VAT WIN FOR MEROCEDES DEALERS

摘要

The Upper Tribunal has allowed the appeal by Mercedes-Benz Financial Services UK Ltd (MBFS) against the decision of the First Tier Tribunal (FIT) ([2013] TC 02778) and held that the vehicle finance agreement with the customers of MBFS constituted a supply of services, rather than of goods on deferred terms. The case, Mercedes-Benz Financial Services UK Ltd v Revenue and Customs Commissioners [2014] UKUT200 (TCC), revolved around whether a motor vehicle finance agreement called Agility was a supply of goods or services under EU Directive 2006/112, article 14(2)(b). MBFS provided asset-backed financial products and ancillary services to its customers when they purchased or leased motor vehicles from retail dealers. In August 2007, MBFS entered into a vehicle finance agreement (the Agility agreement) with its customers, which supplemented its existing finance options of hire purchase and leasing. MBFS marketed the Agility agreement as a distinct financial product, giving the customer in respect of the motor vehicle at the end of the agreement a choice of three options: (1) purchase, (2) return and (3) purchase and part-exchange.