Touch Worldwide OY v Revenue & Customs [2014] UKFTT 868 (TC) (03 September 2014)

Touch Worldwide OY v Revenue & Customs [2014] UKFTT 868 (TC) (03 September 2014)

Touch’s services for Nokia World 2010 and the Nokia Development Summit were advertising services, not event services, and thus the place of supply was Finland. The party was a separate supply, classified as an entertainment activity under Article 53, and thus the place of supply was the UK. As Touch made a supply in the UK during the relevant period, it was not entitled to a VAT refund under the Refund Directive.

Citation
[2014] UKFTT 868 (TC)
Parties
Appellant: Touch Worldwide OY; Respondents: The Commissioners for Her Majesty’s Revenue & Customs
Jurisdiction
United Kingdom
Judgment Date
03 September 2014
Procedural Posture
VAT Refund Appeal / First Tier Tribunal (tax Chamber) Decision
Outcome
Appeal dismissed
Legal Topics
VAT Refund Directive, Place of Supply Rules, Composite and Distinct Supplies, Advertising Services, Entertainment Services
Tax Law European Union Law VAT Refund Directive Place of Supply Rules Composite and Distinct Supplies Advertising Services Entertainment Services

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 7 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 4
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Touch Worldwide OY

Appellant

The Commissioners for Her Majesty’s Revenue & Customs

Respondents

Procedural Posture

VAT Refund Appeal / First Tier Tribunal (tax Chamber) Decision

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether Touch made one composite supply or several distinct supplies to Nokia
  2. 2 Determination of the place of supply for VAT purposes for each supply
  3. 3 Whether services provided were advertising services or event/entertainment services under the VAT Directive

Ratio Decidendi

Touch’s services for Nokia World 2010 and the Nokia Development Summit were advertising services, not event services, and thus the place of supply was Finland. The party was a separate supply, classified as an entertainment activity under Article 53, and thus the place of supply was the UK. As Touch made a supply in the UK during the relevant period, it was not entitled to a VAT refund under the Refund Directive.

Court Disposition

Appeal dismissed

Orders

  • Touch Worldwide OY is not entitled to a refund of VAT under the Refund Directive for the relevant period.