Monty Raphael and Neil Swift of Peters & Peters who act on behalf of Fulcrum and Optigen follow up an article in The Tax Journal on 21 February 2005 'The Innocent Trader and the Delinquent Chip'
In order to combat carousel frauds the UK took the drastic step in 2002 of disrupting the trade in CPUs by refusing to allow traders to deduct VAT where HM Customs & Excise discovered what they claimed was circularity of trading. The innocence of the VAT-registered trader was irrelevant. Indeed the Crown went out of its way in the conjoined appeals of Bond House Fulcrum and Optigen to stress that no misconduct whatsoever was alleged against any of those parties. It was as if the circular CPU contaminated...
If you or your firm subscribes to Taxjournal.com, please click the login box below:
If you do not subscribe but are a registered user, please enter your details in the following boxes:
Monty Raphael and Neil Swift of Peters & Peters who act on behalf of Fulcrum and Optigen follow up an article in The Tax Journal on 21 February 2005 'The Innocent Trader and the Delinquent Chip'
In order to combat carousel frauds the UK took the drastic step in 2002 of disrupting the trade in CPUs by refusing to allow traders to deduct VAT where HM Customs & Excise discovered what they claimed was circularity of trading. The innocence of the VAT-registered trader was irrelevant. Indeed the Crown went out of its way in the conjoined appeals of Bond House Fulcrum and Optigen to stress that no misconduct whatsoever was alleged against any of those parties. It was as if the circular CPU contaminated...
If you or your firm subscribes to Taxjournal.com, please click the login box below:
If you do not subscribe but are a registered user, please enter your details in the following boxes:
