This site uses cookies. By continuing to browse the site you are agreeing to our use of cookies. To find out more about cookies on this website and how to delete cookies, see our privacy notice.

Was there a supply of staff to the Appellant or were they actually employees?

By Andrew Needham, November 2020

This was an appeal against HMRC’s refusal to repay VAT amounting to £40,995.38 for the 04/17 VAT period and an assessment of £69,533.70 due for the 04/17 VAT period. 

The question for the Tribunal in this appeal was whether supplies of workers which the Appellant said were made to it by three companies involved in the refurbishment of office buildings were supplies received in respect of which it could reclaim input tax. 

The Appellant argued that those three companies, the “Intermediate Companies”, were set up as its contractors acting as “gang masters” to manage sub-contractors involved in the refurbishment of office buildings and made supplies of workers to the Appellant. 

HMRC argued that the Intermediate Companies did not make supplies to the Appellant. In fact supplies were made by the sub-contractor workers themselves, who were paid directly by the Appellant and who, as

Subscribe to the McLaughlin’s Tax Case Library to get instant access
to the Tax Case Library.
14 day free trial , 90 day money back guarantee
Subscribe

Related or similar articles

Was the sale of rotisserie chickens a zero-rated supply of food of a kind for human consumption or a standard-rated supply of hot takeaway food?
By Andrew Needham, February 2026
Was the appellant making taxable supplies and eligible to register for VAT?
By Andrew Needham, October 2025
Were the appellants liable to a penalty and were personal liability notices appropriate?
By Andrew Needham, November 2023
Was the adaptation of Merlin helicopters to use early warning radar a supply of goods or services?
By Andrew Needham, February 2022
Was the appellant acting as agent and eligible to use Onward Supply Relief?
By Andrew Needham, October 2021