Determining Location of Risk: Marine Insurance

James Brown
June 22, 2022

Identifying the location of risk for Insurance Premium Tax (IPT) purposes is the first step to ensuring IPT compliance in a given territory. This area perhaps isn’t as straightforward as it first seems for marine insurance.

As with the location of risk rules for all classes of insurance in Europe, the starting point for marine insurance is the Solvency II Directive (2009/138/EC), in particular Article 13(13). Article 13(13)(b) refers to ‘vehicles of any type’, which is generally understood to include not just motor vehicles but also ships, yachts and aircraft within its scope. Based on this, the location of risk for marine insurance is identified by the ‘Member State of registration’. As this phrase is not defined in the Directive, there has been some confusion about what ‘registration’ refers to in this context. This is illustrated nicely by a case heard in the European Court of Justice (ECJ) in April last year.

North of England P&I Association v German Federal Central Tax Office (C-786/19)

This case involved insurance contracts with companies established in Germany and entered into the register of companies held by the District Court in Hamburg. The owners entered the vessels into the shipping register maintained by the same court in Germany. The case arose because the vessels were temporarily authorised to fly the national flags of Malta and Liberia. The German tax authority argued that German IPT was due on these contracts because the vessels remained on the German shipping register throughout the flagging out period.

In contrast, the insurer contested that the risk location should be determined by the Member State that certified that the ship is fit for use and whose flag the ship flies. Malta treats marine insurance as exempt from its Stamp Duty regime, so if the insurer was successful with its argument, then no taxes on its insurance premiums would be due in the European Union.

The ECJ held that the location of risk was in Germany despite the temporary flagging out of the vessels. This decision was because the vessels remained on the Hamburg District Court’s register, which had the primary function of proving ownership. As the owner has the primary interest in insuring the vessel to protect their financial interest in it, the register evidencing ownership was key.

What next for the marine insurance location of risk rules?

It is worth highlighting that it is unclear how much weight should be placed on this case. This is for a couple of reasons. Firstly, the Ordinance for the implementation of the relevant German legislation refers specifically to ‘shipping registers kept by the local courts’ as being determinative, which differs from the position of other territories. Additionally, a significant issue not addressed by the case is what happens when a Member State doesn’t have a shipping register.

We at Sovos haven’t seen a major shift in the approach taken by insurers since the judgment, meaning in many instances that the ship’s flag is continuing to be seen as pertinent by the market. It will be interesting how the ECJ deals with similar future cases.

We’re happy to help any insurers writing business in Europe that have questions about the location of risk rules, whether concerning marine insurance or any other insurance to ensure taxes are correctly declared.

Take Action

Contact Sovos’ team of experts for help complying with marine location of risk rules or download our Location of Risk Rules for IPT eBook for more information.

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

EMEA iOSS VAT & Fiscal Reporting
February 7, 2023
Understand the latest EU tax laws and changes

It can be difficult to know where you stand regarding EU VAT changes and European tax laws. There have been sweeping changes implemented in recent years. This blog breaks down the major updates, including the EU VAT reform, to help ensure your business is on the right path. Additionally, you can speak with our team […]

E-Invoicing Compliance Mexico
February 1, 2023
Mexico’s Resolution Miscellanea Fiscal 2023 and CFDI matters

What is CDFI? CFDI, which stands for Comprobante Fiscal Digital por Internet, is the electronic billing schema defined by the Mexican federal tax code. It has been mandatory for companies that do business in Mexico since 2011. CFDI aims to increase visibility into companies’ tax liabilities so the government can ensure it is receiving accurate […]

EMEA VAT & Fiscal Reporting
January 25, 2023
Understanding VAT Between European Countries

All European countries charge VAT on goods and services. VAT is a consumption tax added during each production stage of goods or services. Although VAT is near-universal according to the EU VAT Directive, VAT rates within the EU do differ. This is because the EU VAT Directive allows Member States to choose whether to implement […]

EMEA iOSS OSS VAT & Fiscal Reporting
January 18, 2023
What Non-EU countries need to know about IOSS & OSS

The EU VAT E-Commerce package has been in place since 1 July 2021. This applies to intra-EU B2C supplies of goods and imports of low value goods. Three schemes make up the package. These are based on the value of goods and the location of the sale of goods. All OSS schemes are currently optional. […]

EMEA VAT & Fiscal Reporting
January 10, 2023
An Introduction to EU VAT

Nearly every major economy has a form of VAT. That’s 165 countries, each with its own compliance and reporting rules. The main exception is the United States. VAT is by far the most significant indirect tax for nearly all the world’s countries. Globally VAT contributes more than 30% of all government revenue. Levying VAT is […]