The Impact of No Claims Bonuses on Insurance Premium Tax

Elliot Shulver
November 5, 2020

There are two types of no claims bonus. The first one is a refund of premium at the end of the policy. This happens when, for example, a discount is given if a policyholder doesn’t make a claim on that policy or makes a claim that is smaller than agreed in the policy documents. The insurer under the terms of the agreement then refunds a portion of the premium back to the policyholder.

The second type is where an agreement is made between the policyholder and the insurer to give a discount on any future premium payment, for example, in next year’s policy. This is given by reducing the amount of premium paid by the policyholder rather than a refund.

The implications for IPT across Europe

Both types of no claims bonus can cause tax issues. This especially applies where insurance premium tax (IPT) needs to be refunded where premium has been returned to the policyholder.

For example, where the premium has been refunded at the end of the policy’s term, some territories don’t allow a tax refund. This happens Italy where no refunds are given when the premium has been refunded because of a no claims bonus. There are exceptions where a refund is given but these are specific circumstances and tend to be given for administrative errors. In Germany, refunds of premium are allowed however in some circumstances where the refund doesn’t lower the risk then the refund is blocked.

In the UK, the issue that influences whether IPT can be credited is whether the payment made to the insured is actually and specifically covered within the insurance contract. If it is, then an IPT credit will be due, if not, then an IPT credit won’t be due. The UK tax authority, HMRC, would expect to see the actual provision in the insurance policy/contract and not in some other document or contract. And, if the insurer is using the special accounting scheme, HMRC would expect a credit to be shown in the company’s premium account to reflect the payment.

When the discount is given in the following years’ premium, because there is no refund of premium and therefore no refund of tax, most countries will allow this type of discount.

Some countries, for example, Malta and Ireland apply stamp duty on insurance premiums. With regard to refunds, even where the premium and risk have been reduced, if a refund of premium is given back to the policyholder it’s unlikely the tax will be able to be reclaimed. In Malta a reclaim of stamp duty is only allowed within the cooling off period. This is usually within the first 14 days of when the policy begins, and as such, the no claims bonus will not be affected by this. For Ireland, a fixed amount of stamp duty is applied per contract, rather than on the amount of premium paid, therefore, a reduction in premium won’t reduce the fixed amount of stamp duty.

It’s important to note that a refund of premium doesn’t always trigger a refund of IPT. Some tax regimes don’t allow a credit at all, and for others it will depend on the circumstances of the refund. Insurers should be aware of the different approaches that each tax authority takes regarding refunds to maximise tax efficiency and to minimise unnecessary costs.

Take Action

Find out why Sovos is the leading solution provider for insurance premium tax compliance in Europe.

Sign up for Email Updates

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


Elliot Shulver

Consulting Manager, IPT compliance for indirect taxes at Sovos. A chartered accountant with 6 years’ experience of indirect tax, including IPT, VAT and Gambling Duties, Elliot is responsible for our Consultancy practice, as well as providing regulatory updates for our global compliance solution suite.
Share This Post

North America ShipCompliant
May 25, 2023
Out-of-State Breweries Gain Self Distribution, DtC Rights in Oregon

Under a settlement agreement, breweries located outside of Oregon now have more options for selling into the Beaver State, including direct-to-consumer (DtC) shipping and self-distribution to retailers. The settlement arose out of a lawsuit filed by a group of Washington breweries last year challenging Oregon laws that limited beer self-distribution to in-state breweries and DtC […]

EMEA VAT & Fiscal Reporting
May 24, 2023
VAT and Art: What you need to know

Significant inflation increases have impacted most of the world’s economies, with the UK still above 10% in 2023. This increase means a reduction in the purchasing power of consumers. Together with increases in the cost of raw materials, this has created uncertainty regarding growth of entire industrial departments and reduced profit margins for companies. The […]

North America ShipCompliant
May 23, 2023
Top 5 Myths Surrounding Retailer Direct-to-Consumer Wine Shipping

By Tom Wark, Executive Director, National Association of Wine Retailers Politics breed myths. This has always been the case as politics is, at its most fundamental, a form of storytelling. So it should be no surprise that myths have arisen as various elements of the wine industry have fought against consumers and specialty wine retailer seeking […]

May 23, 2023
IPT: Location of Risk and Territoriality

Much of the discussion on the Location of Risk triggering a country’s entitlement to levy insurance premium tax (IPT) and parafiscal charges focuses on the rules for different types of insurance. European Union (EU) Directive 2009/138/EC (Solvency II) set out these rules. However, a related topic of growing importance in this area concerns territoriality, i.e. […]

Asia Pacific E-Invoicing Compliance
May 23, 2023
Japan: New e-Invoice Retention Requirements

Japan’s new e-invoice retention requirements are part of the country’s latest Electronic Record Retention Law (ERRL) reform. Along with measures such as the Qualified Invoice System (QIS) and the possibility to issue and send invoices electronically via PEPPOL, Japan is implementing different indirect tax control measures, seeking to reduce tax evasion and promote digital transformation. […]