Tax IDs and List Checks: The New Trend

Gabriel Pezzato
July 9, 2020

VAT gaps can generally be found in countries that collect indirect taxes. This hiatus has led many tax administrations to implement Continuous Transaction Controls (CTCs), through which transactional and accounting data are monitored in real-time or near real-time. However, even countries with sophisticated CTCs may encounter fraud involving missing traders and non-existent supplies. This creates holes in the VAT collection chain leading to significant shortfalls. Although taxpayers are used to validating incoming e-invoices and e-signatures, many governments have introduced additional validation requirements to tackle the loss of revenue.

Validation requirements

Accepting losses due to invalid transactions is normally off the table for the tax authorities. Therefore, methods to pass the debt over to other taxpayers that are part of a VAT credit chain have been implemented. To ensure these methods don’t override proportionality requirements that typically exist in legal regimes, tax administrations generally expect taxpayers to carry out auxiliary checks before relocating the VAT cost in the chain. The thinking behind such validation requirements is to assign tax liabilities to taxpayers that know or should know that the supply or trading partner is in breach of the law. These obligations are varied.  They can be as simple as checking the tax identification of the trading partner or as complex as ensuring that the VAT amount was collected by one of the trading partners.  

Tax ID checks requirements

Among the simplest alternatives are the tax ID checks requirements. Here, trading parties must validate each other’s tax IDs before carrying out a transaction or payment. If the VAT amount is not paid because one of the trading partners is missing, and the checks were not done, the remaining trading partner is accountable for the VAT not collected. This technique has gained traction in the EU where exemptions granted to intra-community supplies depend on the correct information being provided by the interested parties in the recapitulative statement. In practice, suppliers must check the buyer’s VAT number through the VIES platform. If the information is incorrect (or if the trading party doesn’t exist), the supplier bears the VAT burden that otherwise would be the buyer’s responsibility – unless the company proves that the buyer’s VAT number was deemed valid in the VIES platform on the date of the supply.

Further validations

Some countries have gone beyond ID checks and implemented other validations to be executed by the trading parties to ensure the taxes can be collected. What is not so different is the assumption that the negligent party will close the gaps in the VAT credit chain through joint liability with the other party’s VAT obligations. In Poland, for example, apart from the VIES checks performed in intra-community supplies, buyers must carry out payments to bank accounts registered with and listed by the Polish tax authorities. If a taxpayer pays into a supplier’s unapproved bank account, the payer is accountable for the supplier’s VAT obligations. In Mexico, despite early adoption of CTCs, buyers must check whether their suppliers are on an unapproved list (e.g. deemed to have issued fraudulent invoices or been part of sham transactions). Since invoices issued by unapproved Mexican blacklisted companies lack fiscal value, they cannot endorse VAT credit claims; consequently, the buyer assumes the VAT cost of the transaction.

Increased efficiency

A smooth VAT credit system that goes hand in hand with business processes is key to efficiency. Consequently, tax authorities should avoid imposing measures hindering a straight-forward credit-debit system. India is moving to a CTC system through which the tax authority will perform automated tax ID controls. Nevertheless, the country is still expected to keep its current framework through which buyers are only entitled to credit taxes if their suppliers had correctly collected the GST amount to the government treasury. On one hand, this approach makes an auditor of each taxpayer, whilst on the other hand, it causes an immense administrative burden for taxpayers that cannot rely on the payment presumption and must reconcile data that might not be readily available.  

The validation of tax IDs and lists is a trend that affects both post-audit and CTC countries alike. Nevertheless, tax administrations of the latter category can leverage their systems to perform automatic checks and notify interested parties when the transaction is performed. This is the case in Italy, where the SDI (the centralized e-invoicing platform) checks VAT numbers – and also if these tax IDs are part of a larger VAT group – appointed in an e-invoice, rejecting documents with invalid data. In Brazil, these checks are also executed at the core of the multiple State e-invoicing platforms, as is also expected to happen in India.

The cost of noncompliance

The cost of noncompliance is high. The risk of becoming liable for unexpected VAT charges is particularly great since each inadequate tax ID or list check may hide a VAT cost associated with the supply.  All in all, account payable and receivable systems must catch up with the trend and be able to either conduct required checks themselves or have the flexibility to integrate with government platforms or service providers to ensure that checks are duly performed.  

Take Action

To keep up to date with the changing VAT compliance landscape, download Trends: Continuous Global VAT Compliance and follow us on LinkedIn and Twitter to stay ahead of regulatory news and other updates.

Sign up for Email Updates

Stay up to date with the latest tax and compliance updates that may impact your business.

Author

Gabriel Pezzato

Gabriel Pezzato is a Regulatory Counsel at Sovos. Based in Stockholm and originally from Brazil, Gabriel’s background is in tax, corporate and administrative law. Gabriel earned a Law degree and a specialization degree in Tax Law in his home country and has a master’s degree in International and European Tax Law from Uppsala University (Sweden).
Share This Post

LATAM VAT & Fiscal Reporting
May 20, 2020
Sovos Acquires Taxweb, Extends Tax Determination Capabilities in World’s Most Challenging Compliance Landscape

Earlier this month Sovos announced its second acquisition of 2020, completing our solution for Brazil with an unparalleled offering that solves tax compliance in the place where it is most challenging to do so.  Too many companies doing business in Brazil have been burdened by managing multiple point solutions for continuous transaction controls (CTCs), tax […]

Sales & Use Tax United States
December 4, 2020
The On-premise Challenge Part III: The Business Case for Change

Should we move our tax engine to the cloud or keep it on-premise? This conversation is taking place in many organizations as they assess their approach to sales tax management. In this three-part series, we’ll explore some of the problems IT is working through to maintain on-premise solutions that may not always be visible to […]

Sales & Use Tax United States
December 4, 2020
Is There an Economic Nexus in New Hampshire?

When the Supreme Court decided on the South Dakota v. Wayfair, Inc. case, it pushed almost every state to adopt or adjust economic nexus standards. However, the decision did not necessarily impact states without sales tax, such as New Hampshire. As such, there is currently no economic nexus in New Hampshire. Enforcement date: N/A Sales/transactions […]

Sales & Use Tax United States
December 4, 2020
What Changed in the Iowa Economic Nexus?

After the South Dakota v. Wayfair, Inc. decision, numerous states made adjustments to their economic nexus law. Iowa’s governor signed a state tax reform bill on May 30, 2018, which expanded on the definition of businesses that must collect Iowa sales tax and local option tax to include certain remote sellers. We have highlighted the […]

ShipCompliant United States
December 4, 2020
Sovos ShipCompliant Data Shows Record High Transactions on Black Friday and Cyber Monday

This year, Black Friday and Cyber Monday experienced the highest transaction and sales rates in their history. Black Friday saw an approximate 22% increase in sales, reaching $9 billion and Cyber Monday hit $10.8 billion in sales, up nearly 15% from last year, setting the record for the largest U.S. online shopping day ever. As […]

ShipCompliant United States
December 3, 2020
Illinois’ New Economic Nexus Sales Tax Rules to Affect Direct Wine Shippers

Starting January 1, 2021, many direct-to-consumer (DtC) wine shippers will face an added sales tax burden on their shipments to Illinois. The Illinois Department of Revenue (DOR) published FY 2021-06, which explains the upcoming change. Under the recent “Leveling the Playing Field for Illinois Retail Act,” the state will require all remote sellers with economic […]