The Goldsmith Foundation for European Affairs
| Jurisdiction | UK Non-devolved |
| Judgment Date | 07 March 2000 |
| Date | 07 March 2000 |
| Court | Value Added Tax Tribunal |
VAT Tribunal
The following case was referred to in the decision:
C & E Commrs v Redrow Group plc VAT[1999] BVC 96
Supply - Place of supply - Advertising services - Whether services supplied to recipient belonging outside the EU - C & E Commrs v Redrow Group plc [1999] BVC 96 considered -Value Added Tax Act 1994 section 7 schedule 5 subsec-or-para 2Value Added Tax Act 1994, s. 7 and Sch. 5, para. 2;SI 1992/3121 section 16Value Added Tax (Place of Supply of Services) Order 1992 (SI 1992/3121), art. 16; Directive 77/388, the sixth VAT directive, eu-directive 77/388 article 9art. 9.
The issue was whether supplies were made to a recipient belonging outside or within the EU.
The appellant was the recipient of certain supplies from B, an advertising agency established in the UK. The appellant was established in Vaduz, Liechtenstein. It also had a representative office in Geneva. It had been set up to pursue a political agenda of promoting policies of a Eurosceptic nature concerning the European Union and as an entity separate from The Goldsmith Foundation, the philanthropic body founded by Sir James Goldsmith. Its board members were all resident outside the UK. The Referendum Party ("RP") was established as a company limited by guarantee, the aim of which was to promote the holding of a referendum concerning the UK's relations with the European Union. On 1 May 1996, the appellant entered into an agreement with B for the provision of advertising services. These involved the promotion of the Eurosceptic cause advanced by the appellant throughout the European Union and which, in the UK at that time, was also being advanced by the Referendum Party. The agreement provided, inter alia, that RP would produce advertising copy and that B would provide production estimates to the appellant for approval. Once they were approved, space was to be reserved in various advertising media and invoices sent to the appellant and paid by it.
The tribunal found that Goldsmith himself, and not RP, produced or approved the advertising material for B to package. B, it found, was instructed never to take instructions from RP and if asked to do so was to refuse. Invoices were issued to the appellant by B and sent to its representative office in Geneva. As supplies were made to the appellant, an entity established outside the EU, the supplies were zero-rated by B.
By letter dated 21 May 1996, the appellant wrote to RP stating:
In connection with the campaign of the Referendum Party up to the date of the next General Election to be held in the UK which is scheduled for no later than May 1997, this letter confirms our intention to sponsor the objectives of the...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
British United Provident Association Ltd v Commissioners of Customs and Excise
...Ltd VAT(1989) 4 BVC 111 C & E Commrs v Redrow Group plc VAT[1999] BVC 96 Goldsmith Foundation for European Affairs VATNo. 16,544; [2000] BVC 2273 IR Commrs v Duke of Westminster ELR[1936] AC 1 Marleasing SA v La Comercial Internacional de Alimentación SA(Case C-106/89) [1990] ECR I-4135 Pol......