VAT NewsletterImportant VAT, GST and sales tax news from around the worldIssue No. 6, August 2015

IntroductionWelcome to the sixth issue of Ernst & Young LLP’s 2015 VAT Newsletter for the US and Canada. These newsletters cover a variety of topics, as valued-added tax (VAT) can impact businesses in many ways. Approximately 160 countries now have a VAT, goods and services tax (GST), consumption tax, service tax or similar VAT, and the laws and regulations are constantly changing. We use this newsletter to inform you of significant changes taking place.

At the end of this newsletter, you will find contact details for the senior members of our team in the US and Canada who can help answer any questions you may have about the articles in this newsletter or any other VAT questions.

We are interested in your feedback on the items covered and what topics you would like to see covered in the future. Please provide any feedback to Howard Lambert at howard.lambert@ey.com.

If you would like to subscribe to EY’s other Indirect Tax Updates, please click here.

2VAT Newsletter August 2015 Issue 6 |

Global EY’s 2015 Worldwide VAT, GST and Sales Tax GuideYou can access the latest guide here.

EY’s Indirect Tax Briefing, 11th editionYou can access the latest briefing here.

Managing indirect tax controversy: dealing with audits and disputesManaging indirect tax controversy is our new Global Indirect Tax thought leadership report, providing insights into how companies can anticipate and deal effectively with tax audits and resolve disagreements with tax administrations. You can access the report here.

GlobalEY’s 2015 Worldwide VAT, GST and Sales Tax Guide

EY’s Indirect Tax Briefing, 11th Edition

Managing indirect tax controversy: dealing with audits and disputes

AmericasCanada — Recaptured input tax credits to be phased out in Ontario

Asia-PacificChina — Latest news on expansion of VAT pilot

Summary EuropeEuropean Court of Justice — Landmark judgment for VAT

Greece — VAT legislation changes

Poland — European Commission Infringement Proceedings on the application of the reduced VAT rate to the supply of a range of medical equipment and pharmaceutical products

Middle East, India and AfricaNigeria — Tax Appeal Tribunal rules that nonresident companies carrying on business outside Nigeria are not liable for VAT

Ghana — Value Added Tax Law amended

Tanzania — New VAT Act impacts financial services

3VAT Newsletter August 2015 Issue 6 |

Americas Canada — Recaptured input tax credits to be phased out in OntarioThe Canada Revenue Agency (CRA) recently released GST/HST Info Sheet GI-171, “Phasing out of Recaptured Input Tax Credits in Ontario.” The info sheet explains the process under which the current requirement for certain large businesses to recapture input tax credits (RITCs) in Ontario will be phased out from 1 July 2015.

Recaptured input tax credits means that the provincial component of the HST must be “recaptured” and not claimed. These RITC rules currently only apply to the Ontario HST (13%) and the Prince Edward Island HST (14%). GST/HST registrants in these two provinces must track the amount of HST paid on the four categories of specified expenses, and instead of claiming an input tax credit (ITC) for the full 13% or 14% HST paid on those expenditures, they are only entitled to claim the 5% federal component of the HST. As a result, they are required to recapture the 8% or 9% provincial component of the HST.

On their GST/HST returns, they are required to report the gross amount of ITCs being claimed in respect of these specified expenses (i.e., the full 13% or 14%) and then show the amount of the provincial component that they are recapturing, thus claiming only the net 5%.

Background

Since the inception of the harmonized sales tax (HST) in Ontario on 1 July 2010, large

businesses, subject to the RITC rules, have been required to report RITCs separately on their GST/HST returns. Large businesses are generally those whose revenues exceeded $10 million in taxable and zero-rated revenue during their last fiscal year. The threshold amount is calculated by including the revenues in respect of supplies made by the business and its associated companies in Canada, or outside of Canada through a permanent establishment in Canada. Certain financial institutions are also deemed to be large businesses, regardless of their threshold amount.RITCs must be reported on Schedule B of the GST/HST Netfile return, irrespective of whether or not the related ITCs have been claimed. RITCs cannot be netted against the related ITCs. Failure to report RITCs in the required manner and in the appropriate period will generally result in the imposition of penalties and interest by the CRA.

The RITC requirements apply in respect of specified property and services, including particular supplies of road vehicles, energy, telecommunication services and meals and entertainment expenses.

Phase out of recapture commences 1 July 2015

For the first five years that the HST has been in effect in Ontario, the recapture rate has been 100%. Effective 1 July 2015, the recapture rate will be reduced to 75% and it will then gradually be phased out as the recapture rate is reduced by 25% per year. The Ontario recapture requirement will be eliminated by 1 July 2018.

4VAT Newsletter August 2015 Issue 6 |

The following chart shows the recapture rates in effect during specific recapture periods:

Recapture periodOntario

recapture rate

1 July 2010 – 30 June 2015

100%

1 July 2015 – 30 June 2016

75%

1 July 2016 – 30 June 2017

50%

1 July 2017 – 30 June 2018

25%

1 July 2018 and beyond 0%

Subject to some limited exceptions, large businesses are generally required to report RITCs in the same return in which they are entitled to claim an ITC on the specified property or service even if the ITC has not yet been claimed. As a consequence of this general rule, large businesses must make sure that they track the period in which they were entitled to claim a particular ITC, in order that the related RITC will be reported at the correct recapture rate.

If a GST/HST reporting period straddles any of the periods shown in the above table, there may be a requirement to report RITCs at multiple recapture rates. Schedule B of

the GST/HST Netfile return will be modified by the CRA to include separate lines for each potentially applicable recapture rate. For example, Schedule B of the return for the July 2015 GST/HST reporting period will be formatted to allow RITCs to be reported at the recapture rates of 100% and 75%. Schedule B will automatically perform the calculation to reduce the recapture amount, and therefore the large business will be required to input the gross RITC amount. GI-171 provides several examples of calculations that straddle the 1 July transition date and other detailed examples.

5VAT Newsletter August 2015 Issue 6 |

Asia-Pacific China — Latest news on expansion of VAT pilotIt is planned that life style, real estate and construction, and financial services will be included into the VAT regime. The projected implementation date will be 1 Dec 2015 or 1 Jan 2016. The final date will be decided by State Council.

Life style services are those services closely that are consumed on a daily basis. To be more specific, they mainly include, but are not limited to, the following industries:

• Restaurant and dining

• Hotel accommodation

• Medical and education

• Housekeeping

• Laundry and dry cleaning

• Beauty and hair

• Photography

6VAT Newsletter August 2015 Issue 6 |

Europe European Court of Justice — Landmark judgment for VATOn 16 July 2015, the Court of Justice of the European Union (CJEU) released its judgment in the joined cases of Beteiligungsgesellschaft Larentia + Minerva mbH & Co. KG (C 108/14) and Marenave Schiffahrts AG (C 109/14) at the European Court.

The German cases referred three questions to the CJEU. The first question concerned the appropriate level of deduction of input VAT on costs relating to different activities of holding companies. The second question asked whether partnerships may be included in a VAT group, and the third question addressed whether the VAT grouping provisions in the Directive have direct effect. The CJEU holdings are set forth below.

Deduction of input VAT on costs relating to different activities of holding companies

The CJEU held that management holdings are generally entitled to a full input VAT recovery (if no VAT-exempt services such as the granting of loans are rendered), and that furthermore, in the case of a VAT group, the turnover of the VAT group is decisive.

Persons included in a VAT group

The decision outlines that a restriction of members of a VAT group to legal entities only and to the exclusion of partnerships would only be allowed if necessary to prevent the abuse of law and tax fraud. While the German Federal Tax court must finally answer this question, the decision provides the impression that the CJEU would not agree to with such a ruling.

Therefore, it appears likely that VAT groups with partnerships as subsidiaries will now have to be allowed.

The CJEU also confirmed that VAT grouping has an effect on the input VAT recovery level of the VAT group members.

Direct effect of VAT grouping provisions in the Directive

As noted with the second question, conditions must be set to prevent the abuse of law and tax fraud. The German Federal Tax Court must determine whether this is the case. However, the CJEU expressed doubts that this requirement is fulfilled.

Furthermore the CJEU held that a taxpayer cannot directly refer to the VAT group article of the Directive. This means that only if the German Federal Tax Court decides that the German law can be interpreted in accordance with EU law to allow the inclusion of partnerships or different integration conditions, a taxpayer will be able to claim respective positive effects retrospectively. Therefore, there is an increased likelihood that certain partnership types (in particular GmbH & Co.KG) will have to be accepted retrospectively, whereas the possibility of a different interpretation of the integration conditions appears to be lower.

The decisions are a milestone for the VAT recovery of holding companies and VAT grouping provisions and are of high importance.

This article is a high-level and first summary of the CJEU decision. Accordingly, detailed effects for businesses should be reviewed.

7VAT Newsletter August 2015 Issue 6 |

Greece — VAT legislation changesOn 16 July 2015, the Greek Government published L.4334/2015 (Urgent Measures for the negotiation and the conclusion of an agreement with the European Stability Mechanism [E.S.M.]) in the Government Gazette. L4334/2015 introduces significant changes to the VAT legislation. The publication was confirmed in circular POL 1154/2015.

Changes to VAT rates

The new law amends certain provisions of the VAT Code (Law 2859/2000) and replaces Annex ΙΙΙ thereof (goods and services subject to reduced VAT rate). As a result, various goods and services are reclassified from a 13% to a 23% VAT rate. Where there is a specific provision in Annex III, a new super-reduced VAT rate of 6% replaces the previously applicable 6.5%.

Annex III of the VAT Code is amended to limit the goods and services that are subject to a reduced VAT rate of 13%.

The following categories of goods and services are now subject to 23% VAT:

• Goods: packaged foodstuff; sugar; vinegar; salt; coffee; tea; spices; fats; flowers and some plants; cocoa, prepared or otherwise; processed meat and fish; as well as food preparations of specific tariff headings; animals; and fertilizers; among others.

• Services: transportation of passengers and their luggage; restaurant services; tickets for cinemas, concerts and other events; toll manufacturing services with respect to goods subject to a reduced VAT rate; and the provision of specific medical and dental services (excluding those exempted under article 22 the of VAT Code); among others.

In addition, the following categories of goods and services, for which the VAT rate remains at 13%, are explicitly mentioned:

• Goods: electricity; gas; water supply; vegetables; olive oil; milk and dairy products; cereals; waters; edible fruit; preparations for child nutrition packaged for retail sale; and specific kinds of pasta; among others.

• Services: provision of home care service for children, the elderly, sick and disabled people in general.

An important change refers to the reclassification of accommodation services in hotels and similar establishments, including the provision of holiday accommodation and the rental of places on camping or caravan sites as of 1 October 2015 to 13%. The provision’s legal

wording should be revised since, for the transition period (namely until the aforementioned date), accommodation services in hotels and similar establishments appear to be subject to the standard VAT rate of 23%.

The super-reduced VAT rate is now 6% (from the previously applicable 6.5%), which applies to drugs, vaccines for human medicine and books of specific tariff headings, as well as theater tickets.

The changes in VAT rates appear to be effective as of the publication date of the law in the Government Gazette (16 July 2015) and as confirmed in circular POL 1154/2015. However, according to a press release issued by the Ministry of Finance, in order to enable a smooth transition to the new VAT rates, the Ministry shall take necessary action so that application of the new provisions is effective as of 20 July 2015. Further developments are expected on this matter.

Gradual abolition of favorable rates (reduced by 30%) applicable in certain Greek islands

Favorable VAT rates (reduced by 30%), applicable in certain Greek islands, are abolished as follows: favorable VAT rates in developed islands with the highest income per capita are abolished as of 1 October 2015, whereas in less developed islands they are abolished as of 1 June 2016. Favorable VAT rates applicable in remote islands stay in force until 31 December 2016. Clarifications for the application of this provision are expected through the issuance of ministerial guidelines.

Measures for immediate withholding and remittance of VAT from bank institutions

Where retail transactions (exceeding €1,500 and other transactions between businesses exceeding €3,000) are settled via bank means (especially via credit or debit cards, e-banking, bank deposit for the purpose of settling an invoice or bank check), immediate withholding and remittance of VAT, by bank institutions to the Greek State, is required. More specifically, bank institutions are obliged to withhold the corresponding VAT and remit it to the Greek State within five days of the payment date. The bank grants a certificate for the attributed VAT amount to VAT-taxable persons, so that the respective output VAT amount (remitted to the Greek State) may be taken into account for the completion of the VAT return. No fee or expenses should be charged by the bank institutions for the supply of the aforementioned service. Ministerial guidelines, where the practical aspects of the aforementioned provision shall be regulated, together with any other issue relating to remittance and refund of VAT, are expected.

8VAT Newsletter August 2015 Issue 6 |

Poland — European Commission Infringement Proceedings on the application of the reduced VAT rate to the supply of a range of medical equipment and pharmaceutical productsOn 4 June 2015, the CJEU delivered its judgment in infringement proceedings brought by the European Commission against Poland for applying a reduced rate of VAT to the supply of a range (15) of medical equipment and pharmaceutical products.

This case proceeded to judgment without a written Advocate General’s opinion.

Article 98(2) of the VAT Directive provides that Member States may only apply reduced VAT rates to the limited categories of goods and services set out in Annex III. Categories 3 and 4 of Annex III refer,

respectively, to “pharmaceutical products of a kind normally used for health care, prevention of illnesses and as treatment for medical and veterinary purposes, including products used for contraception and sanitary protection” and “medical equipment, aids and other appliances normally intended to alleviate or treat disability, for the exclusive personal use of the disabled.” The Commission contended that the goods in question were not covered by either of these categories and, consequently, they were properly liable to the standard rate of VAT. The CJEU upheld the Commission’s action insofar as it related to a small number (3) of the disputed items, but dismissed the Commission’s action insofar as it related to the remaining (12) items.

The full judgment (which is only available in French and Polish) can be accessed by clicking here.

9VAT Newsletter August 2015 Issue 6 |

Middle East, India and Africa

Ghana — Value Added Tax Law amendedThe Ghana Parliament recently approved a number of amendments to the Value Added Tax Act, 2013 (Act 870) with the passage of the Value Added Tax (Amendment) Act, 2015 (Act 890). The President has assented to the new Act and it was published in the Official Gazette.

Key changes in the amendment include:

• Requirement for estate developers to account for VAT at a flat rate of 5% on supplies made in respect of immovable property. This shall be calculated on the value of the taxable supply. Estate developers are not entitled to deduct input tax in connection with a supply of immovable property.

• Introduction of the Ghana Revenue Authority (GRA) General Refund Account to replace the Value Added Tax Refund Account. This is aimed at establishing a more efficient refund system to cover duty drawbacks, VAT refunds and corporate tax overpayments. An amount not exceeding 4% of total revenue collected shall be paid into the General Refund Account.

• Repeal of subsection (7) of section 159 of the Internal Revenue Act, 2000, Act 592 (as amended) to conform to the GRA General Refund Account.

• Interpretation of a ”currency point” has been corrected from GH¢10,000 to GH¢1.

• Defining pharmaceuticals to mean essential drugs listed under the Harmonised Systems Commodities Classification Code, 2012.

• The following additions to exempt supplies:

• Supply of pharmaceuticals in Ghana

• Supply or import of the active ingredients and selected inputs for the manufacture of pharmaceuticals, as determined and prescribed by the Minister of Health and the VAT Regulations

• Import of selected drugs or pharmaceuticals, as determined and prescribed by the Minister of Health and the VAT Regulations

• Supply of paper for the production of exercise books and textbooks

• Import of mild carbon steel for the manufacture of machetes

The above amendments are now in effect.

10VAT Newsletter August 2015 Issue 6 |

Nigeria — Tax Appeal Tribunal rules that nonresident companies carrying on business outside Nigeria are not liable for VATOn 10 June 2015, the Federal Capital Territory (FCT) division of the Nigerian Tax Appeal Tribunal (TAT) delivered judgment in favor of Gazprom Oil & Gas Nigeria Limited (Gazprom), in a tax dispute case with the Federal Inland Revenue Service (FIRS) on the imposition of a VAT charge on services rendered by a nonresident company (NRC) to a Nigerian entity.

Gazprom instituted the appeal case at the TAT following the refusal of the FIRS to discharge the notices of VAT re-assessment imposed on the company for failure to deduct and remit VAT on services received from an NRC.

In delivering its judgment, the TAT held that an NRC is only required to register and charge VAT where it carries on business in Nigeria and that a contract to perform services for a Nigerian company was not sufficient to create an obligation to register and charge VAT. The NRC must carry on the business in Nigeria.

The TAT also held that the VAT Act does not provide for a reverse charge. Therefore, there was no obligation on a Nigerian company to account for VAT where the NRC has not included VAT in the invoice issued to the Nigerian recipient company.

Case background

Gazprom, a company incorporated in Nigeria, engaged the services of an NRC with no physical presence in Nigeria to render advisory and research services. The NRC fully performed the services in its country of residence without any employees, assets, equipment, representatives or agents in Nigeria during the course of the contract.

The NRC invoiced Gazprom for the services without including VAT, and Gazprom paid the total invoice amount to the NRC. Gazprom did not self-account for the VAT.

In an audit of Gazprom, the FIRS alleged that Gazprom had failed to report VAT for

services received by NRCs during the period under review and subsequently imposed additional VAT assessments on Gazprom.

Dissatisfied with the refusal of the FIRS to amend the additional VAT liabilities imposed on the company, Gazprom filed an appeal at the FCT division of the TAT seeking the determination of a number of issues, among which were:

1. Whether an NRC that is not carrying on business in Nigeria is required to register for VAT compliance and charge VAT on its supplies

2. Whether a supplier that has no physical presence in Nigeria can be considered to be carrying on business in Nigeria under section 10 of the VAT Act

3. Whether a company that has not received a VAT invoice on its transaction with an NRC has an obligation to account for or pay VAT

TAT judgment

By way of background, The TAT is Nigeria’s tax tribunal established to adjudicate on all tax disputes arising from operations of the various Tax Laws in Nigeria. Decisions of the TAT may be appealed to the Federal High Court.

In delivering its judgment in this case, the TAT stated that the requirement for a foreign company to register for VAT was premised on the condition that the NRC was carrying on business and if the services performed by the NRC were performed offshore, there should be no requirement to register for VAT in Nigeria.

Following from that conclusion, the TAT ruled that if there was no requirement to register, then the NRC was not required to charge VAT.

Regarding the requirement for the Nigerian recipient company to withhold and remit the VAT charged under section 10(2) of the VAT Act, the TAT stated that the provisions of section 10(2) of the VAT Act required the Nigerian recipient to pay the VAT-only if it was charged. There was no requirement to self-account for the VAT.

To this end, the TAT referred to the established principle for the interpretation of tax laws, adding that the court was bound to give effect to the provisions of the law where they were clear and unambiguous.

The TAT allowed the appeal and ruled in favor of Gazprom by subsequently setting aside the additional VAT assessments imposed on the company by the FIRS.

Implications

The ruling provides clarity on the application of VAT on contracts between Nigerian companies and foreign company providers where the services are rendered offshore.

The decision references several court cases which emphasize the fundamental principle in the interpretation of tax laws, i.e., the requirement to give effect to the literal interpretation of statutes where the words are clear and unambiguous.

The judgment further emphasizes the important principle that the existence of a contract between a Nigerian company and an NRC does not prima facie translate to carrying on business in Nigeria. This is significant in several respects, and parties contracting for services must sufficiently designate activities carried out entirely offshore to avoid being regarded as carrying on business in Nigeria.

However, the requirement to withhold VAT at source in the oil and gas upstream and downstream sectors appears to impose a reverse charge obligation on oil and gas companies awarding contracts. The decision of the TAT in this case did not refer specifically to that provision of the VAT Act.

Nevertheless, it is thought that this decision should equally apply in the oil and gas sector. Nigerian companies entering contracts with NRCs are recommended to review the contract details in order to determine the applicability or otherwise of this judgment to their specific case.

Where a part of the contract, however minimal, is to be rendered in Nigeria, proper care should be taken in structuring the contract to make sure that the above decision of the TAT is applicable to the NRC.

11VAT Newsletter August 2015 Issue 6 |

Tanzania — New VAT Act impacts financial servicesTanzania’s new Value Added Tax Act (Act), effective 1 July 2015, brings far-reaching changes for resident and nonresident financial services companies.

The new Act categorizes a “financial service” as an intermediary service which is exempt from VAT, with certain limited exceptions.

Insurance services

Not all insurance services will constitute a financial service from 1 July 2015. The new definition defines “financial services” to include (but is not limited to):

Transactions involving the granting or transferring of ownership of a health or life insurance contract or the provision of reinsurance in respect of such contract.

This means that the supply of any other insurance will no longer be exempt in terms of the new Act, as it no longer constitutes an exempt financial service. Supplies of, e.g., auto or home insurance therefore constitute taxable supplies of ordinary “services.” In light of the fact that the transitional rules for progressive supplies are cumbersome, suppliers of such insurance should obtain advice with respect to the receipt of pre-paid premiums, received prior to 1 July 2015, but which relate to the supply of short-term insurance after 1 July 2015.

Adjustments

The new Act contains special rules for adjustments relating to the payment and receipt of indemnity payments under a contract of insurance.

In addition, the rules relating to the issuing of credit notes, as well as to rebates and other adjustments, has also changed. The effect thereof is that suppliers of financial services may need to change their processes and amend their ERP systems.

Facilitation fees

The new definition of “financial services” does not include any arranging services supplied to facilitate the financial service. This means that the fees to facilitate a

financial service will be taxable, while the financial service which is the subject of the facilitation service will be exempt. This will create apportionment issues regarding a supplier’s entitlement to input tax credits.

Change in apportionment rules for input tax

Banks, insurers, equity traders and other financial service companies will be required to apportion their input tax going forward, and will only be able to claim input tax credits to the extent that an expense is incurred to make VAT-taxable supplies, i.e., to earn facilitation fees. In addition, entitlement to an input tax credit will vary in accordance with the ceiling and floor de minimis rules.

At the outset, a supplier will no longer have the option to choose an appropriate method of apportionment. Instead, companies making mixed supplies (taxable and exempt supplies) whose taxable supplies are equal to between 10% and 90% of total sales, will be required to apportion their input tax credit in accordance with the “average method” set out in the new Act. The de minimis rules provide that entities with taxable supplies exceeding 90% of their total supplies qualify for a full input tax credit, while entities with taxable supplies of less than 10% of total supplies are not entitled to an input tax credit at all. Direct allocation is not impacted by the apportionment rules.

The new Act, however, does allow for a regulation prescribing further methods of apportionment for use by financial service companies, and furthermore provides that the current regulations, issued in relation to the repealed VAT Act, remain in force until such regulations are themselves revoked, amended or cancelled.

Branch rules

Where the business in mainland Tanzania is carried on from a fixed place of business, the branch of an NRC situated inside mainland Tanzania is deemed to be a separate person from the main company situated outside mainland Tanzania, despite the two branches

both being a part of a single legal entity. From a VAT perspective, services provided by the mainland Tanzanian branch to the person outside mainland Tanzania will constitute a taxable supply of services. Services from the main branch outside mainland Tanzania to the mainland Tanzanian branch are discussed below under “imported services.”

Imported services

In most instances, VAT on imported services is no longer applicable, i.e., “services” supplied by the head office outside mainland Tanzania to the mainland Tanzanian branch will not generally constitute “imported services.” Note, however, that to the extent the head office outside mainland Tanzania allocates costs to its branch in mainland Tanzania, a taxable supply of services is deemed to take place, upon which VAT must be accounted for by the branch inside mainland Tanzania.

VAT registration is also determined in terms of an “economic activity” definition, the ambit of which is very wide. The “economic activity” definition may serve as a catch-all provision, and services which previously would have constituted “imported services” may in the future constitute “economic activity” in Tanzania. Any person conducting an “economic activity,” who exceeds the threshold, is required to register for VAT in Tanzania. Whether or not the VAT-only registration may expose the business for income tax remains to be seen in practice.

Implications

The financial services and insurance industries in Tanzania will be directly impacted by these changes, effective 1 July 2015. The Tanzania Revenue Authority strictly applies these deadlines, and it is recommended that nonresident multinationals supplying financial services in Tanzania, or to recipients in Tanzania, seek advice to enable compliance.

12VAT Newsletter August 2015 Issue 6 |

EY newsletters and alerts

If you would like a copy of a green paper, newsletter or alert covering some of the topics mentioned below, please click on the link or contact Howard Lambert at howard.lambert@ey.com.

Croatia: EY Tax News — February 2015: Ernst & Young d.o.o. has issued the February 2015 edition of its regular client newsletter. From an indirect tax perspective this issue includes the following items:

• E-filing of PPO form (overview of supplies subject to reverse charge)

• Excise duty changes — special tax on motor vehicles

Czech Republic: EY Tax News — June 2015. Ernst & Young s.r.o. has issued the June edition of EY Tax News, its regular client newsletter. From an indirect tax perspective, this edition includes the following items:

• The hybrid tax inspection

• Control reports — new information

• Constitutional Court case on implied tax assessment and seizure of excess VAT deduction in criminal proceedings

Hungary: EY Tax Express — May 2015. Ernst & Young Tanacsado Korlatolt Felelossegu Tarasag’s May edition of its regular client newsletter, EY Tax Express, advises of expected tax modifications (including VAT and other indirect taxes) related to the 2016 budget. The changes will enter into force from 2016, except for certain amendments concerning corporate taxation. The bill is expected to be passed in late June.

Iraq: Alert — Customs duty law and new sales tax instructions from 1 August 2015.

Netherlands: Tax Update Weekly — editions 23, 24 and 25, 2015. Weekly e-newsletter regarding the latest updates of the most recent and relevant tax news from the Netherlands and the rest of the world.

Slovakia: EY Tax & Legal News — May 2015: Ernst & Young k.s. has issued the latest edition of its client tax newsletter EY Tax and Legal News that includes an item on the CJEU judgment in case C-42/14 Wojskowa, concerning the VAT treatment of utility costs, recharged by a landlord to tenants in connection with the letting of immovable property.

UK: VAT News — weeks ending 8 June 2015, 15 June 2015 and 22 June 2015. Weekly client e-newsletter — roundup of VAT news from the UK, the EU and other countries.

EY | Assurance | Tax | Transactions | AdvisoryAbout EY

EY is a global leader in assurance, tax, transaction and advisory services. The insights and quality services we deliver help build trust and confidence in the capital markets and in economies the world over. We develop outstanding leaders who team to deliver on our promises to all of our stakeholders. In so doing, we play a critical role in building a better working world for our people, for our clients and for our communities.

EY refers to the global organization, and may refer to one or more, of the member firms of Ernst & Young Global Limited, each of which is a separate legal entity. Ernst & Young Global Limited, a UK company limited by guarantee, does not provide services to clients. For more information about our organization, please visit ey.com.

Ernst & Young LLP is a client-serving member firm of Ernst & Young Global Limited operating in the US.

© 2015 Ernst & Young LLP. All Rights Reserved.

EYG no. YY3622 BSC no. 1507-1592058

ED None

This material has been prepared for general informational purposes only and is not intended to be relied upon as accounting, tax or other professional advice. Please refer to your advisors for specific advice.

ey.com

US VAT practice leaders

Robert Smith Irvine, CA +1 949 437 0533 robert.smith5@ey.com

Karen Christie New York, NY +1 212 773 5552 karen.christie@ey.com

Anne Freden San Francisco, CA +1 415 894 8732 anne.freden@ey.com

Ela Choina Chicago, IL +1 312 879 2935 ela.choina@ey.com

Maria Hevia Alvarez New York, NY +1 648 831 2187 maria.heviaalvarez@ey.com

Edel Flynn New York, NY +1 212 773 3759 edel.flynn@ey.com

Gino Dossche New York, NY +1 212 773 6027 gino.dossche@ey.com

Regional resources

Alex Cotopoulis New York, NY +1 212 773 8216 alex.cotopoulis@ey.com

Deirdre Hogan San Francisco, CA +1 415 894 4926 deirdre.hogan@ey.com

Corin Hobbs San Jose, CA +1 408 947 6808 corin.hobbs@ey.com

Howard Lambert Irvine, CA +1 949 437 0461 howard.lambert@ey.com

Steve Patton New York, NY +1 212 773 2827 steve.patton1@ey.com

Peter Molnar New York, NY +1 212 773 1329 peter.molnar@ey.com

Enrique Agresott Garcia New York, NY +1 212 773 1935 enrique.agresottgracia@ey.com

Ernst & Young LLP (US)

Canada GST practice leader

Jean-Hugues Chabot Montreal, Quebec +1 514 874 4345 jean-hugues.chabot@ca.ey.com

Regional resource

Ally Murphy Toronto, Ontario +1 416 932 5878 ally.murphy@ca.ey.com

Ernst & Young LLP (Canada)