income, has become highly specialised. The larger charities now have professional staff to manage their volunteer supporters. Even the voluntary directors of charities themselves are increasingly recruited using the kind of competency framework approach that would have been unheard of in this sector 20 years ago. And perhaps it’s as well, since understanding the drivers of charity business success is a crucial function of charity boards. Contingency planning will surely come to the fore, as well as a searching review of some of the fundamental assumptions about funding. Benefacts has already received queries from charities trying to understand their position relative to their peer organisations in a given sub-sector, anticipating perhaps an even more competitive environment in the future. Audited financial statements are a hugely valuable source of granular data that makes up the picture of any sector and its component entities. Like analysts in commercial sectors, Benefacts relies on charity company disclosures as the bedrock on which we build a profile of the charity sector and its sub-sectors. Common financial reporting standards bring consistency and reliability to the data that can be used to create a picture of the whole sector and track changes year-on-year at the level of individual charities and sectors such as hospice care, addiction support, or animal welfare. Thanks to its database, augmented each year with more than three million new data items harvested from non-profit company disclosures, Benefacts has been able to provide charities, funders, policy-makers and other stakeholders with a powerful knowledge asset to help them navigate uncertain times. The impact of regulation The range of data underpinning our analysis of this multi-billion euro sector suffered a setback with the new Companies Act reform in 2014. For the first time, small non-profit (limited by guarantee) companies could avail of the same exemptions from filing full accounts as commercial companies. While this is only fair and equitable on the face of it, it has diminished the public disclosures of thousands of charities that rely on public donations, state funding, or both to support their operations. Unfortunately, the Charities Act 2009 did not foresee this change and exempts charity companies from filing their accounts to the Charities Regulator to avoid the burden of double regulation. Again, fair and equitable – except for the unintended side effect of making the financial disclosures of thousands of charities less transparent to the very people on whom they rely for income and something more precious – trust. Here are the numbers: of the 3,628 charities that have already filed their 2019 accounts, 36% have filed abridged accounts and 26% have filed unaudited accounts. 106 of these charities receive funding from the State. This means that their unaudited accounts breach the reporting standards for any body receiving State funding set by the Department of Public Expenditure & Reform (Circular 13, 2014). Rules are there to be obeyed, and over time, the compliance authorities will surely iron out these wrinkles in the provisions of the various legal and regulatory frameworks. But charities are not like other small businesses. The principle rather than the letter of the legislation regulating them is one of transparency. To that, I would add informed self-interest. Sector lead bodies preparing a brief for their board or a presentation for an Oireachtas Committee hearing are often disappointed to discover that Benefacts analysis of their members is missing some critical dimension – especially an analysis of their income. That is because so many of the source documents lack an important few pages: the income and expenditure account. This is all the more galling as funders require the full accounts to be provided to them. We therefore experience a double standard – full accounts to go in the State filing cabinet, abridged ones for the rest of us.

Having read the 1,246-page Trade and Cooperation Agreement, which was agreed to “in principle” by the EU and UK on Christmas Eve, Cróna Clohisey shares her thoughts on the critical elements causing concern and highlights areas that warrant further work. In recent weeks, there has been as much discussion about what the Trade and Cooperation Agreement (TCA) reached between the EU and UK on Christmas Eve doesn’t cover as what it does. The deal, spanning some 1,246 pages, threw up some surprises and certainly left a lot for discussion between the two sides in the months ahead. The main areas covered in the document include trade in goods and certain services, energy, aviation and road transport, fisheries, social security coordination, law enforcement, digital trade and intellectual property. Certain big-ticket items, including decisions relating to equivalence for financial services, the adequacy of the UK’s data protection regime, or an assessment of the UK’s sanitary and phytosanitary regime were excluded, however. These three areas, in particular, are unilateral decisions of the EU and were never subject to negotiation. The TCA does not govern trade in goods between Northern Ireland and the EU where the Protocol on Ireland and Northern Ireland will apply, bringing a whole other set of rules – not least in customs and VAT. Implementing, applying, and interpreting the TCA falls to the newly created Partnership Council. This political body will be co-chaired by a European Commission member and a UK government minister, and decisions will be made by mutual consent. Several specialised committees, including a trade partnership committee, will assist the Partnership Council. Therefore, it seems that negotiations between the EU and the UK on their future relationship are set to continue long into the future.  In this article, I will look at the TCA elements that are causing concern or require further work. Trade in goods and customs The real test for cross-border trade between the UK and EU is really just beginning, given that traffic at ports and borders is generally quieter in the weeks after Christmas. Still, problems with paperwork (which could never be removed by a free-trade agreement), health checks and systems were reported by many companies in the first few weeks of the year. We have heard reports of large retailers reporting shortages on their shelves with retailers in Northern Ireland significantly affected given the customs declarations required for goods brought into Northern Ireland from Great Britain – a requirement that seems to have taken some by surprise.   The TCA’s chapter on rules of origin is particularly cumbersome and has already hampered, and is expected to continue to hamper, existing supply chains. The ‘zero tariffs, zero quotas’ headline celebrating free trade is not all it seems, particularly when only eligible goods qualify for this approach. Rules of origin determine a product’s economic nationality and where products ‘originate’ is the fundamental basis for determining if tariffs apply. The TCA says that for products to benefit from zero tariffs and zero quotas, goods must be wholly obtained from, or manufactured, in the EU or UK or be substantially transformed or processed in the EU or UK in line with the specific origin rules that apply to the product being exported. Minor handling, unpacking and repacking won’t qualify as sufficiently processed. There could be issues for goods not wholly grown, farmed, fished or mined in either the UK or EU.  The amount of non-originating materials (i.e. materials not originating in either the EU or UK) that a product can have in order to still benefit from the TCA differs depending on the product. The annexes to the TCA set out the product-specific rules, and you will need to identify the commodity code as a starting point. Some products allow a maximum level of non-originating content (e.g. 50% of the ex-works selling price), but again this varies from product to product. If, for example, products are processed in the UK, the TCA states that EU origin materials and processing can be counted when considering whether UK exports to the EU meet rules of origin requirements. There is a qualifying production level, for example, called ‘cumulation’. Another nuance is that some rules of origin require that non-originating inputs used in the production of a good must have a different tariff heading, while some rules require a specific operation to take place in the UK for the goods to be classed as being of UK origin. For certain chemicals, for example, a chemical reaction must occur in the UK. It’s also important to remember that when goods are exported from a customs territory, origin status is lost (preferential origin status can only apply once). Take leather shoes originating in Spain as an example. When the shoes move from Spain to Great Britain and are then shipped to Ireland, they lose their EU preferential origin status when they leave Great Britain. Because they haven’t been processed or altered in Great Britain, they don’t have UK origin. Therefore, unless the goods move under a special and complicated customs procedure, duties arise on the goods entering Ireland. The now infamous case of Marks & Spencer’s Percy Pig confectionery is an example of this issue. These issues add to supply chain headaches and give rise to hidden costs. The rules are undoubtedly complex and don’t suit the UK’s significant role as a distribution hub. Business travel Free movement of people between the EU and UK ended on 1 January 2021. Of course, Irish and UK citizens are still free to live, travel and work in either country under the rules of the Common Travel Area (CTA). Beyond this category of people, immigration requirements – including securing permission to work and restrictions on the activities that can be performed as business travellers – are now a key consideration for UK nationals moving throughout the rest of the EU, including UK citizens residing in Ireland. Similar policies are in place for EU nationals seeking to travel to, and work in, the UK. The CTA allows short-term business visitors to enter either jurisdiction visa-free for 90 days in any given six-month period, but there are restrictions on the activities that can be performed. Activities such as meetings, conferences, trade exhibitions, and consultations are allowed. However, anything that involves selling goods or services directly to the public requires a work visa. The specific business situations where a visa is required are set out in the annexes to the TCA. The environment In a first for the EU, the fight against climate change has been included as an “essential element” in a bilateral agreement with a third country. This effectively means that if the EU or the UK were to withdraw from the Paris Agreement or take measures defeating its purpose, the other side would have the right to suspend or even terminate all or part of the TCA. The TCA paves the way for a joint framework for cooperation on renewable energy and other sustainable practices, as well as the creation of a new model for energy trading. However, it allows both sides to set their own climate and environmental policies in areas such as carbon emissions/carbon pricing, air quality, and biodiversity conservation. Divergence from respective environmental and climate laws will be monitored, but this area is not subject to the TCA’s main dispute resolution mechanism. It will instead be governed by a ‘Panel of Experts’ procedure. Time will tell how effective this will be. Data transfers Many businesses rely on the ability to transfer personal data about their customers or employees to offer goods and services across borders. A company based in Belfast, for example, might outsource its payroll processing to a company based in Galway. In this case, any restriction on this data’s ability to flow freely would act as a trade barrier. The EU and UK haven’t concluded a deal yet to allow data to continue to flow freely across borders, but the EU has committed to a decision on the adequacy of the UK’s system (UK GDPR) by 30 June 2021. Until then, the UK will be treated as if it is still part of the EU on data protection grounds, and data can continue to flow freely between jurisdictions. If the EU doesn’t reach an adequacy agreement (although reports suggest that a deal is close), provisions such as standard contractual clauses may be needed in future transfers of data between the UK and EU. Financial services Currently, the UK has identical rules to the EU in terms of the regulation of financial services. Supplementary documentation published with the TCA states that the UK Treasury and European Commission aim to sign a cooperation agreement covering financial services regulation by March 2021. The EU has already deemed the UK equivalent for a time-limited basis in clearing and transaction settlement, while the UK has provided the EU with specific findings that would enable EU member states to conduct such business in the UK. Many other areas of the TCA will be digested and interpreted in the weeks and months ahead. Trade deals are predominantly about trade. Only time will tell if they go far enough in other areas such as environment, security and intelligence, or healthcare, for example. Let’s hope that in the long run, a deal is better than no-deal. POINT OF VIEW:  Barry Cullen, Silver Hill Duck Silver Hill Duck is a perfect example of a cross-border business and the various challenges posed by the new trading relationship between the EU and the UK. Silver Hill Duck is a duck manufacturing company based in Emyvale, Co. Monaghan, with operations in Northern Ireland and the Republic of Ireland. The company controls all aspects of the breeding, farming, production and packaging of its famous Silver Hill Duck breed. Established in 1962, it has supplied the best Chinese restaurants in the UK for the past 40 years. During this time, the company has expanded its customer base to include retail and foodservice, including a range of raw and cooked products. Barry Cullen, Head of Sales at Silver Hill Duck and President of the Irish Exporters Association, shares the background to his company’s commercial decisions. “The UK was historically our largest market, and we took some steps before 1 January 2021 to avoid the expected delays that were predicted at the ports. This involved setting up a Northern Ireland company with the appropriate VAT and EORI numbers, and a customs clearance agent to handle the paperwork. Silver Hill also had to source a warehousing partner in the UK that could hold frozen stock for our UK customers. Trading with our fresh retail customers was suspended for the first few weeks in January due to the uncertainty around delays at ports and the documentation required. The first few weeks of 2021 has shown that this was a prudent decision, as it has become apparent that the UK is nowhere near ready for the new trading requirements. There are major delays at Holyhead with hauliers unable to access the Irish market due to incorrect paperwork and a COVID-19 testing regime that has exacerbated the problem. It’s a case of learning on the job as our sales team feels its way through the many documentation requirements to send a pallet of product to the UK. For example, despite having done due diligence for over three years, we were not aware of the REX system and the need to be registered to self-certify our goods. Even though there are no actual tariffs, the customs clearance costs are high at approximately €120 per order, regardless of size, if you act as exporter and importer for the UK customer. This will make much retail business commercially unviable and will have a significant knock-on effect on small- and medium-sized enterprises in the coming months. There will undoubtedly be a settling-in period for the new trading requirements, but the cost for traders, hauliers and suppliers is as yet uncertain.”   Cróna Clohisey is Public Policy Lead at Chartered Accountants Ireland.

With international tax reform progressing at unprecedented speed, Susan Kilty explains why Irish businesses must continue to participate actively in the discussion. With all the global uncertainty that Ireland is facing due to COVID-19 and Brexit, there is a risk that the OECD global tax reforms – the other major threat to Irish business and the economy – will be pushed further down the corporate agenda. But to do so would be very risky. Ireland must engage with this process now, at both the political and corporate level. The world of international tax is in a state of extreme flux as governments grapple with changes in the way multinationals do business. It is worth reiterating that Ireland has attracted healthy levels of foreign direct investment (FDI) over the past 30 years, and the multinational community has contributed significantly to our economic success. According to the OECD, Ireland received more foreign direct investment in the first half of this year than any other country. Along with Ireland’s near-iconic 12.5% tax rate, a crucial element in our continuing ability to attract international investment is the stability and transparency of the corporate tax regime here. Investors from abroad who establish activities in Ireland tend to be quite sensitive to changes in the taxation system. They like certainty and stability in a tax code, which is why Ireland presents such an attractive proposition. Ireland cannot afford to lose FDI as a result of turbulence in the global tax landscape at this time. As corporation tax accounts for almost 18% of Ireland’s total tax take, any change to the regime threatens to seriously undermine the attractiveness of our FDI model and negatively impact our revenue-raising ability. The crux of the matter is that we, and many other countries, apply 20th century tax systems to 21st century e-commerce business models. Businesses have an increasingly digital presence, and many no longer trade out of brick and mortar locations. This is not limited to so-called technology companies, but can be seen across industries and in businesses of all sizes. Businesses sell freely across borders without ever needing to set up operations abroad. This new digital way of trading is not always captured in our analogue tax rules, and the rules must be realigned with the reality of modern e-commerce. However, to tax a multinational business, you need a multinational set of rules. This is where the OECD comes in, but the uncertain shape that the new rules might take brings more uncertainty for businesses at a time when it is least needed. Many clients cite the changing international tax environment as one of the top threats to potential revenue growth. And although countries now face enormous bills for COVID-19, one sure thing is that BEPS, OECD and tax reform will not go away. International corporate tax reform is happening, and it will impact many businesses and our economy. Companies need to stay on top of these changes and prioritise the issues that will affect them. OECD proposals The OECD proposals offer a two-pillar solution: one pillar to re-allocate taxing rights and ensure that profits are recorded where sales take place, and a second pillar to ensure that a minimum tax rate is paid. At the time of writing, a public consultation is open for stakeholders to share their views with the OECD on the proposals that were recently summarised by way of two “blueprint” documents, one for each pillar. Pillar One seeks to give market jurisdictions increased taxing rights (and, therefore, increased taxable income and revenues). It aims to attribute a portion of the profits of certain multinational groups to the jurisdictions in which their customers are based. It does this by introducing a new formulaic allocation mechanism for profits while ensuring that limited risk distributors take a fair share of profits. Several questions remain as to how the Pillar One proposals, which constitute a significant change from the current rules, will be applied. Pillar Two, on the other hand, seeks to impose a floor for minimum tax rates across the globe. This proposal is very complicated. It is much more than a case of setting a minimum rate of tax. It is made up partially of a system that requires shareholders of companies that pay low or no tax to “tax back” the profits to ensure that they are subject to a minimum rate. At the same time, rules will apply to ensure that payments made to related parties in low-tax-paying or no-tax-paying countries are subject to a withholding tax. Finally, it can alter the application of double tax treaty relief for companies in low-tax-paying or no-tax-paying countries. Agreeing on the application and implementation of this pillar will be incredibly difficult from a global consensus point of view. Several supposed “safety nets” in Pillar Two are also likely to be of limited application. For example, assuming that the minimum tax rate is set at 12.5%, this does not mean that businesses subject to tax in Ireland will escape further tax. Similarly, assuming that the US GILTI (global intangible low-taxed income) rules are grandfathered in the OECD’s proposal, this does not mean that the US GILTI tax applies as a tax-in-kind tax for Pillar Two purposes. Pillar Two poses a significant threat to Ireland, as it reduces the competitiveness of our 12.5% rate to attract FDI and, coupled with the Pillar One profit re-allocations, could reduce our corporate tax take. The OECD estimates that once one or both of the pillars are introduced, companies will pay more tax overall at a global level, but where this tax falls is up for negotiation – and this is why early engagement by all stakeholders is critical. While the new proposals will undoubtedly have an impact, it is not certain that Ireland’s corporation tax receipts will fall off a cliff. Ireland has already gained significantly in terms of investment from the first phase of OECD tax reform, and this has helped to drive a significant increase in corporate tax revenue. But the risks must nevertheless be addressed. There is, of course, the risk that the redistribution of tax under the rules directly under Pillar One and indirectly via Pillar Two will impact our corporate tax take. But even if the rules have no impact on a company’s tax bill, they could still impose a considerable burden from an administrative perspective, and the complexity of the rules cannot be overestimated. At a time when businesses are grappling with other tax changes, led by the EU and domestic policy changes, this would be a substantial additional burden on the business community. The OECD is progressing the rules at unprecedented speed in terms of international tax reform. The momentum behind the process comes from a political desire for a fair tax system that works for modern business. However, does this rapidity risk the international political process marching ahead of the technical tax work? This is where Ireland, both government and corporate, needs to play a vital role. While the consultation period on both pillars is open, the focus for stakeholders should be on consulting with the OECD on the technical elements of its plan. Considering the OECD’s stated objective to have a political consensus by mid-2021, this could be one of the last opportunities for stakeholders to have a say in writing the rules. The interplay between the OECD and the US Treasury cannot be ignored when considering the OECD’s ability to get the proposals over the line. The US Treasury decided to step away from the consultation process with the OECD for a period in mid-2020. This, of course, raised questions around whether the OECD proposals could generate a solution that countries would be willing to implement. Added to this, the OECD has always positioned Pillar One and Pillar Two as an overall package of measures and has stressed that one pillar would not be able to move forward without the other. The “nothing is decided until everything is decided” basis of moving forward is a risky move, but the OECD recently rowed back on this stance. If the OECD fails to reach a political consensus by 2021, we could very well see the EU act ‘en bloc’ to introduce a tax on companies with “digital” activities. This could result in differing rules within, and outside of, the EU. It would also increase global trade tensions, all of which would not be good for our competitiveness. As a small open economy, Ireland will always be susceptible to any barriers to global trade. A multilateral deal brokered by the OECD therefore remains the best option – the last thing we want to see is the EU accelerating its own tax reform or, worse still, countries taking unilateral action. For the Irish Government, providing certainty where possible about the future direction of tax is critical. Where we have a lead is in how we provide that stability and guidance where we can. The upcoming Corporate Tax Roadmap from the Department of Finance will be an opportunity to give assurances in these uncertain times. Next steps for business The public consultation will be critical for businesses to have their say in shaping the rules. Ireland Inc. must continue to engage constructively with the OECD to try to shape the outcome so that we maintain a corporate tax system that is fit for purpose, is at the forefront of global standards, and works for businesses located here. Doing so would ensure that we articulate the position of small open economies like our own. Each impacted business must take the opportunity to comment on the proposals, as this may be the last chance to have a say. Indeed, what comes out of the consultation period may be the architecture of the rules for the future. We know that difficult decisions must be made at home and abroad in terms of the new tax landscape, and made with additional pressures we could not have foreseen 12 months ago. Although it may seem that much is out of our control, Irish businesses must continue to participate actively in the discussions and ensure that their concerns are heard. The game may be in the final quarter, but the ball is in our hands. Susan Kilty is a Partner at PwC Ireland and leads the firm’s tax practice. Point of view: Fergal O'Brien Since the start of the BEPS process in 2013, Irish business has recognised the importance of the work to our business model and the country’s future prosperity. At its core, BEPS has seen a further alignment of business substance and tax structures at a global level. This has resulted in an often under-appreciated surge in business investment, quality job creation and, ultimately, higher tax revenue for the Irish State. With its strong history as a successful location for foreign direct investment, and substance in world-class manufacturing and international services, Ireland was well-placed to benefit from the new global order. The boom in business investment, which last year reached over €3 billion every week, and increase in the corporate tax yield from €4 billion in 2013 to €11 billion in 2019, are evidence of the further embedding of business substance in the Irish economy. The current round of BEPS negotiations will have further significant implications for the Irish economy, and particularly for the rapidly growing digital economy. Ibec is working directly with the OECD to ensure that any further changes to corporation tax recognise the central role of business substance and locations of real value creation. Fergal O’Brien is Director of Policy and Public Affairs at Ibec.  Point of view: Norah Collender The OECD’s proposals to address the challenges of the digitalised economy will have a disproportionate negative impact on small, open exporter economies like Ireland. Earlier consultation papers issued by the OECD on taxing the digitalised economy suggested that smaller economies could benefit from international tax reform emanating from the OECD. However, the OECD now openly admits that bigger countries stand to benefit from its proposals more than smaller countries, and the carrot has turned into the stick in terms of what will happen if smaller countries do not support the OECD. Ireland is acutely aware of the dangers ahead if countries take unilateral action to achieve their vision of international tax reform. But that does not mean that countries like Ireland should be rushed into accepting international tax rules that fundamentally hamstring Irish taxing rights. Genuine consensus must be reached to ensure that international tax reform is sustainable in the long-term. Likewise, the new tax rules must be manageable from the multinational’s perspective and from the perspective of the tax authority tasked with administrating the rules. A rushed outcome to the important work of the OECD will make for tax laws that participating countries, tax authorities, and the all-important taxpayer may not be able to withstand in the long-term. Norah Collender is Professional Tax Leader at Chartered Accountants Ireland. Point of view: Seamus Coffey How Pillar One and Pillar Two of the OECD BEPS Project will ultimately impact Ireland is uncertain. One sure thing, however, is that there will be changes to tax payments. This will be a combination of a change in the location of where taxes are paid and perhaps also an increase in tax payments in some instances. But there will likely be both winners and losers. From an Irish perspective, there might have been some comfort in that the loser could have been the residual claimant – the country at the end of the chain that gets to claim taxing rights on the profits left after other countries have made their claim. As US companies are the largest source of Irish corporation tax revenue, it might have been felt that most of the losses would fall on the US. However, significant amounts of intellectual property have been on-shored here. Ireland, therefore, has become a residual claimant for the taxing rights to some of the profits of these companies. At present, Ireland is not collecting significant taxes from these profits as capital allowances are claimed. If BEPS results in a significant reallocation of these profits, we might never collect much tax on them. Seamus Coffey is a lecturer in the Department of Economics in University College Cork and former Chair of the Irish Fiscal Advisory Council.

David Duffy discusses recent Irish and EU VAT developments.Irish VAT updatesVAT rate decreaseAs most readers already know, the standard rate of Irish VAT has been reduced from 23% to 21% for the period from 1 September 2020 to 28 February 2021. We expect that most businesses will already have made the necessary changes to their systems and processes to apply the new rate to affected transactions from 1 September 2020 onwards. However, when preparing your September/October VAT return in November, it may be helpful to check that the new rate has been correctly applied. Some of the points to check may include:Has the new VAT rate been correctly applied to your sales? The tax point and corresponding VAT rate for your sales may differ depending on whether the sale was to another business or consumer, whether you operate the invoice or cash-receipts basis of accounting for VAT, and whether a payment was received in advance of the supply. The Revenue Tax and Duty Manual on changes in rates of VAT, available on the Revenue website, provides further guidance on how to apply these rules.Has the appropriate VAT rate been applied to purchase invoices received in the period?Has the appropriate VAT rate been applied to credit notes issued or received during the period? In general, the VAT rate applied to the credit note should match the VAT rate applied to the invoice to which the credit note relates.Does VAT charged at the new rate correctly map to the appropriate general ledger accounts and is it correctly captured in your VAT reports for the period?Extension of COVID-19 reliefsRevenue has confirmed an extension of a number of temporary, indirect tax reliefs introduced earlier this year to help combat COVID-19. These reliefs were originally due to expire on 31 July 2020, but have now been extended until 31 October 2020, subject to further review. The temporary reliefs include:The zero-rate of VAT applies to personal protective equipment (PPE), thermometers, medical ventilators, hand sanitiser, and oxygen when supplied to the HSE, hospitals, nursing homes, care homes and GP practices for use in providing COVID-19-related healthcare services. Relief from import VAT and customs duties applies to the import of medical goods to combat COVID-19 by or on behalf of State organisations, disaster relief agencies and other organisations approved by Revenue, and which are provided free of charge for these purposes. No VAT clawback will arise for the owner of a property used to provide emergency accommodation to the State, HSE or other State agencies in order to combat COVID-19. EU VAT updatesDeferral of VAT e-commerce rulesThe EU has recently agreed to defer the introduction of significant changes to the EU VAT rules for e-commerce transactions from 1 January 2021 to 1 July 2021. The deferral was in response to potential challenges of meeting the 1 January 2021 deadline for tax authorities and businesses as a result of COVID-19. While this deferral gives businesses more time to prepare, it is important for businesses that will be impacted by the changes to begin their preparations. Businesses which will be most affected include retailers with online stores, online platforms and marketplaces which facilitate sales of goods to consumers, and postal and logistics operators which handle imports of goods on behalf of retailers or consumers. A brief summary of the changes coming into effect on 1 July 2021 is set out below. The current domestic VAT registration thresholds for cross-border business to consumer (B2C) sales of goods in each EU member state will be abolished. As a result, a retailer selling goods to consumers in other EU member states will be obliged to charge VAT at the appropriate rate in the member state to which the goods are shipped regardless of their value, subject to a very limited exception where the value of sales to consumers across all EU member states is less than €10,000 per year. The VAT payable to tax authorities in other member states on these sales can be remitted through a quarterly One Stop Shop (OSS) registration rather than requiring an overseas VAT registration. VAT will apply to all goods imported into the EU, at the appropriate rate in the EU country of import, regardless of their value. This is as a result of the abolition of the import VAT relief for low-value consignments with a value of up to €22. This is likely to significantly increase the volume of packages imported on which VAT must be paid. To help facilitate the payment of VAT, the retailer or, in certain cases, the online marketplace facilitating the sale can charge the VAT at the time of sale and pay this VAT to the tax authority in the country of import through a new Import One Stop Shop (IOSS). This return would be filed, and related VAT paid, on a monthly basis. However, this will only apply to imported consignments with a value of up to €150. Packages above that value will be subject to import VAT and customs duty in the normal way at the time of import. An online marketplace that facilitates sales of goods to consumers will be deemed to have purchased and resold those goods in two scenarios: first, the goods are imported from outside of the EU in a consignment of up to €150; or second, the goods are sold within the EU by a retailer established outside of the EU. This will bring additional VAT collection and reporting obligations for these platforms.Additional VAT record-keeping requirements will apply to platforms and marketplaces which facilitate other supplies of goods and services to consumers within the EU.VAT on property adjustmentIn the HF case (C-374/19) the Court of Justice of the European Union (CJEU) ruled that a VAT clawback was payable by a German retirement home operator where it ceased to carry out taxable supplies in a cafeteria attaching to the main retirement home building. The operator constructed the cafeteria and fully recovered VAT on the construction costs as its intention was to sell food and beverages to visitors. This activity would be subject to VAT. It was subsequently determined that there had been approximately 10% use of the café for VAT exempt supplies to residents of the retirement home, which resulted in a partial adjustment of the VAT reclaimed. This was not in dispute.However, subsequent to that initial adjustment, the taxable activity of sales of food and drinks to visitors ceased entirely. The only remaining use was in respect of the VAT exempt supplies to the residents, albeit there was no absolute increase in their use of the building. The question was, therefore, whether this triggered a further adjustment of VAT.The taxpayer had sought to rely on earlier court judgments which support the position that where VAT is reclaimed based on an intended taxable activity but that activity does not subsequently take place, the taxpayer’s right to VAT recovery is retained. However, the CJEU distinguished this case from the others because the intended taxable activity had commenced but ceased and the property was now only being used for VAT exempt activities. Ireland has adopted similar rules (referred to as the capital goods scheme) which can result in a clawback or uplift in VAT recovery where the proportion of taxable/exempt activity in building changes. This typically needs to be monitored over a period of up to 20 years. It is, therefore, important to carefully consider any changes in use of a building as this could have significant VAT consequences.David Duffy FCA, AITI Chartered Tax Advisor, is an Indirect Tax Partner at KPMG.

The pandemic has broken several business taboos and accelerated the role of digitisation in all walks of life. The UK tax system is no different. HMRC’s role in developing the job retention and self-employed schemes’ online portals at speed to deliver support to employers and businesses at a time of crisis has shown that digitisation can be done quickly. It might not have been perfect, but it was very good. On the back of these lessons, the UK Government published its vision for tax administration in the UK in July: building a trusted, modern tax administration system. The strategic importance of this goal has clearly been brought into sharper focus by the pandemic.An important part of the July publication was the announcement of further steppingstones in the roadmap of the Making Tax Digital (MTD) project, starting with extending MTD for VAT to VAT-registered businesses with turnover below the current £85,000 VAT registration threshold from April 2022. MTD for income tax will commence for self-employed businesses and landlords with income over £10,000 from April 2023.But there’s one glaring issue missing from the picture: UK tax legislation is extremely complex. Unless this is seriously addressed, efficient, problem-free, further digitisation of the UK tax system cannot be effectively achieved. For that reason, the Government should also develop a roadmap for simplification of the UK tax system which should work as a precursor to any new digital services developed. This should begin with income tax complexity. If this doesn’t happen, having to navigate legislation that continually increases in complexity coupled with a requirement to make multiple filings to HMRC has the capacity to be extremely challenging for both HMRC, the taxpayer and their agent. The UK Government must simplify to digitise.Leontia Doran FCA is a UK Taxation Specialist with Chartered Accountants Ireland.

Budget 2021 is the next instrument in the government's response to the impacts of COVID-19 on the Irish economy. Between the pandemic and a possible disorderly Brexit, Budget 2021 will not be a normal budget, says Kim Doyle.COVID-19 has presented unprecedented challenges for the global economy. Governments, along with their tax authorities worldwide, have adopted and administered emergency measures to preserve the health of their people and defend against collapse of their economies. In Ireland, we had a mini-Budget in the form of the July Jobs Stimulus, a €7.4 billion package of measures aimed at supporting the Irish economy in response to the impact of COVID-19. We also have a number of administrative measures in operation by Revenue to ease taxpayers’ compliance burden. Brexit also brings challenges. At this stage, we do need to respond to the immediate impacts of Brexit, and a possible disorderly Brexit, and plan for the long-term stability and robustness of the Irish economy. Climate change is, too, the ‘defining challenge of our generation’, according to the Minister for Finance. And, indeed, a raft of measures were introduced last year to tackle this challenge, while others were promised in the future. EU and OECD tax reform proposals continue to pose challenges and bring additional uncertainties into play. The impact of these on the Irish economy could extend well beyond corporation tax receipts and may influence unwanted changes in investment decisions by MNC groups going forward.Framing Budget 2021Budget 2021 may target revenue raising measures to cover the expenditure introduced to deal with the recent challenges brought about by COVID-19 and a possible disorderly Brexit, but any budgetary measures must avoid undoing the impact of the July Jobs Stimulus Package. Health and housing priorities will also have to be addressed in the budget. The government has said the measures will focus on the short-term and not beyond 2021.The government has pledged no increases to income tax credits or bands. (This is also promised in the Programme for Government.) The level of government expenditure over the coming months is unlikely to fall substantially, if at all. Despite the backdrop, tax receipts for the first eight months of 2020 are only 2.3% behind the same period in 2019. Given that some of this deficit is a timing issue and will be recovered in 2021, this is a remarkable outturn. September tax returns will be the final “piece in the jigsaw” before the final Budget 2021 is decided, according to the government. ExpectationsPre-COVID-19, Budget 2021 was expected to be framed around Brexit and climate change. Now, amid a pandemic, what are we more likely to see in the Budget from a tax perspective? Income taxConsidering the government has stated there will be no broad based increases in income taxation, we don't expect to see much by way of income tax measures. We may see some modest tax cuts in the form of increased tax credits for stay-at-home parents and other credits and reliefs targeting lower and middle income earners. We would like to see a long-term commitment to a reduction in our high marginal tax rates of 52% and 55% for employees and self-employed respectively; however, there is no fiscal space to make any pledge to reduce these rates in the short-term.The concept of broadening the tax base, so more people pay a little, has long been debated with very little reaction by government. The main reason may be it is likely to be unpopular with constituents. However, considering the challenges for the Irish economy, the government may need to embrace this concept but balance it with the pledge for no broad income tax increases. A new form of tax relief for individuals working remotely is a possible outcome of the Department of Business, Enterprise and Innovation public consultation on Guidance for Remote Working. Some responses to this summer consultation called for changes to the tax rules for reimbursement of employee expenses and changes to the tax treatment of expenses incurred by employees. We may see some tweaks to the Irish Tax Code in response. Corporation taxThe government reaffirmed its commitment to the 12.5% corporation tax rate in the Programme for Government. The importance of this commitment is evident in the remarkable tax receipts for the eight months to end of August 2020, which are largely driven by large corporation tax increases along with a strong start to the year pre-COVID-19 and more resilient income tax receipts. Ireland is obliged under EU law to implement changes to our tax code to restrict the interest tax deduction taken by companies. At the time of writing, these changes are more likely to take effect in 2022. The EU agreed last year to park its digital tax proposals in order to allow global consensus be reached through the OECD digital tax discussions. Changes to accommodate any digital tax proposals will be premature in 2020 and, therefore, unlikely to be a feature of Budget 2021. Capital taxes In order to further stimulate the economy, lowering both the CGT and CAT rates will likely promote activity in the market and should ultimately see assets put to a more productive use. This rate reduction has been called for and debated in recent years. Perhaps Budget 2021 will deliver. Considering residential property prices have fallen in recent months, there may be scope to increase the related Stamp Duty rate. However, such a rate increase will likely be unpopular among constituents and not helpful considering the struggles reported by many in getting a foot on the property ladder. VATThe extension of the 9% VAT rate to construction services would help encourage the scale of property development needed to absorb the current demand and address the housing shortage. The re-introduction of the 9% VAT rate to stimulate the hospitality sector would complement the other measures, such as the Stay and Spend Tax Scheme. An extension of the new temporary 21% VAT rate, while desirable by many, is unlikely; the headline VAT rate is a useful revenue raising measure. Increasing the threshold for cash-receipts basis of accounting, and the VAT registration thresholds, may support businesses to deal with the current challenges. Old reliablesPetrol and diesel excise increases may feature, particularly in the context of requirements to address climate change. Increases in the excise to diesel only to bring it in line with the cost of petrol at the pumps is more likely. Excise increases on alcohol and cigarettes is possible but the hospitality sector has already taken a battering due to COVID-19 and any further perceived attacks may not be in favour. ConclusionOverall there isn’t the fiscal space for wide-ranging and significant tax reductions and reliefs in Budget 2021. But the Budget 2021 equation must consist of tailored tax measures to support and stimulate the hardest hit sectors of the Irish economy and defend against the impacts of a possible disorderly Brexit on the economy while also satisfying climate change targets.Kim Doyle FCA is Tax Director, Head of Tax Knowledge Centre in Grant Thornton.

Paul McCourt and Fiona Hall consider the possible tax implications of current low asset values and what individuals can do to help protect family finances for the long-term.The COVID-19 outbreak is having a range of effects on families and individuals, with many investors seeing family finances suffer and the value of their assets fall in recent months. An important factor to remember at this point is that when an individual makes a gift, it is the current market value of the asset being gifted that applies for both inheritance tax (IHT) and capital gains tax (CGT) purposes.TrustsThe creation of a trust to hold assets for the benefit of the wider family or dependants has been a long-standing solution for many individuals seeking to pass assets to the next generation. Settling a trust is generally a chargeable IHT event. However, if the settlor’s nil rate band is fully available, individuals can transfer £325,000 of assets into the trust without incurring an IHT liability. This could increase to £650,000 for married couples jointly settling a trust with the availability of two nil rate bands. CGT hold-over relief may also be available so that the gift to trust does not trigger a CGT liability.For those considering using a trust, or who have already established one, now may be the time to gift or sell assets. When assets pass out of the trust to a beneficiary, either by way of an entitlement or an appointment by the trustees, any IHT and CGT liabilities are based on the current market value of the assets passing. Trustees may wish to consider whether the trust continues to meet its objectives and whether it is now appropriate to appoint assets out to trust beneficiaries.Personal giftsGifting an asset to another individual is often a potentially exempt transfer for IHT purposes. As such, if the donor survives for seven years from the date of the gift, it falls out of their IHT estate. However, if the donor does die in this period, the value of the assets gifted at the time the gift was made could become taxable.Where a gift fails the seven-year rule, subject to reliefs and the IHT nil rate band (currently £325,000), IHT could be payable on the gift (by the recipient or the executors) or the value of the estate. Making a gift when asset values are low will mitigate the potential IHT exposure for the individual considering gifting an asset.A gift is treated for CGT as being a disposal of the asset at market value by the donor. This could trigger a capital gain if the value exceeds the allowable cost unless the assets qualify for business assets hold-over relief.When asset values are lower, the likelihood of a gift triggering a gain is reduced, or a gift may give rise to a loss. Care should be taken in generating a loss on gifts, as any losses arising from the disposal of an asset to a connected person can only be set against gains that arise from other disposals to that same person. Capital losses generally carry forward to future years, but not back so timing is vital.Crystallising ‘paper’ lossesIndividuals may consider crystallising a current ‘paper’ or book loss on an investment and repurchasing a similar asset. Any such loss can then be offset against capital gains arising on asset disposals made in the same, or later, tax years. It is important to note, however, that ‘bed and breakfasting’ of shares is often ineffective for tax purposes and particular care is required with transactions conducted personally, via an individual savings account or between spouses.As with any investment decisions, independent investment advice should be sought before proceeding.Exercising share optionsWhere an individual exercises an option to acquire shares in an employer through a non-tax-advantaged share plan, income tax is charged on that exercise on the difference between the market value of the shares at the date of exercise and the amount paid for the shares under the option. If the shares acquired are ‘readily convertible’ (i.e. easy to sell for cash or shares in a subsidiary company) National Insurance contributions will also be due on the exercise of the option.Exercising such options while the value of a company is temporarily reduced could reduce tax liabilities in the longer-term. However, this is clearly a risk-driven investment decision on which independent investment advice should be sought before proceeding. One of the key benefits of holding an option is that it would often be exercised before an exit event (e.g. the sale of the company) so that there is an immediate return of value. In the absence of such an event, the implications of becoming a shareholder in the company, and the risk to the value thereby invested, should be considered carefully.Pensions – lifetime allowanceAn individual whose pension pot was previously above the lifetime allowance of £1,073,100 (and with no protection/enhanced protection) might choose to crystallise pension benefits now while the fund value is reduced to reduce/eliminate the lifetime allowance tax charge.There are many financial, investment and IHT issues to consider carefully before proceeding, but acting now may save tax in the long-term. Action should only be considered as part of overall wealth planning, including advice from an independent financial adviser.Short-term opportunity to achieve long-term goalsThis is a difficult time, but any temporary reduction in asset values may allow clients to pass assets into trust or to the next generation at a lower tax cost than both a year ago and a year from now.Fiona Hall is Principal, Personal Tax, at BDO Northern Ireland.Paul McCourt is Tax Principal at BDO Northern Ireland.

The Temporary Wage Subsidy Scheme is ever evolving in the face of uncertainty, writes Maud Clear.The Temporary Wage Subsidy Scheme (TWSS) was introduced on 26 March 2020. Looking back 20 weeks on, in a world turned upside down by COVID-19, it is fair to say that the Scheme has evolved since its inception. With many businesses facing an uncertain road to recovery, the July Jobs Stimulus package was the next eagerly awaited phase in this evolutionary process.Revenue offered its services to the Department of Finance to pay out the subsidy through real-time reporting tools – an extraordinary move from an institution whose function is to collect tax.While the initial assessment in establishing eligibility was a significant exercise for many employers, Revenue provided consistency and support in their operation of the Scheme.That is until a programme of compliance checks was announced on 23 June for all employers availing of the Scheme. This was an unforeseen turn in the Scheme’s evolution, particularly when Revenue issued guidance on 20 April indicating: “We may in the future, based on risk criteria, review eligibility”.Such a broad stroke approach and the requirement for a response within five days have many employers questioning what is yet to come in the operation of the Scheme.Chartered Accountants Ireland, under the auspices of the CCAB-I, sought an extension to this response time. In response, Revenue may now allow for an extension of the five days where an employer contacts them to explain their difficulty in returning a response within the required timeframe.The announcement of an extension to the TWSS until the end of August came with a warning from the Minister for Finance that “this support cannot last forever”. As the challenges facing employers in re-opening continue to mount, assurance has since been provided by the Minister that the Scheme will not come to “an abrupt end”.  Most employers need the support of the TWSS to get back on their feet. Clarity on how they will get it, and for how long, will be a determining factor in their recovery. It is hoped that the ‘July Jobs’ stimulus package will provide that certainty.Maud Clear is Tax Manager at Chartered Accountants Ireland.

The prospect of an EU-wide digital tax raised its head again in June following developments at the OECD. Peter Vale and Kim Doyle consider if we are now closer to implementation of an EU digital tax across all member states, and the impact on Ireland’s offering.The EU agreed last year to park its digital tax proposals to allow global consensus to be reached through the OECD digital tax discussions.Both the EU and OECD proposals aim to allocate a portion of profits based on the location of consumers, reflecting the increasing value that businesses place on consumer data.In June, the US withdrew from the OECD’s digital tax discussions. This has increased the likelihood that the EU will push ahead with its own proposals.In the short-term, the impasse at OECD level is also likely to see other countries push ahead with unilateral digital tax proposals. Indeed, many EU countries have either implemented or proposed their own digital tax proposals.An EU digital taxThe EU’s original digital tax proposals envisaged a simple 3% turnover-based tax as an interim measure, subject to reaching agreement on a means of allocating profits based on digital activity. Given the complexities involved in arriving at such a means, the risk is that any interim ‘quick fix’, such as a flat turnover-based tax, could potentially become permanent.While countries are free to introduce their own digital tax measures, as several have done, implementation of an EU-wide digital tax regime would require unanimity across all EU member states. The need for unanimity could make it challenging to implement as certain countries, including Ireland, are not in favour of the existing EU digital tax proposals.However, the EU is looking to replace unanimity over tax decisions with a form of “qualified majority voting”. While such a change will itself require unanimity, political factors may lead to the removal of the requirement for unanimity in the future. This could potentially pave the way for easier implementation of EU-wide tax changes.Although the removal of the requirement for unanimity on significant EU tax decisions is some years away, countries are often reluctant to use a veto to block EU tax proposals. Hence the real possibility of an EU-wide digital tax in the short- to medium-term.COVID-19 will also drive countries to seek out additional tax revenues to fund spending, with digital tax from large multinationals likely seen as an easy target.What does it mean for Ireland?In recent years, many multinational companies (MNCs) with substantial operations in Ireland have moved their valuable intellectual property (IP) here. Over time, this would be expected to increase corporation tax revenues in Ireland.A simple 3% tax on the ‘digital’ revenues of large MNCs would increase the effective tax rate of these companies and thus dilute the benefit of our 12.5% corporate tax rate. This would impact low-margin businesses most and from a tax perspective, would make it less attractive to operate from Ireland.While the movement of IP to Ireland should see an increase in our corporate tax revenues, an EU-wide digital tax could see a pull the other way; it may cause some groups to reconsider their Irish presence.However, even if our tax regime becomes relatively less attractive, our 12.5% corporate tax rate may still make Ireland the most compelling location in Europe in which to do business and help us retain key employers.Digital tax optionsThe EU acknowledges that a 3% turnover-based tax is a blunt instrument and that more refined taxation of digital activity is the end goal. The OECD considered other options, which would involve looking at the level of activity in the selling country in determining an appropriate allocation between the selling country and the market jurisdiction. However, it is acknowledged that this is a difficult exercise – one that potentially involves a rewriting of transfer pricing principles – hence the EU proposal to start with a straightforward 3% turnover-based tax.Ideally, there would be agreement at EU level on a more sophisticated and accurate means of profit allocation rather than simply jumping into a turnover-based tax regime. While this might take some time to develop, it could be part of negotiations at EU level given that unanimity is required to implement any digital tax proposals (although countries would remain free to continue to develop their own digital tax regimes, which is far from an ideal scenario). A longer-term solution that reflects the value-added activities taking place in the selling jurisdiction, not merely market jurisdiction factors, would be better for Ireland. It would also encourage more knowledge-based businesses to locate here.Wider impactIf the price of any negotiation on digital tax proposals is that unanimity over tax decisions is removed, there is a longer-term vista of other EU proposals being pushed through. This would include the dreaded Common Consolidated Corporate Tax Base (CCCTB), which would again look to rewrite the rules in terms of the allocation of a group’s profits. Such moves would be bad for a small, open economy such as Ireland with significant profits diverted to larger market jurisdictions diluting the benefit of our 12.5% corporate tax rate.Once again, we are at a critical juncture in terms of global tax rule changes. Developments to date have generally been positive for Ireland. However, it would be dangerous to think that this will continue to be the case. In practice, our options are limited in terms of influencing the direction of changes to the tax landscape. In any future scenario, however, the location of high value-add activities should continue to play a key role in the allocation of a group’s profits. One thing that is not good for Ireland is uncertainty. Groups cannot make robust plans in an uncertain environment. The sooner there is clarity on digital tax changes, the better for Ireland.Ongoing robust corporate tax receipts evidence the generally positive impact that global tax changes have had in Ireland to date, with a movement away from tax havens to jurisdictions with substance. If Ireland can maintain a regime that both encourages and rewards innovation, we will be in the best possible place to emerge relatively unscathed from the latest round of changes.Kim Doyle FCA is Tax Director, Head of Knowledge Centre at Grant Thornton.Peter Vale FCA is Tax Partner, Head of International Tax at Grant Thornton.

Peter Vale considers the items that could become long-term features of Ireland’s tax regime under the new government. In the April issue of Accountancy Ireland, I wrote about the expected impact of COVID-19 on Exchequer receipts for 2020 and beyond. We have now seen the evidence with both VAT and excise down roughly 50% on similar months last year. While some of the drop in VAT receipts might be down to timing with companies deferring payments, a large chunk is an unquestionably permanent loss in VAT revenue due to lower spending. The income tax figures for May are also expected to show a significant drop, due to vastly lower numbers in employment. The Department’s view is that corporation tax figures will hold up better. I hope this forecast is right, but I fear that the hit to corporate profits will be higher than anticipated, with refunds for prior years and losses carried forward likely to feature. What is next? So, what does this mean for future taxes? Will the relatively healthy state of our public finances entering the crisis make for a less painful exit? The Minister for Finance, Paschal Donohoe T.D., has stated that he will not raise taxes this year as doing so would stifle the ability of the economy to recover. This makes sense, assuming we can afford to do it. You also cannot simply raise taxes and expect to collect more tax revenue; you reach a tipping point, after which further hikes result in less tax collected. And many of our taxes are already high. Tax reliefs Of course, ruling out impending tax increases does not mean that there will not be a focus on tax reliefs. While many tax reliefs have been abolished over the last decade or so, certain targeted reliefs remain available to taxpayers. It is unlikely that tax reliefs incentivising environmentally friendly behaviour will be targeted. Furthermore, the research and development (R&D) tax credit is also unlikely to be affected as it encourages more sustainable jobs. Reliefs that allow business assets to be passed (typically) to the next generation are more likely to be in scope. Generous reliefs exist for both the disponer and the recipient. These reliefs escaped the guillotine in the past as they continued to make economic sense; a large tax bill was avoided on a potentially illiquid event, allowing the business to be driven forward by the next generation. Capital taxes Capital taxes are likely to be targeted by the Minister, perhaps initially by way of curtailment of reliefs and in the medium-term via an increase in rates. That said, capital tax rates are already high with our 33% rate one of the highest in the EU. In contrast, the UK capital gains tax rate is 20%. We know that when the capital gains tax rate was halved from 40% to 20% some years back, the tax-take doubled. An increase in capital gains tax rates could see the opposite effect, with fewer transactions and potentially more tax planning resulting in a lower tax yield. Broadening the tax base One thing the Minister may look at in the future is broadening the income tax base. It is questionable as to whether this would be regarded as an increase in taxes, but it would generate more tax revenue. Broadening the tax base would mean more people paying tax, albeit many would pay very little. Adjusting the current exemption limits and credits would facilitate this. Broadening the tax base was a recommendation of the Commission of Taxation over a decade ago, but we have not seen it followed by governments since. While the notion of everybody contributing something may resonate more in the current environment, it may still prove politically unpalatable. Property tax In the medium-term, depending on the state of the public finances, other tax-raising measures may be considered. The options aren’t exactly limitless. Our VAT rate is already comparatively high, as are our income taxes. Our corporation tax rate is low but effectively untouchable. One tax rate that is low in a European context is property tax, in particular for residential property. Many economists see property taxes as the least distortive, so an increase in property taxes might be the ‘least bad’ way to raise taxes. Tackling property taxes would be a brave move for a new government, but potentially something that could be done in year one or year two of a new term. Conclusion In summary, tax increases later this year are unlikely – although we may see certain reliefs targetedand the ‘old reliables’ such as cigarettes and alcohol are unlikely to escape. In the medium-term, COVID-19 will mean that tax-raising measures are likely to feature. In my view, a broadening of the tax base and an increase in property taxes are the most likely outcomes. Both of the above could be long-term features of our tax regime, although much will depend on future government priorities.   Peter Vale FCA is Tax Partner at Grant Thornton.

Geraldine Browne provides food for thought as employers prepare to report end-of-year expenses and benefits. At the time of writing, I am adjusting to working from home and seeking the best working station in the house (I lost). Much of my time is spent assisting clients with queries on the UK Government interventions introduced to help businesses survive in this challenging time. The most common questions relate to furloughed workers as companies struggle to maintain productivity. It is difficult to choose a topic for this article amid the human tragedy unfolding before us on a global scale. As this article will publish in June, employers will be gathering the necessary information to complete Forms P11D and share scheme reporting for the year ended 5 April 2020. For this reason, I will focus on P11D reporting and consider the changes employers face in benefit-in-kind (BIK) reporting in light of the coronavirus emergency. The due date for P11D reporting is 6 July 2020 for BIK provided for the year ended 5 April 2020. While this may have been delayed in line with other announcements from HMRC, the preparation process will nevertheless be the same. What do I need to file? If the employer paid any benefits and/or non-exempt expenses, or if they payrolled any BIKs, a P11D (B) form must be filed. The employer must include the total benefits liable to Class 1A, even if some of the benefits have been taxed through payroll. Employers are also required to give employees a letter informing them of the benefits that were payrolled and the amount of the benefit. What do you need to include on the P11D form? Taxable benefits typically include private medical and dental insurance, company cars, and gym membership, for example. HMRC has published a useful guide for P11D completion, which is a good starting point. Company cars and vans Employers are required to disclose the company car BIK for the full tax year where it is made available for the entire period. The question has been asked as to whether an employer can reduce the BIK value since employees have been asked to remain indoors and business travel in a company car ceased temporarily from March 2020. If an employee is furloughed and the vehicle remains at the employee’s home, the car is seen as being available under the current rules. At the time of writing, HMRC has not yet issued formal guidance on this matter. There have been suggestions that HMRC may accept that company cars will not be deemed available for BIK tax purposes where they are ‘virtually’ handed back by returning keys and fobs. It is worth reminding ourselves of the rules regarding the cessation of the car benefit. The benefit may cease, but remember: The car must be unavailable for at least 30 days to pause or cease a company car benefit; and HMRC will accept that the car is unavailable to the employee if it is broken down and has not been repaired or if the employee does not have the keys. If you have not already considered the company car policy, it is worth seeking advice in this area. Taxable expenses when working from home If employers provide a mobile phone without restriction on private use, limited to one employee, this is non-taxable. If the employee already pays for broadband, no additional expenses can be claimed. If broadband was not previously available in the employee’s home, the broadband fee paid for by the employer may be provided tax-free although in this case, private use must be restricted. Laptops, tablets, computers, and office supplies will not result in a taxable benefit if mainly used for business. If the employee purchases a desk and chair and seeks reimbursement from the employer, this will be viewed as taxable, and you may wish to include this in a Pay-as-you-earn Settlement Agreement (PSA). Some employers may provide employees with an allowance for additional expenses incurred in connection with working from home. This was increased to £6 per week from 6 April 2020 and can either be paid to the employee or reimbursed to them. Businesses and the economy are facing unprecedented financial pressure. It is worth reviewing your current benefits and expenses to identify ways in which you can reduce the cost to your business and reduce the taxable benefit to the employee. With many employees now furloughed and under severe financial pressure, any assistance an employer can provide to increase net pay will be welcome.   Geraldine Browne is Tax Director at BDO Northern Ireland.

David Duffy discusses recent Irish and EU VAT developments. Irish VAT updates VAT payment deferrals  In response to the economic impact of COVID-19, Revenue announced that interest would not apply to late payments by SMEs of their January/February 2020, March/April 2020 and May/June 2020 VAT liabilities. SMEs in this context are defined as businesses with a turnover of less than €3 million and which are not dealt with by either Revenue’s Large Cases Division or Medium Enterprises Division. Businesses that do not meet the definition of an SME but are experiencing VAT payment difficulties are advised to contact Revenue and these issues will be dealt with on a case-by-case basis. Revenue also advised that all taxpayers should continue to file VAT returns within the normal deadlines. Where key personnel are unavailable to prepare the VAT returns due to COVID-19, businesses should file on a ‘best estimates’ basis and any subsequent amendments can be completed on a self-correction basis without penalty.  Furthermore, on 2 May 2020, a scheme was announced to allow businesses that have availed of VAT and PAYE deferrals during the COVID-19 crisis to defer or “warehouse” the payment of those outstanding liabilities for a period of 12 months without accruing any interest. A lower than normal interest rate on late payment of tax (3% per annum instead of 10% per annum) will then apply until the warehoused tax liability has been repaid. Further details of this scheme are available on the Revenue website and legislation will be enacted in due course. Temporary relief from VAT and duty on PPE On 8 April 2020, Revenue announced that the 0% rate of Irish VAT and customs duties would apply to Irish imports (from outside the EU) of personal protective equipment (PPE) and other goods used to combat COVID-19. This relief applies to imports in the period from 30 January 2020 to 31 July 2020. Revenue also confirmed in eBrief 63/20, issued on 17 April, that the 0% rate of Irish VAT concessionally applies to domestic and intra-EU acquisitions of similar goods in the period from 9 April 2020 to 31 July 2020. These reliefs are subject to certain conditions, which are summarised below. For imports from outside the EU, the goods must be imported by, or on behalf of, State organisations, disaster relief agencies, or other organisations (including private operators) approved by Revenue. The goods must be intended for free-of-charge distribution or be made available free-of-charge to those affected by, at risk from, or involved in combating COVID-19. Furthermore, the importer must have both an EORI number and be pre-authorised by Revenue for the relief. In addition, import declarations must include the relevant customs codes in the appropriate SAD boxes. Where VAT and customs duties have already been paid but the relevant conditions for relief are met, a refund of such amounts can be claimed. Application forms to avail of the relief and to seek a refund of VAT or customs duty previously paid are available on Revenue’s website. For domestic supplies and intra-EU acquisitions, the 0% VAT rate temporarily applies to PPE, thermometers, ventilators, hand sanitiser and oxygen supplied to the HSE, hospitals, nursing homes and other healthcare facilities for use in the delivery of COVID-19-related healthcare services to patients. The sale of these products in other circumstances will continue to attract the VAT rate that would typically apply. VAT grouping In eBrief 053/20, Revenue issued guidance in respect of VAT groups. The guidance primarily outlines the requirements and implications of VAT grouping and includes examples, which show how the rules apply in certain circumstances. Businesses that are considering forming or breaking a VAT group should review the guidelines to ensure that the appropriate procedures are followed. The guidance includes a section on the territorial scope of Irish VAT groups and confirms that, where an entity that is established or has a fixed establishment in Ireland joins an Irish VAT group, it is the entire entity, including any overseas branches, that is considered to join the Irish VAT group. Consequently, charges from a foreign establishment of an Irish VAT group member to other members of that Irish VAT group are disregarded for Irish VAT purposes. This has been the Revenue position for some time, but it is helpful to have it reconfirmed – particularly for the financial services and insurance sectors. ROS enhancements In eBrief 58/20, Revenue announced several VAT-related enhancements to Revenue’s Online Service (ROS). Taxpayers now have the option to add a second VAT agent. To add the second VAT agent, taxpayers will need to complete an Agent Link form in the usual manner. Also, the Revenue Record (Registration Details) on ROS now indicates the VAT basis of accounting (i.e. the cash receipts or invoice basis) adopted by a given taxpayer. EU VAT updates VAT treatment of staff secondments The Court of Justice of the EU (CJEU) concluded in the San Domenico Vetraria (SDV) case (C-94/19) that the secondment of staff by a parent company to its subsidiary in return for a payment equal to the parent company’s cost (but excluding any profit margin) is a supply of services within the scope of VAT. The case highlights that VAT can arise on cross-charges for staff time and this should be carefully considered, particularly in cases where there may be no or partial VAT recovery in the recipient entity. In analysing the case, the CJEU re-stated that VAT arises on a supply of goods or services effected for consideration within the territory of an EU member state by a taxable person. A supply effected for consideration requires a legal relationship between the supplier and recipient, and reciprocal performance, meaning that the payment received by the provider of the service is in return for the service supplied to the recipient. In the present case, the CJEU was satisfied that there was a legal relationship between the parent and subsidiary and that there was a payment in return for the service provided. Consequently, where the Italian court, which had referred the case to the CJEU, established based on the facts that the amounts invoiced by the parent company were a condition for the secondment and that the subsidiary paid those amounts only in return for the secondment, VAT would apply to the secondment. The CJEU confirmed that the fact that the payment did not include a profit margin did not impact the VAT analysis, as it has been previously held that a supply for VAT purposes can take place where services are supplied at or below cost.   David Duffy FCA, AITI Chartered Tax Advisor, is an Indirect Tax Partner at KPMG.

Kim Doyle considers the best course of action for businesses that are strained financially as a result of the impact of COVID-19. COVID-19, a term that was not part of most members’ vocabulary a mere two months ago, is now the unwanted commandeer of conversations. Self-isolation, social distancing, WFH (working from home) and CC (conference call) have become part of our basic business language. But we must not forget to keep talking about the old reliable, tax. Continue to talk to Revenue, as early as possible, if you are now experiencing timely tax payment difficulties. This is one of their key messages. The other is to get tax returns in on time. At the time of writing, Revenue’s message to businesses strained financially as a result of the impact of COVID-19 is that they will work to resolve tax payment difficulties. Viable businesses that experience cash flow difficulties have long been encouraged by Revenue to engage with them as early as possible. Often, entering a phased payment arrangement is the appropriate practical step to deal with outstanding tax payments. In fact, at the end of 2019, over 6,300 business had such arrangements in place covering €73 million in tax debt, according to Revenue. Revenue will only agree to a phased payment arrangement provided the relevant tax returns are filed with them, the tax due is fully calculated, the business is viable and there is early and honest engagement. Applications for such an arrangement can be made via the Revenue Online Service (ROS). Supporting documents will be required; the volume of documentation depends on the level of outstanding tax payments. A down-payment must be made, which can range from 25-40% of the total tax payment, which may include interest. Agents can apply on behalf of their clients via ROS. Applications are typically responded to within two weeks; in many cases, arrangements are up and running in a matter of days. Responding to the difficulties arising from the impacts of COVID-19, Revenue has implemented specific measures for small- and medium-sized enterprises (SMEs) experiencing trading difficulties. Perhaps the most important being that interest will not be applied to late tax payments of VAT for the January/February period (due by 23 March) or employer PAYE liabilities for the months of February and March. Any future similar suspension will be considered at the relevant time, Revenue say. For other businesses experiencing temporary cash flow or trading difficulties, the advice from Revenue is to contact the Collector-General’s office directly or the appropriate Revenue division. Revenue has also suspended all debt enforcement activity, for now. Current tax clearance status is expected to remain in place for all businesses over the coming months.  And in an effort to ease the burden on households, Revenue also announced the deferral of certain local tax payments (annual Debit Instruction/Single Debit Authority) to 21 May from 21 March. As of now, there is no statement from Revenue on dealing with other taxes such as corporation tax. In this unprecedented turbulent environment, protecting the tax receipts must be one of the priorities for Government. It is hoped that any dip in tax receipts will be confined to 2020. However, as long as we continue to talk about COVID-19 and suffer the impacts, we must also continue to talk to Revenue. Kim Doyle FCA, AITI-CTA, is Tax Manager at Chartered Accountants Ireland.

It is now time to consider the UK tax relief available on building projects, writes Eugene Moore. To stimulate international investment in the UK, the then-Chancellor, Phillip Hammond, presented his 2018 Autumn Budget to the House of Commons. In it, he announced the introduction of capital allowances for capital expenditure incurred on the construction, renovation or conversion of most UK and overseas buildings and structures. The Structures and Building Allowance (SBA) applies to contracts entered into on or after 29 October 2018. Construction projects that may qualify for the SBA are now starting to be completed, with the structures and buildings coming into use. It is now, therefore, time for the current owners and their advisors to consider the significant tax relief available on such capital projects and how best to mitigate the risks of making an invalid claim. The relief Relief is available for UK and overseas structures and buildings where the claiming business is within the charge to UK tax. The SBA was introduced at a rate of 2% straight-line basis on qualifying expenditure over 50 years. The rate was increased to 3% in the Budget and the change will take effect from 1 April 2020 for UK corporation tax and 6 April 2020 for UK income tax. The relief commences with the later of: The day the building or structure is first brought into non-residential use; or The day the qualifying expenditure is incurred. Once qualifying expenditure is incurred, the first use of the structure or building must be non-residential. Subsequent events, such as change of use to residential or the demolition of the structure or building, will impact the availability of the SBA. A period of non-use immediately after a period of non-residential use is deemed as non-residential use, and the SBA continues to be available. Qualifying activities The structure or building must be for a qualifying activity carried out by the person who holds the relevant interest. Qualifying activities include: trade; an ordinary UK property business; an ordinary overseas property business; a profession or vocation; the carrying on of a concern listed in ITTOIA05/S12(4) or CTA09/S39(4) (mines, quarries and other concerns); or managing the investments of a company with investment business. Qualifying expenditure Capital expenditure incurred on the construction or purchase of a structure or building (including professional fees and site preparation costs) is qualifying expenditure. Excluded expenditure covers: the cost of the land or rights over the land; the cost of obtaining planning permission; financing costs; or the cost of land remediation, drainage and reclamation. Abortive costs, such as architect’s fees associated with a structure or building that is not completed, do not qualify for the SBA. Commencement date As the SBA was introduced to stimulate investment from 29 October 2018, allowances are not available on structures or buildings where the contract for the physical construction work was entered into before 29 October 2018. For projects under a construction contract, the commencement date for the SBA will be the date of that contract. HMRC is of the opinion that contracts can take different forms; it gives the example of email exchanges, which confirm that works will take place. Where no contract is in place, the date of the commencement of physical works represents the commencement date for the SBA. This is also the case where physical works commence, and a contract is subsequently put in place. Site preparation According to HMRC, the cost incurred in preparing land as a site is treated as expenditure on the construction of the structure or building that is then built upon that site. This includes cutting, tunnelling or levelling land. On the plus side, these costs are not excluded as expenditure for the SBA. On the downside, the timing of these costs could drag the entire construction project into an invalid claim position for the SBA if they are incurred before 29 October 2018. HMRC states that the following does not impact the commencement date: separate preparation and construction contracts; replacement of preparation contracts; preparation works ceased then recommenced; and preparation work redone. Demolition or enabling works incurred before 29 October 2018 do not in themselves make the entire claim invalid for the SBA unless explicitly linked to the actual structure or building. Practical issues Before an SBA claim can be made on a UK income tax or UK corporation tax return, the current owner of the relevant interest in a structure or building must create and maintain an allowance statement. Where the current owner incurred the qualifying expenditure in relation to the structure or building, the current owner creates the allowance statement. Where the current owner acquired the relevant interest in the structure or building from another person, they must obtain the allowance statement from the previous owner. An allowance statement means a written statement, which must include the following information: information to identify the building to which it relates; the date of the earliest written contract for the construction of the building; the amount of qualifying expenditure incurred on its construction or purchase; and the date the building is first brought into non-residential use. CPSE.1 (Ver. 3.8) General Pre-Contacts Enquiries for all Commercial Property Transactions now contains questions concerning the SBA and requests explicitly the allowance statement. In summary The SBA may result in significant tax relief for UK businesses that construct or purchase non-residential structures and buildings where previously, there was none on such expenditure. Careful consideration should be given to the commencement date of the project, and detailed evidence must be created and maintained by way of an allowance statement to avoid invalid claims.   Eugene Moore ACA is Corporate Tax Manager at BDO Northern Ireland.

David Duffy discusses recent Irish, EU and UK VAT developments. Irish VAT updates VAT compensation scheme for charities eBrief 21/20 contains updated guidance in respect of the VAT compensation scheme for charities. This scheme is now open in respect of VAT incurred by charities in 2019. The deadline for submitting such claims is 30 June 2020. Charities must satisfy various conditions to make a valid claim and there is a formula for calculating the claim. The total fund available for all claims is capped at €5 million and, if exceeded, this amount will be allocated between valid claims on a pro rata basis. There have been no changes to the scheme, but the guidance provides further details on the terms “total income” and “qualifying income”, which are relevant to the calculation of claims under the scheme. VAT on telecom services On 31 January 2020, the Tax Appeals Commission (TAC) published a determination in a case (16TACD2020) involving a mobile telephone operator (the appellant). The case considered the VAT treatment of the appellant’s cancellation charges, unused data, and non-EU roaming on bill-pay mobile phone services, as well as the time limit for making VAT reclaims. The appellant was unsuccessful in arguing for a VAT refund on three counts but did succeed in a claim for a VAT refund on non-EU roaming services. The key points of TAC’s determination were as follows: The appellant was liable for VAT on cancellation charges to bill-pay customers for early termination of their contracts. This followed a similar decision by the Court of Justice of the EU (CJEU) in MEO (C-295/17). The appellant was also liable for VAT in respect of customers’ unused data included in the price of their bundle. The appellant’s argument that VAT refunds should extend back further than four years was also rejected. The appellant had sought to argue that it should be equivalent to the five-year refund period available for other taxes, but this was rejected. The appellant was successful in arguing for a VAT refund to the extent that its bill-pay customers used its telecom services outside the EU. Revenue had sought to argue that refunds for non-EU roaming should only be available for pre-pay customers, but this was rejected by the TAC. While the case is principally relevant to the telecoms sector, some of the principles regarding cancellation charges and equal treatment could have wider application. The determination (which is available on the TAC’s website) is, therefore, a useful read. Time limits The question of time limits for VAT refunds was also the subject of a TAC determination (03TACD2020). The taxpayer was engaged in a VAT-exempt business but was entitled to partial VAT recovery on its dual-use input costs to the extent that its services were to non-EU recipients. However, during 2009, the taxpayer had not been aware of its entitlement to partial VAT recovery and therefore had not taken any VAT recovery on its costs. Upon becoming aware of this entitlement, the taxpayer submitted a claim on 31 December 2013, which included VAT incurred before 1 November 2009, which would ordinarily be outside the four-year time limit. The taxpayer sought to argue that this VAT was still within the four-year time limit because, in the taxpayer’s view, it was an adjustment of its partial exemption VAT recovery rate review for 2009 (which fell due after 31 December 2009). However, the TAC disagreed as the taxpayer had not applied any VAT recovery rate to dual-use inputs during 2009. The TAC concluded that only VAT incurred from 1 November 2009 onwards was correctly included in the claim submitted on 31 December 2013. While the facts of the case are quite specific, it emphasises the importance of following the appropriate procedures and paying close attention to time limits when submitting a claim for any historic VAT. EU VAT updates VAT treatment of boat moorings Segler (C-715/18) was a German non-profit-making association whose objective was to promote sailing and motorised water sports. It maintained boat moorings, some of which were used by members of the association and others were used by guests. Segler applied the reduced rate of German VAT as it believed the letting of the moorings fell within the meaning of “accommodation provided in hotels and similar establishments, including the provision of holiday accommodation and the letting of places on camping or caravan sites”. The German tax authorities argued that the standard rate of VAT should instead apply. The CJEU concluded that the reduced rate could not apply, as the letting of the boat mooring was not intrinsically linked to the concept of “accommodation”. UK VAT updates Budget 2020 The UK’s Chancellor of the Exchequer announced several VAT measures in Budget 2020, which was presented to the UK parliament on 11 March 2020. The key updates are summarised below: The 0% rate of VAT will apply to e-books and online newspapers, magazines and journals with effect from 1 December 2020, bringing them in line with the rate applying in the UK to physical books and publications. The standard 20% rate has applied heretofore. Interestingly, however, the UK Upper Tribunal had already held that the 0% rate correctly applied to such publications in the Newscorp decision, but HMRC has indicated an intention to appeal that decision. Consequently, the position applying before 1 December 2020 remains to be clarified. As a cash flow-relieving measure following the implementation of Brexit, postponed accounting for import VAT will be introduced for all goods imported into the UK with effect from 1 January 2021. Postponed VAT accounting will enable UK VAT-registered businesses to self-account for import VAT under the reverse charge mechanism. From January 2021, 0% VAT will apply to women’s sanitary products. David Duffy FCA, AITI Chartered Tax Advisor, is Indirect Tax Partner at KPMG.

Peter Vale and Christopher Crampton outline some expected changes to international taxation in the coming year. 2020 is set to be a busy year for international tax. For Ireland, it’s a key period. While international tax reform to date has been good for the country, the changes being looked at in 2020 pose challenges.   Global tax changes – Pillars One and Two The outcome of meetings in January are key to the OECD’s plans to reach consensus on both the Pillar One and Pillar Two proposals. While the Department of Finance expects the ultimate outcome to be a reduction in Irish corporate tax receipts by up to €2 billion, it’s a very difficult one to call. Pillar One examines a reallocation of profits to market jurisdictions. While this does impact on our corporate tax base, it should not prove fatal on its own. However, recent pronouncements from the US suggest that getting consensus on the Pillar One changes could be difficult. Pillar Two looks at a global minimum effective tax rate and is, perhaps, of more danger to Ireland. A tax rate of 12.5% was suggested by the French Finance Minister in December. While at first glance this would look positive from an Irish perspective, the devil is in the detail.   The most recent OECD draft proposals look at an allocation of profits to individual countries based on a group’s consolidated financial statements. This could provide a distorted result for groups with large intellectual property (IP) migrations to Ireland, in particular, and potentially lead to an effective tax charge significantly lower than 12.5%.  The early months of the year should provide key signals as to the direction of travel on both Pillars, with the outcome critical to the relative attractiveness of our corporate tax regime in the future. We should not rule out the EU taking matters into its own hands, particularly if reaching a consensus looks like being a protracted affair. Transfer pricing Finance Act 2019 saw the introduction of OECD 2017 guidelines into Irish tax legislation. One of the biggest impacts of the guidelines will be more onerous documentation requirements in 2020 for Irish companies, although many will already be maintaining similar documentation on a group-wide basis. At first glance, this might seem to cause disruption for Irish subsidiaries of US multinationals with significant IP in Ireland. While these groups typically have significant substance here, many of the IP functions are carried out outside Ireland; often in the US. Another key change in Finance Act 2019 was the introduction of transfer pricing for Irish small- and medium-sized enterprises (SMEs). While it is expected that the documentation requirements will be more relaxed for SMEs, the extension of transfer pricing will create further administrative requirements on Irish businesses. On the positive side, the extension of transfer pricing to SMEs is subject to Ministerial Order, which we might see later in 2020. Any transfer pricing requirements will apply from that date or later; they should not be retrospective to 1 January 2020. For businesses within the scope of transfer pricing now, more focus from Revenue in 2020 can be expected.   IP migrations 2020 will see the final year of “double Irish” migrations, with 31 December 2020 marking the end for groups with IP currently housed offshore in Irish incorporated non-resident entities. After that date, those entities become regarded as Irish tax resident. While many groups have already moved their IP onshore (much of it to Ireland), a significant number of groups have yet to do so. Hence, we expect many IP migrations to take place in 2020. When an IP migration takes place, the market value of the IP determines the amount of tax allowances available in Ireland. This number is often large, and so we expect to see Revenue examine these IP valuations closely. Interestingly, when these tax allowances expire then, all other things being equal, a significant increase in Ireland’s corporate tax receipts at some point in the future would be expected. However, a lot could happen in the intervening years! Revenue audit focus Aside from the focuses identified above, we don’t expect significant change in the nature of Revenue audit activity in 2020. We expect Revenue’s focus to remain on PAYE and VAT for SMEs, which tend to be the areas of greatest non-compliance.   On the corporation tax side, we have seen Revenue increasingly look for back-up supporting tax losses carried forward, which can prove challenging where the losses were generated some time ago but are being used presently. Businesses should be aware of this when considering document retention policies. Budget 2021 While Budget 2020 has just passed, it’s worth noting that this Budget was based on a more negative outlook than now appears to be materialising. This could mean we finally see more meaningful movement on our high marginal income tax rates later in the year, or possibly a reduction in capital taxes. Of course, a lot can happen between now and then, including a new government, further global tax changes, and six months of known unknowns! And, that’s all without mentioning Brexit. In summary, another year of significant developments on the international tax front looks likely, with the outcome critical for Ireland. Peter Vale FCA is a Tax Partner at Grant Thornton. Christopher Crampton ACA is an Associate Director at Grant Thornton. Brass Tax -- new year, new tax rules by Leontia Doran Since we’re fast approaching a new tax year in the UK (from 6 April 2020), let’s take a look at what is on the horizon for practitioners. IR35 rules From 1 April 2020, the IR35 rules in the public sector are being extended to the private sector with an exemption from the rules only available to “small” businesses. The IR35 legislation is designed to combat avoidance by individuals who are supplying their services to businesses via an intermediary (such as a company) but who would be an employee if the intermediary wasn’t used. Making Tax Digital From 1 April 2020, the UK will join the ranks of France, Italy, Austria, Turkey and Malaysia when it introduces its own digital services tax.  Making Tax Digital (MTD) for VAT continues. Some businesses are now able to apply for an extension to meet the digital links requirement once the one-year soft-landing period ends on either 1 April 2020 or 1 October 2020. However, the criteria to do so is strict, as set out in the updated VAT notice.  Corporation tax The rate of corporation tax is also legislated to fall from 19% to 17% from 1 April 2020. However, the Government has stated that it will remain at 19%. As it’s already on the Statute books, legislation will be needed to reverse this.  And therein lies the rub. The next UK Budget isn’t taking place until 11 March, which means the related Finance Act likely won’t be enacted until several months later. Retrospective legislation is never a good thing. Leontia Doran FCA is UK Taxation Specialist at Chartered Accountants Ireland.