Business ETC uses cookies. By continuing to browse this site you are agreeing to our use of cookies. Click here to find out more »
Dublin: 12 °C Monday 20 May, 2013

Ireland to find out whether Brussels can force change in VAT laws

EU VAT laws allow several people to be treated as one – but Brussels says Ireland shouldn’t include non-taxable people in those groups.

A file photo of lawyers at the ECJ in Luxembourg. An ECJ advocate-general will issue an opinion next week on whether Ireland could have to change its VAT laws.
A file photo of lawyers at the ECJ in Luxembourg. An ECJ advocate-general will issue an opinion next week on whether Ireland could have to change its VAT laws.
Image: Nicolas Bouvy/AP

IRELAND WILL BE TOLD next week whether it may be forced to change its VAT laws in a long-running dispute with the European Commission about its interpretation of five-year-old VAT rules.

An advocate-general at the European Court of Justice will issue an opinion next Tuesday in a lengthy disagreement between Dublin and Brussels over whether Ireland is in breach of an EU VAT directive by allowing non-taxable persons to be grouped together with taxable persons.

The European Commission claims that Ireland has failed to comply with its obligations under an EU VAT directive issued in 2006, which outlines a common system of VAT to be applied across every member state.

The directive – which came into effect in January 2007, and which was agreed by the heads of each member state – allows people who have close personal or professional relationships, such as married couples or business partners, to be treated as a single taxable person for VAT purposes.

Ireland has applied this by allowing ‘non-taxable persons’ – such as children or non-working people – to be included in VAT groupings, thereby allowing for a lower individual tax burden for each member – but Brussels believes this illegally gives rights and responsibilities to people outside the tax system.

Papers were originally filed in the case in February 2011, and oral arguments were made in the court in Luxembourg two months ago.

Opinion is not binding, but authoritative

The advocate-general’s opinion, which will be delivered next Tuesday, is not binding and the justices of the court could offer a different ruling.

However, the final rulings tend to be consistent with the opinions offered by the advocates-general, and therefore Tuesday’s events are likely to be seen as a key indication of whether Ireland will be forced to change its laws.

The formal, official ruling is not expected on the matter until well into 2013 – but a ruling against Ireland could require the government to amend domestic VAT laws to end the provision where non-taxable persons can be grouped together for tax persons.

This, in turn, could pose some financial trouble for the State – which is already under pressure to balance the books as the Troika bailout funds begin to run dry.

Four other EU member states – including the UK, Denmark, Finland and the Czech Republic – are supporting Ireland in the dispute, as they operate under similar legal interpretations and could also be compelled to change their laws if Ireland loses its case.

Read: Exchequer returns for October show €2.9 billion deficit

Read next:

Comments (9 Comments)

  • what about vehicle registration tax (vrt). when is this being phased out? or is this included in this ruling?

    Reply
  • what would that mean? Would it mean that someone who has for example married credits, would not be allowed to do it anymore??

    Reply
    • Not quite. This case only applies to VAT law – I suppose the usual circumstances where this would apply would be where a sole trader, who is registered for VAT, can be treated as a group with their spouse who doesn’t engage in business activity. The EU says the directive was only ever meant to apply to groups of businesspeople, basically, and that parties not involved in some sort of trade shouldn’t be involved.

      It doesn’t have any impact on personal tax credits or anything of the sort.

      Reply
    • its more cost effective not to marry..its funny a piece of paper from a religion can have a input on your income

      Reply
  • Red Ed 19/11/12 #

    This is what happens when people voted yes on Lisbon the second time. The EU can force it if they wish but they will probably have a word in Enda’s ear to pursuade us first just like the children’s referendum.

    Reply
  • Just another step closer to departing from the euro.
    The three parties can “tut tut” all they want and the supporters will tell us how bad things will be and our ecenomy will collapse for years…Ehhh,just look out the windows ,we are neck deep and getting deeper with no hope,no leadership in sight.
    How about a referendom to stay/leave the eu or are the government and their supporters scared of the outcome.

    Reply
  • “Opinion is not binding, but authoritative”

    That right there is why the EU can go get stuffed.
    We have handed enough to them of our right to govern ourselves – handed to them by traitors within the three main parties!

    Enough is enough!
    Get stuffed EU!

    Reply
    • Gavan , thanks for your comment but could you give me an example ? Finding it hard to understand.

      Reply
    • Rory – From the outset, let me say I’m not 100% clear as to whether I understand this issue right, but the following is an illustration of how I understand it.

      It might help to think of these circumstances as being similar to an arrangement you might make for income tax.

      Let’s say you are a single person in a good job earning €70,000 a year. You receive an annual tax credit of €1,650 a year simply for working – that is, your income tax bill is reduced by €1,650.

      Now let’s say you get married and your spouse doesn’t work – your income is good enough to support both of you. Your annual income, as a couple, is still €70,000 – but now, because you’re part of a married couple, your tax credit jumps to €3,300.

      This arrangement is sort of similar: a sole trader (i.e. a person in business who does not have a private limited company set up) is liable to pay VAT, but by seeking to be treated as a group – by having their non-working spouse included in the calculations – their own VAT liability falls.

      Reply

Add New Comment