Sussex wrote:
Umpteen cases on here which say that if an operator takes a cut of the fare, be that cash/card or account, then VAT is payable by the operator on the whole fare, not just the cut.
In short if they don’t take a cut then they can argue they are acting as an agent, if they take a cut they are acting as a principal.
Gotcha. To be honest, I'm not that up to speed with the VAT stuff. But of course there are parallels with the employment status issue.
And to that extent I don't really see the difference between drivers paying a fixed fee or a %age fee. It's just a different way of the driver paying the operator rather than anything more substantive in economic terms.
Of course, yesterday's judgement wasn't about the VAT dimension, but it's obviously fundamental to it, so it will be interesting to see how HMRC approaches it, and whether it's considered relevant to the difference between fixed or %age fees paid by drivers to circuits.
Or at least that's my opinion, but obviously the current case law views things differently
