Companies dealing with complex sales and use tax determination, VAT regulations and other tax challenges across the globe know that SAP alone is not equipped to support the varying requirements from country to country. As SAP sunsets support and updates for ECC and R3, companies must move to HANA to keep their systems up to date. With this inevitable change to S/4HANA or HANA Enterprise Cloud, now is the perfect time to step back and develop a comprehensive strategy to managing tax worldwide.
SAP users must migrate to HANA by 2025, but a majority have not yet started the process. Since the move requires major changes to ERP infrastructure, SAP users with global operations should take advantage of the unique opportunity to be more strategic in their implementation. With the right approach, companies can future-proof their solutions in a way that ensures they can keep pace with constant changes in tax regulations throughout Latin America, Europe and beyond.
Learn how to minimise business disruption during an SAP S/4HANA upgrade project in the wake of modern tax: Read Preparing SAP S/4HANA for Continuous Tax Compliance and don’t let the requirements of modern tax derail your company.
Governments around the world are implementing technology for tax enforcement. In order to keep up, companies must make the digitisation of tax a core pillar of their HANA migrations.
In the move to HANA, companies must consider the new world of tax, which includes:
The move to S/4HANA or HANA Enterprise Cloud requires companies to move all of their processes, customisations and third-party add-ons to the new platform. As such, there are several critical considerations.
Since most companies’ SAP ERP systems have been built and customised over many years, many will benefit from a phased approach to HANA implementation. The less customised modules, such as Financial Accounting (FI) and Controlling (CO) will be easier to move than Materials Management (MM) or Sales and Distribution (SD), which will need a long-term plan for customisations.
Many SAP configurations have become a patchwork of customised code and bolt-on applications. This is especially true when it comes to sales and use tax determination, e-invoicing, and VAT compliance and reporting, since requirements are vastly different in every jurisdiction a company operates. The move to HANA gives companies the opportunity to consolidate, eliminating local configurations in favour of a global strategy. Companies that proactively plan can help to ensure that the next 15 years are simplified, without the constantly changing configurations needed in the previous 15 years as governments have gone digital.
With an upcoming migration to SAP HANA, businesses must consider a solution that maintains SAP as the central source of the truth while keeping pace with constant regulatory change. Learn how Sovos is helping companies do just that, safeguarding the value of their HANA implementation here.
Countries within the European Union (EU) are losing billions of euros in value-added tax (VAT) every year because of VAT fraud, VAT evasion, VAT avoidance and inadequate tax collection systems. As of 2016, the VAT gap in the EU was 159.5 billion euros, or 14% of the total expected VAT revenue for the EU. As a result, EU countries have been introducing several measures to increase VAT compliance and make their VAT systems more fraud-proof. One such measure is the split payment mechanism.
The split payment mechanism changes how VAT is generally collected by making the payment for the tax base (i.e., product price net of VAT) separate from that for the VAT amount. There are variations of the split payment mechanism, but generally, an invoice is paid by the customer to two separate accounts: The net amount is paid to the supplier’s business bank account, and the VAT amount is paid directly to a dedicated bank account of the supplier, called a VAT account. In practice, a single payment will be made and it will be divided by the bank.
Split payments are regarded as a measure to combat VAT fraud and non-compliance by removing the opportunity for suppliers to charge VAT and disappear without declaring or paying it to the tax authority (‘missing trader fraud’). It digresses from the mainstream of VAT collection in the EU, which relies on vendor-based collection of VAT and on periodic remittance of VAT by registered traders.
The European Commission completed a comprehensive study of split payments in December 2017 to design and assess legally and technically feasible scenarios for a split payment mechanism as a VAT collection tool. The study found:
“….no strong evidence that the benefits of split payment would outweigh its costs. The main identified effects were that a wider scope of split payment would potentially provide a larger decrease of the VAT gap, but would also significantly increase the related administrative costs.” [source]
Despite the European Commission’s inconclusive assessment, split payment mechanisms are currently in place around the world, primarily outside of the EU. In the EU, Italy and Romania have implemented split payment mechanisms while Poland plans to implement it, and the UK has started to consider it.
Italy has employed a split payment mechanism since January 1, 2015 for payments to public authorities under Law 23/12/2014, n. 190 (Stability Law). It has been expanded several times, most recently on January 1, 2018. Currently, it applies to supplies of goods and services rendered to several categories of public bodies, such as public economic entities, special companies, foundations and their subsidiaries, as well as companies included in the FTSE MIB index. As per the design of the system in Italy, suppliers charge Italian VAT on goods and services made to the entities listed above. These customers then “split” the payment of the invoice: they pay the taxable amount to the suppliers and pay the VAT to an allocated VAT bank account of the treasury.
In Poland, split payments are scheduled to be implemented as of July 1, 2018. Unlike Italy, Poland’s scheme will not require customers to make two separate payments. Instead, Poland will require a single payment executed to the bank who will then split the payment into two separate bank accounts: one account for the amount net of VAT to be paid to the supplier’s business bank account, and the other account for the VAT amount to be paid directly to a dedicated VAT bank account of the supplier.
The scope of Poland’s split payment mandate is much broader than Italy’s as it will apply to all VAT registered businesses. On the other hand, the Polish split payment mechanism will be optional as the buyer may but does not have to apply it.
In Romania, a split payment mechanism has been implemented since January 1, 2018 for companies which exceed certain thresholds for outstanding VAT liabilities. Under the Romanian split payment mechanism, obligated VAT registrants are required to open separate bank accounts for the collection and payment of VAT. The VAT split payment applies to all their taxable supplies of goods and services, for which the place of supply is in Romania. Similar to Italy but unlike Poland, the split payment mechanism is mandatory. The suppliers charge Romanian VAT on goods and services, then the split payment is made by the business customer, who transfers the VAT directly to the VAT bank account of the supplier. The VAT bank account of the supplier can only be used for output and input VAT payments.
The UK has held a public consultation on adopting anti-VAT fraud split payment mechanism for eCommerce. The split payment mechanism would require the VAT due on online supplies to be paid directly to the UK tax authorities at the time of purchase. The UK is debating several issues:
HMRC has made an initial proposal with respect to how the split payment mechanism would function, titled “Alternative method of VAT collection – split payment,” and is seeking public comment until June 29, 2018. HMRC’s proposal would have the merchant identify and make the split payment for transactions relating to UK residents, and have payment service providers identify and fulfill the split payment for transactions relating to non-UK residents. There would be an approved register of payment companies (both merchants and payment service providers) who could split payments. With respect to overseas sellers, for each payment, the card issuer would check if an approved payment company will be responsible for splitting that payment. If so, the card issuer would pass the payment in full to the payment company. The payment company would then split out the VAT, pay it directly to the HMRC, and pass on the balance to the overseas seller’s bank account. If not, then the card issuer would have to split out the VAT, pay it directly to the HMRC, and pass on the balance to the unapproved payment company which would then pass on that amount to the overseas seller’s bank. Finally, the HMRC would credit the seller’s UK VAT bank account with the output VAT thus collected.
Under a split payment mechanism, suppliers may suffer negative cash flow. Although funds within the VAT account belong to the supplier, the supplier will not be able to use them freely. Such funds may be spent only in specific ways prescribed by the regulatory regime. In Poland, businesses can use the funds only to pay invoiced VAT to the VAT account of the invoice issuer, and to pay VAT to the tax authorities.
In Italy, a large delay has been observed on processing refunds to businesses (up to 90 days after quarterly VAT refund request). This hiatus allows authorities to hold input VAT for a longer period of time, earning interest for the government, while affecting the cash flow of Italian businesses. To fully estimate the cash flow implications of a split payment system, one must consider the costs of borrowing for the businesses and for the government.
The European Commission considered a variety of factors and models of split payment mechanism to determine impacts on businesses. The impact of split payments on different types of businesses varies depending on a number of factors, including the type of transaction, where the liability lies for the payment, whether the transaction is cross-border, and compliance costs that businesses will bear to implement split payment best practices.
Take Action
Split payments are emerging as a new VAT collection mechanism in the European Union. Businesses need to continue to stay alert and adaptive in the ever-changing landscape of VAT compliance. Contact us to know how we can help your business to stay on top of VAT Compliance landscape.
The main indirect tax of Mexico is the Value Added Tax (locally known as IVA), which generally applies to all imports, supplies of goods, and the provision of services by a taxable person unless specifically exempted by a particular law. The tax is imposed by the federal government of Mexico and ordinarily applies on each level of the commercialisation chain. This tax has been applied in Mexico since 1980.
Click here to read “Why the New Process for Cancelling E-Invoices in Mexico Matters”
Mexico applies a single standard rate of 16% across the country. However, there is also a 0% rate applicable to exports and the local supply of certain goods and services. Sales of ice, fresh water, machinery and raw materials for manufacturers, books, newspapers, magazines by their editors, medicines, as well as the supply of services to eligible manufacturers, are subject to the 0% rate.
It is worth mentioning that until December 2013, Mexico applied a reduced rate of 11% in Mexican Border states of Baja California Norte, Baja California Sur, Quintana Roo, the municipalities of Caborca and Cananea, and in the bordering regions of the Colorado River in the state of Sonora. This was an effort largely to attract businesses to these areas and because the sales tax in the U.S. border states was half of the IVA in Mexico. These regions were commonly referred as the “maquiladora zones.”
That 11% reduced rate was revoked starting January 1, 2014, and substituted with a broader regime of incentives aimed at the manufacturing companies located in that region.
As mentioned before, the Mexican IVA applies to all goods and services unless specifically exempted by the law. There is a wide variety of goods and services exempt from the tax, including:
The Mexican IVA doesn’t differ much from IVA in other countries in that it allows the taxpayer to deduct the IVA that has been paid to the taxpayer’s suppliers or IVA that the taxpayer has paid himself at the time of importing goods that were subject to the tax. In addition to the IVA paid on imports and local purchases, the taxpayer also has the right to credit the IVA withheld by clients that are required to apply the reverse charge system that we are going to examine later.
In those instances where the taxpayer cannot use all the credit that has been accumulated on its purchases, the remaining amount can be carried over to later periods or eventually even to request a reimbursement from the government.
One of the unique characteristics of the Mexican IVA is that when determining the taxable event, the law requires the taxpayer to use the cash accounting method rather than the accrual accounting method. What this basically means is that IVA on a sale is considered due when the seller is effectively paid, rather than when the invoice has been issued, the service provided or the good has been supplied. If the seller does not get paid, no tax liability exists either.
In general, the Mexican IVA should be paid on a monthly basis, no later than the 17th day of the month after the taxable event occurred.
<!–
Learn how other mandates in Latin America affect your business and how you can overcome challenges by downloading the Definitive Guide to Latin American Compliance.
–>