Applicability of IPT to Warranty Services

James Brown
August 30, 2024

This blog was last updated on September 5, 2024

Italy: IPT Treatment on Used Vehicle Warranty Services

On 21 May 2024, the Italian tax authority published a ruling (No. 110/2024) on the IPT treatment of warranty services provided in relation to the sale of used vehicles.

The ruling dealt with a scenario in which a company (the ‘Applicant’) provided warranty services to dealers within the same company group, with the latter offering these warranties to the purchasers of the vehicles. The Applicant also separately entered into insurance contracts with an insurance company to obtain coverage for the costs it incurred in repairing the vehicles sold when required under the terms of the warranty.

The insurance contract concluded between the Applicant and the insurance company would only be subject to IPT in Italy if the policyholder’s relevant establishment was located in Italy, in line with the location of risk rules.

More significantly, however, the ruling also addressed the warranty services provided by the Applicant to the dealers. For these, the ruling assessed that guarantees such as these do not satisfy the requirements of an insurance contract with an insurance company as the contracting party. The VAT treatment of this arrangement was outside the scope of the ruling, but it was conclusive in outlining that IPT does not apply to such an arrangement.

Comparing this ruling to the position in Germany highlights the possibility of a lack of harmonization in this area without an EU-wide position.

Read our blog on general matters of IPT in Italy for additional information.

 

Germany: The Application of IPT rather than VAT to Guarantee Commitments

Following the publication of various circulars by the Federal Ministry of Finance in Germany in 2021, rules on the taxation of guarantee commitments were made effective 1 January 2023. This blog explains how this affects insurers and other suppliers.

Scope of the rules for guarantee commitments

The Ministry of Finance published its initial circular in May 2021. This was in response to a Federal Fiscal Court judgment. It concerned a seller of motor vehicles providing a guarantee to buyers beyond the vehicle’s warranty.

In these circumstances, the circular confirmed that the guarantee is not an ancillary service to vehicle delivery but is deemed to be an insurance benefit. As such, it would attract IPT instead of VAT – unless the guarantee is considered a full maintenance contract.

The circular did not prompt immediate concern within the insurance sector. Markets outside the motor vehicle industry weren’t concerned either. The presumption was that it was limited to the specific context of the motor vehicle industry.

Matters changed the following month. The Ministry of Finance clarified that the tax principles it outlined in fact applied to all industries. As a result, the scope of these rules became potentially limitless in Germany. All guarantees provided as additional products to goods or services sold are now within the scope of the application of IPT.

The clarification could impact industries like those organizations selling electrical items and household appliances.

Effect on insurers and other suppliers

The effect on traditional insurance companies should be relatively limited as they do not usually provide guarantees as part of the sales of goods and services. There could arguably be a significant impact on other suppliers that do provide such guarantees.

First and foremost, there is a potential increase in the cost of providing the guarantees caused by the application of IPT. Unlike input VAT, a supplier cannot deduct IPT from its taxable income – it must either increase prices to compensate or accept a less favourable profit margin.

Any companies that purchase the guarantees cannot reclaim the IPT either, as they can do with VAT. The standard IPT rate of 19% in Germany is high compared to most European countries. This exacerbates these issues.

There are also practical considerations to bear in mind for suppliers obliged to settle IPT with the tax authority. They are presumably required to be registered for IPT purposes like insurers, although the Ministry of Finance has not formally confirmed this.

Perhaps more difficult is the issue of licensing. The Ministry of Finance circulars focus on taxation, leaving it unclear whether other suppliers are now required to obtain a license to write insurance under German regulatory law.

Looking for more information on general IPT matters in Germany? Our German IPT blog can help.

Sign up for Email Updates

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

Author

James Brown

James Brown is a Consultant at Sovos. His academic background is in Law having studied the subject at undergraduate level, and he has since enjoyed various roles in the IPT Managed Services Department at Sovos.
Share this post

dtc shipping law updates
North America ShipCompliant
March 12, 2025
The Case for DtC Beer Shipping Reform: Key Takeaways from the 2025 Report

This blog was last updated on March 12, 2025 Craft beer drinkers want more choices. Brewers want more opportunities. And yet, legal barriers still stand in the way of direct-to-cconsumer (DtC) beer shipping. The 2025 Direct-to-Consumer Beer Shipping Report, produced by Sovos ShipCompliant in partnership with the Brewers Association, reveals how consumer demand, regulatory restrictions […]

DtC wine market
North America ShipCompliant
March 7, 2025
From Decline to Opportunity: Lessons from the 2024 DtC Market

This blog was last updated on March 7, 2025 The 2025 Direct-to-Consumer Wine Shipping Report offers more than just data—it provides valuable insights into the trends shaping the industry and the factors driving change. To delve deeper into these findings, industry experts Andrew Adams from WineBusiness Analytics and Alex Koral from Sovos ShipCompliant joined forces […]