ING Intermediate Holdings Ltd v HM Revenue and Customs

ING Intermediate Holdings Ltd v HM Revenue and Customs

IDUK's deposit-taking business involved the provision of banking services to depositors, not merely the receipt of deposits. The contractual terms granted customers rights to use banking facilities, which were central to the transaction and not merely ancillary. The provision of these services was for consideration, as reflected in the interest rate and contractual arrangements, and such consideration could be expressed in monetary terms. The appeal was dismissed.

Parties
Appellant: ING Intermediate Holdings Limited; Respondents: The Commissioners for Her Majesty’s Revenue and Customs
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
13 December 2017
Procedural Posture
Civil Appeal (tax and Chancery) / Appeal From Upper Tribunal to Court of Appeal
Outcome
Appeal dismissed
Legal Topics
Value Added Tax (vat), Banking Services, Consideration in Contract, Composite and Ancillary Supplies, Monetisation of Non Monetary Consideration
Tax Law Banking Law European Union Law Value Added Tax (vat) Banking Services Consideration in Contract Composite and Ancillary Supplies Monetisation of Non Monetary Consideration

Case Brief

Summary, issues, holding and outcome

More case intelligence is available

Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.

Full judgment text Downloadable case file Legal principles 3 Authorities cited 15 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

ING Intermediate Holdings Limited

Appellant

The Commissioners for Her Majesty’s Revenue and Customs

Respondents

Procedural Posture

Civil Appeal (tax and Chancery) / Appeal From Upper Tribunal to Court of Appeal

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether IDUK's deposit-taking business constituted a supply of banking services for VAT purposes or was merely the receipt of deposits
  2. 2 Whether the services provided were for consideration
  3. 3 Whether any non-monetary consideration could be expressed in monetary form for VAT purposes

Ratio Decidendi

IDUK's deposit-taking business involved the provision of banking services to depositors, not merely the receipt of deposits. The contractual terms granted customers rights to use banking facilities, which were central to the transaction and not merely ancillary. The provision of these services was for consideration, as reflected in the interest rate and contractual arrangements, and such consideration could be expressed in monetary terms. The appeal was dismissed.

Court Disposition

Appeal dismissed

Orders

  • The appeal is dismissed.