With a new month comes yet another report due in the Insurance Premium Tax (IPT) sphere. Insurance companies covering risks in Greece must report their insurance policies triggered in 2021 in the form of the Greek annual report. This is due by 31 March 2022.

Let us cast our minds back, in late 2019 this report came to fruition after previously being ratified in legislation released in 2016. At the time, due to the delay in implementation, the report was backdated, and insurers faced the challenge of submitting transactional level details for the period 2016-2018 in a short space of time.

There was however a precedent for such a dramatic change. And those who experienced the change with the Spanish Consorcio de Compensacion de Seguros submission would have experienced a sense of déjà vu with this development. Similarly, some insurers may be experiencing all too familiar issues now with the change in Portuguese Stamp Duty submission.

The market initially struggled with the Greek annual report due to the level of details required. In particular, the VAT/tax registration number was often not being collected from the Insured. Furthermore, with legacy systems still in use some of the other details in the report weren’t readily available. What this meant in a lot of cases for the Insurer was the painstaking and often time consuming process of going back to the policyholder to collect such information.

Greek annual IPT report

What about the report itself? The Greek annual report is a transactional level declaration on excel, which requires the following details to be populated:

• Policy number
• Invoice number
• Invoice date
• Insured
• VAT/tax registration number
• Class of business
• Premium
• IPT rate
• IPT

The standard IPT rate in Greece is currently 15% with the 20% rate reserved for risks covering fire. Where there is a multi-risk policy covering both rates, the premiums must be apportioned on a per rate basis and therefore split out into two different lines.

Thankfully exempt premiums are not required on the report which somewhat eases the burden.

But what about cases where it was simply not possible to collect this information? This was an issue we’ve seen for some of our IPT customers where incomplete reports were submitted. So far, we haven’t experienced pushback from the tax authority for the omission of certain details, but we cannot guarantee this will continue to be the case.

Easing the pain of IPT reporting in Greece

Preparation is key. And education is key. This annual report is here to stay so the Insurer must be prepared well in advance that such details will be required and they should aim to collect this information on an ongoing basis rather than at the last moment. In some cases, an update in software will be required as the current systems may not have the capability to capture the required data. Furthermore, all relevant parties in the data supply chain should be educated on the importance of collecting the details. We believe that more countries will implement transactional reports in the coming years, so it would be prudent to set up certain controls now, to help prepare and ease the burden later.

As the world of IPT compliance is so fragmented across territories, keeping abreast of changes in reporting requirements can be challenging. Our team of experts can guide you through the details and ensure you are on the right compliance path.

Many businesses will now be involved in “cross border” transactions meaning that a business in one territory will sell and, often, deliver goods to a customer located within another territory. The existence of two or more tax territories in the transaction, and the possibility that there may be a customer in the EU and a supplier in a third country such as the UK, will inevitably lead to VAT challenges with varying degrees of complexity.

Different challenges will be faced by suppliers involved in B2B transactions compared to B2C transactions – although there will also be some common issues. This article will focus on B2B transactions.

Let’s consider a UK supplier with a contract to supply goods manufactured in the UK to customers within the EU.

Importing goods into the EU

The first point to recognise is that to deliver the goods to the EU customer the goods must pass through an EU customs border.  And here is the first point for supply chain management.

Who will import the goods into the EU and what are the considerations?

The customer’s starting point is likely to be that they will want the supplier to import the goods and a salesperson, eager to please their customer, is likely to agree.  Is this a problem for the supplier?  OH YES!

Customs considerations

A salesperson returns triumphant with an order with Incoterms of DDP (Deliver Duty Paid) – but is this a cause for celebration?

Deliver Duty Paid means that the supplier must deliver the goods to the territory of the customer from which, for VAT purposes, a local sale will be made.  This will require the UK supplier to import the goods into the EU and this creates the first issue.

Under the Union Customs Code (UCC) the person presenting the goods to the customs authority (the declarant) must be established within the EU.  An EU established business importing goods can be both the importer and the declarant.  A business established outside the EU can be the importer but not the declarant.  In this case the non-EU importer must appoint an EU established business to act as its “indirect customs agent”.  This agent is jointly and severally liable for the import duties that are due and there are not too many businesses which provide such a service because of the risk.  So the seller could find itself unable to satisfy a contractual obligation because it cannot find someone to act as its indirect customs agent in time to make the required delivery – or at all.

Understanding local VAT issues

If a supplier successfully manages to overcome this hurdle then there is the issue of dealing with local VAT on the sale – must the supplier register for VAT and apply it to the sales invoice – or does the reverse charge apply?   And will the customer pay the non-refundable duty costs incurred by the supplier at the border?

The takeaway here is that a contract concluded under DDP terms may be much easier for the sales team to achieve but it can create serious issues down the line.  UK suppliers should seek to agree any Incoterm other than DDP wherever possible.

EU warehouse facilities

To reduce the possibility of delays some UK suppliers have set up warehouse facilities within the EU from which deliveries can be made.  One issue which can affect both VAT and direct taxes is whether the warehouse creates a permanent or fixed establishment.  For the purposes of this article we assume no – although creating a permanent establishment could avoid the need to appoint an indirect customs agent.

How to deal with import VAT

Once the UK supplier has successfully brought the goods into an EU warehouse it will make deliveries to customers. One big consideration here is how the import VAT is dealt with. Several Member States offer the possibility to postpone import VAT to the VAT return via a reverse charge.  In such circumstances import VAT deduction is guaranteed so long as the formalities are followed and the business is able to fully recover VAT.  Where goods are imported into a Member State where import VAT must be first paid and then deducted consideration as to how this will happen is important.  Where there is a VAT registration in place, the VAT can normally be recovered via the VAT return.  However, where the Member State of import has a reverse charge mechanism for domestic sales, a non-EU supplier will need to make 13^th Directive claims to recover import VAT.  One Member State where this will arise is Spain which has reciprocity rules in place so not all businesses are able to make 13^th Directive claims.

Therefore if a supplier is considering utilizing an EU warehouse or making sales on a DDP basis, they should first map out all of the likely flows and then determine the VAT treatment to understand if any negative VAT issues will arise.  The planning opportunities and potential pitfalls that arise from such a warehouse will be considered in a later article.

IPT in Ireland reflects the dynamic shifts in the global tax landscape. With an increasing number of tax jurisdictions adopting electronic filings, Ireland has joined this progressive movement. The Irish tax authority has announced changes to how Stamp Duty, Life Levy, Government Levy and the Compensation Fund are declared and paid from the Quarter 1 2022 submission period (i.e. 25 April 2022).

What is changing for Ireland’s Insurance Premium Tax  (IPT) requirements?

From Q1 2022, businesses will be required to file all returns via the Irish online portal and pay taxes due via direct debit.

The Irish Revenue issued notification of the filing requirement changes in December 2021. The Irish Revenue has an online service with a digital pay and file facility for Stamp Duty on insurance levies which will be available via Revenue Online Services (ROS).

What happens next?

Registered insurers will have an individual ROS account. By the end of February 2022, insurers will be issued new ID numbers (TRN numbers), and the 4-digit file reference number will be discontinued. Insurers will need a TRN number to register for a ROS account to file declarations online via ROS. Payments made online are required to be via direct debit instruction.

Although many authorities still rely on paper returns, online filing and payment systems are becoming more common place.  In Europe alone, Spain, Finland, Portugal, Hungary, Italy and the UK are just a few who have adopted digital tax approaches.

More tax authorities are now adapting to online submissions to fill the gap for further transparency and accuracy in collecting taxes, causing increased challenges for insurers when ensuring premium tax compliance.

This change in Ireland is just another example in the list of tax authorities requesting additional information on a more frequent basis to increase efficiency, minimise tax gaps and boost revenue. We don’t see this trend disappearing and recommend that insurers stay abreast of the latest regulations to be prepared for more countries who will undoubtedly follow this approach. Insurers need to be aware of compliance responsibilities by keeping pace with this heightened degree of complexity, scrutiny and change. This will result in system and process changes and any digitisation will inevitably impact IT systems and budgets.

Unlike many other country initiatives that we have seen in the e-invoicing space recently, Australia does not seem to have any immediate plans to introduce continuous transaction controls (CTC) or government-portal involvement in their B2B invoicing.

Judging from the recent public consultation, current efforts are focused on ways to accelerate business adoption of electronic invoicing. This consultation builds on the government’s previous outreach undertaken in November 2020 on “Options for the mandatory adoption of e-invoicing by businesses”, which led to a serious government effort to enhance the value of e-invoicing for businesses and increase business awareness and adoption.

In addition to a decision to make it mandatory for all commonwealth government agencies to receive PEPPOL e-invoices from 1 July 2022, the Australian government seeks to also boost e-invoicing in the B2B space, but without the traditional mandate for businesses to invoice electronically. Instead, the proposal is to implement the Business e-Invoicing Right (BER).

What Is Business E-invoicing Right (BER)?

Under the government’s proposal, businesses would have the right to request that their trading parties send an e-invoice over the PEPPOL network instead of paper invoices.

To make and receive these requests, businesses need to set up their systems to receive PEPPOL e-invoices. Once a business has this capability, it would be able to exercise its ‘right’ and request other companies to send them PEPPOL e-invoices.

According to the current proposal, BER would be delivered in three phases, with the first phase to include large businesses, and the later stages to include small and medium-sized businesses. The possible rollout of BER would be as follows:

• From 1 July 2023: All businesses would have the right to request PEPPOL e-invoices from large businesses. Large businesses would have a legal obligation to provide PEPPOL e-invoice on receipt of a valid request.
• From 1 July 2024: All businesses would have the right to request PEPPOL e-invoices from medium-sized and large businesses. Medium-sized and large businesses would have a legal obligation to provide PEPPOL e-invoices on receipt of a valid request.
• From 1 July 2025: All businesses would have the right to request PEPPOL e-invoices. All covered businesses would have the legal obligation to provide PEPPOL e-invoices on receipt of a valid request.

Further measures to support e-invoicing adoption

The objective of the Australian BER initiative to boost the adoption of B2B e-invoicing is complemented by a proposal for several other initiatives supporting businesses in this direction. One measure would be the enabling of PEPPOL-compatible EDI networks. As EDI networks represent a barrier to broader adoption of PEPPOL e-invoicing, particularly for small businesses that interact with large businesses that use multiple EDI systems, the proposal to enable PEPPOL-compatible EDI networks could ultimately reduce costs for businesses currently interacting with multiple EDI networks. Furthermore, the government is contemplating expanding e-invoicing into Procure-to-Pay. Businesses may realise more value from adopting e-invoicing if the focus grows to embrace an efficient and standardised P2P process that includes e-invoicing.

Finally, integrating e-invoicing with payments is another proposed means to boost e-invoicing. This would allow businesses to efficiently receive invoices from suppliers directly into their accounting software and then pay those invoices through their payment systems.

How efficient the proposed measures will be in accelerating adoption of e-invoicing, and whether the Australian government will feel it was the right decision not to introduce a proper e-invoicing mandate, as is becoming more and more common globally, remains to be seen.

On 24 February 2022, the Indian Central Board of Indirect Taxes and Customs (CBIC) issued a notification (Notification No. 01/2022 – Central Tax) that lowered the threshold for mandatory e-invoicing.

In India, e-invoicing is mandatory for taxpayers when exceeding a specific threshold (businesses operating in certain sectors are exempted). The current threshold for mandatory e-invoicing is 50 Cr. Rupees (approximately 6.6 million USD). From 1 April 2022, taxpayers with an annual threshold of 20 Cr. Rupees (approximately 2.65 million USD) or above must comply with the e-invoicing rules.

Evolution of e-invoicing in India

E-invoicing has been mandatory in India since October 2020. The IRP must approve and validate e-invoices before being sent to the buyer. Therefore, the Indian e-invoicing system is categorised as a clearance e-invoicing system, a type of continuous transaction controls (CTC).

From the beginning, the Indian tax authority clearly expressed their intention to gradually expand the scope of e-invoicing. In line with its message, the threshold limit has been lowered twice; in January 2021 (from 500 CR. To 100 Cr.) and April 2021 (from 100 CR. To 50 Cr.). Once again, the threshold limit is reduced to require more taxpayers to transmit their transactional data to the tax authority’s platform.

One important thing to be noted in this context is that voluntary adoption of e-invoicing is still not possible. Taxpayers cannot opt in to use the e-invoicing system and transmit their invoices to the IRP voluntarily. Given the recent developments, this might change in the future.

E-invoicing and E-waybill relationship

Suppliers in the mandatory scope of e-invoicing must generate e-waybills relating to B2B, B2G and export transactions through the e-invoicing platform because their access to the e-waybill platform is blocked for generating e-waybills relating to these transactions. E-waybills relating to transactions outside of the scope of e-invoicing can still be generated through the e-waybill platform.

Therefore, it would be advisable for taxpayers who are getting ready to implement e-invoicing to consider this aspect.

Update: 7 December 2023 by Carolina Silva

Spain Establishes Billing Software Requirements

The long-awaited Royal Decree, establishing invoicing and billing software requirements to secure Spanish antifraud regulations, has been officially published by the Spanish Ministry of Finance.

The taxpayers and SIF developers, defined further below in this article, must be aware of several new official deadlines set forth by the Spanish tax authority in the Royal Decree:

• From 1 July 2025: Only ordinary SIF or Verifactu-approved billing systems may be used to prepare and submit invoices for the taxpayers under scope
• Billing software developers and sellers must offer their product fully adapted within a maximum period of nine months from the approval of the Ministerial Order that specifies all the technical details, which is still to be approved

Therefore, companies that fall within scope must ensure their computer systems are adapted to this regulation as of 1 July 2025.

Looking for more information on tax compliance in Spain? This page can help.

Update: 10 February 2023 by Carolina Silva

Understanding Spain’s Verifactu system

The Spanish government is pursuing various routes for digitizing tax controls, including introducing software requirements on the billing system.

In February 2022, Spain published a Draft Royal Decree establishing invoicing and billing software requirements to secure Spanish antifraud regulations.

The Draft Decree ensures billing software meet the legal requirements of integrity, conservation, accessibility, legibility, traceability and inalterability of billing records. It sets standards for systems known as SIF (Sistemas Informaticos de Facturación).

To comply with SIF standards, taxpayers may use a Verifactu system – a verifiable invoice issuance system which is further detailed later in this article.

Since publishing the Draft Decree and concluding its public consultation, the Spanish tax authority has released draft technical specifications for the Verifactu system and a list of modifications to be introduced to the Draft Decree. One is the estimated date of entry into force of the billing software requirements.

What is a Verifactu billing system?

Among the many SIF requirements established in the Draft Decree is the capability to generate a billing record in XML format for each sale of goods or provision of services. This needs to be sent to the tax authority simultaneously or immediately before the issuance of the invoice.

The Draft Decree establishes two alternative systems taxpayers can adopt to comply with the technical standards of the SIF: the ordinary SIF and the Verifactu system.

A Verifactu system is a verifiable invoice issuance system, and its adoption is voluntary under the Draft Decree. Taxpayers who use computer billing systems to comply with invoicing obligations may choose to continuously send all the billing records generated by their systems to the tax authority.

A Verifactu billing system complies with all the technical obligations imposed by the Draft Decree., Taxpayers use the system to effectively send all billing records electronically in a continuous, automatic, consecutive, instantaneous, and reliable manner.

Benefits of the Verifactu billing system

A taxpayer opts for a “verifiable invoice issuance system” by systematically initiating the transmission of billing records to the tax authority. If the systems are Verifactu, invoices must include a phrase stating so.

There are several benefits for taxpayers who decide to opt for a Verifactu system:

• As companies send the billing records to the tax authority, the formal acceptance response will automatically incorporate the information from such records into the taxpayer’s book of issued invoices.

Current deadlines

Taxpayers and SIF developers must be aware of several deadlines set forth by the Spanish tax authority. These are still part of the draft development of the SIF and official deadlines are outstanding:

• From 1 July 2024: Only ordinary SIF or Verifactu-approved billing systems may be used to prepare and submit invoices. The Draft Decree deadline was 1 January 2024, but the Spanish authority postponed it following a public consultation.
• Billing software developers and sellers must offer their product fully adapted within a maximum period of nine months from the regulation’s entry into force.
• Also within nine months, the Spanish tax authority must ensure that the service for receiving billing records for the Verifactu systems becomes available.

What’s next?

Although still in draft form, it’s expected there will be official publication of the Draft Royal Decree – along with a Ministerial Order detailing the technical and functional specifications of the billing systems. Official publication of the Verifactu technical specifications is to come.

The Draft Decree explicitly states that its implementation is compatible with an electronic invoicing mandate which is also underway in Spain. Therefore, taxpayers must ready themselves to comply.

For further information on the incoming changes to tax in Spain, speak with a member of our expert team.

Update: 24 February 2022 by Victor Duarte

The Spanish Ministry of Finance has published a draft resolution that will – once adopted – establish the requirements for software and systems that support the billing processes of businesses and professionals. This law will have a significant impact on the current invoice issuance processes. It will require implementing new invoice content requirements, including a QR code, and the generation of billing records by January 2024.

The regulation is also intended to adapt the Spanish business sector, especially SMEs, micro-enterprises, and the self-employed, to the demands of digitization. For this, it is considered necessary to standardise and modernise the computer programs that support the accounting, billing, and management of businesses and entrepreneurs.

Scope of the regulation

The regulation establishes the requirements that any system must meet to guarantee the integrity, conservation, accessibility, legibility, traceability and inalterability of the billing records without interpolations, omissions or alterations.

The new rules established in the regulation will apply to:

• Taxpayers subject to corporate tax (IS), except for exempt or partially exempt entities.
• Taxpayers subject to income tax for physical persons (IRPF) who obtain income from economic activities.
• Taxpayers subject to income tax for non-residents (IRNR) with a permanent establishment in Spain.
• Entities under the income allocation system carrying out economic activities.

Companies that do not fall within the above categories do not need to comply, but those who do must ensure their computer systems are adapted to this regulation as of 1 January 2024.

New invoice content requirements: ID and QR codes

Invoices generated by the computer systems or electronic systems and programs that support the billing processes of businesses and professionals must include an alphanumeric identification code and a QR code, generated per the technical and functional specifications established by the Ministry of Finance.

Billing system requirements

The computer systems that support billing processes must have the capability to:

• Generate a billing record for each delivery of goods or provision of services, simultaneously or immediately before the issuance of the invoice.
• The computer system must be able to send all the billing records generated to the State Tax Administration Agency (AEAT) in a continuous, secure, correct, complete, automatic, consecutive, instantaneous, and reliable manner.
• The system must be provided with traceability, verifying the sequence of data creation. It will create an event log that collects all the system operations and incidents during its use.
• The records created may not be altered by the user or any internal or external means.
• The systems must add a fingerprint or ‘hash’ to the billing records, according to the specifications and the electronic signature.

To achieve these ends, all computer systems must certify that they ensure the commitment to comply with all the requirements established in this regulation through a “responsible statement”. The Ministry of Finance will establish the minimum content of this statement later in a new resolution.

Billing record content and its optional transmission

The billing records must comply with several content requirements laid down by the regulation.

The taxpayers using computer systems to comply with their invoicing obligations may voluntarily send all its billing records generated by the computer systems to the AEAT automatically by electronic means. The response of a formal acceptance message from the AEAT will automatically mean that these records have been incorporated into the taxpayer’s sales and income ledgers.

Tax administration audits

The AEAT may appear in person where the computer system is located or used and may require full and immediate access to the data record, obtaining, where appropriate, the username, password and any other security key that is necessary for full access.

The AEAT may request a copy of the billing records, which companies may provide in electronic format through physical support or by electronic means.

Application to the B2B e-invoicing mandate

The regulation doesn’t include any specific rule for the B2B e-invoice mandate draft decree currently being discussed in Congress and waiting for approval. However, if the mandate is approved, all the B2B e-invoices issued under this draft decree will have to comply with all the new rules established in this regulation.

Next steps

While this new regulation does not seem to take Spain further down the continuous transaction control (CTC) route, the proposal has clear similarities with Portugal’s invoice requirements.

The draft resolution establishing these is currently open for public consultation until 11 March 2022. Once this resolution is approved, the Ministry of Finance will publish the technical and functional specifications needed to comply with the new requirements and the structure, content, detail, format, design and characteristics of the information that companies must include in the billing records.

The Ministry of Finance will also publish the specifications of the signature policy and the requirements that the fingerprint or ‘hash’ must meet. Once these details are published, it will be clearer whether Spain is going down the Portuguese route or carving out its own path.

Ebook

Compliance Mandates Around the World Have Elevated the Importance of Tax

Sorting out indirect tax issues was not traditionally at the top of any IT organisation’s to-do list. Today that’s changed and new VAT compliance mandates being introduced at an increasing rate around the world have elevated its status.

It’s more important than ever that IT decision makers and in-house tax and finance professionals engage and have meaningful, strategic discussions about how – and also why – to accelerate their digital transformation. This will enable them to not only respond but also to prepare for invasive new tax mandates.

Each time a product or service is sold in a new country or under the watchful eye of evolving national tax regimes, enterprises must respond. They must ensure their VAT recognition and reporting processes are aligned to new and evolving mandates for continuous controls on e-invoicing and other critical sales and purchase processes and documents.

Get the e-book

A cascade of tax compliance mandates

Multinational companies continue to leverage new technologies to optimise borderless supply chains. The spectacular growth of e-commerce and a new generation of technologies is opening global markets for even the smallest of micro-enterprises. Global businesses and supply chains increasingly intersect new national mandates. Many of these mandates impose sophisticated real-time controls on business transactions and make compliance more complex than it’s ever been before. And the cost of non-compliance can be high. Non-compliance can affect an organisation in many ways – financial, operational, employee productivity, customer experience, legal, and even brand perception. IT, tax and finance teams need to communicate and collaborate effectively to fully understand their compliance obligations in each of the markets where they operate. If they can’t companies will likely find their digital transformations inhibited by disparate local point solutions that can be so entrenched, they can become impossible to replace. With better collaboration between functions and alignment on tax, your entire organisation can achieve real operational efficiencies. Download our e-book and read about

• The opportunities that exist when tax and IT work together
• How joined up thinking can reduce risk and uncover opportunities
• A shared vision and modern tax solution
• How better conversations drive a better compliance process

As  tax compliances becomes increasingly interconnected with core business processes, organisations must make all aspects of tax reporting central to, and integrated with, core business activities. A modern tax compliance solution must be engineered from the ground up to handle modern regulatory mandates. This especially applies to global manufacturers and retailers that do business in numerous countries around the world and must comply with mandates established by hundreds of tax authorities. Read more and download the e-book

Annual reporting requirements vary from country to country, making it complex for cross-border insurers to collect the data required to ensure compliance.

Italy has many unique reporting standards and is known for its bureaucracy across the international business community. Italy’s annual reporting is different due to the level of detail required. The additional reporting in Italy requires an in-depth list of policies and details including inception and expiry dates, cash received dates, policyholders’ names, addresses, fiscal codes and premium values. This makes the annual reporting a significant undertaking. Refer to this blog about IPT in Italy for an overview.

Contracts and Premiums Report – due by 16 March each year in respect of previous calendar year

The Italian legislation and regulations require insurance companies writing business in Italy to submit annual reports with the purpose of collecting information that facilitates the tax authorities’ control of activities on taxpayers.

These reports should list all the insurance contracts in place in the relevant year with a policyholder (individual or entity) subject to Italian taxes. Policies covering Liability, Assistance and any risks written as ancillary to an underlying Liability or Assistance policy don’t need to be included in the report.

If there were no contracts in place in the previous calendar year, there is no requirement to submit a Nil report.

Claims Report – due by 30 April each year in respect of previous calendar year

Claim payments made during the previous year in favour of beneficiaries (individuals or entities) who possess an Italian fiscal code must be reported to the Italian tax authorities by the end of April.

Details required in the report include:

• Claim reference number
• Date of payment
• Amount paid
• Beneficiary’s fiscal code
• Details of any third parties involved in handling the compensation

If there are no claims to be reported for the previous year, Nil reports are not required.

Motor Report – part to the annual IPT report due by 31 May each year in respect of previous calendar year 

As an integral part of the annual Insurance Premium Tax (IPT) return due by the end of May, insurance companies writing compulsory motor third-party liability must report the amount of IPT paid in the previous year to each of the Italian provinces. Details required include province policy number, fiscal code, vehicle plate number, premium, IPT rate and IPT.

Why planning ahead of the reporting season is vital

The additional reporting in Italy requires that certain elements are present before submission. To submit the Contracts and Premiums report an insurance company needs:

• Active PEC address – Italian certified email address
• Access to the SID Channel – System of transmission of data

• Legal representative – SID Channel registration is linked to the company legal representative. If the legal representative ceases to act as such, their details need to be revoked, and a new application processed. This is a lengthy process that takes a few weeks therefore planning ahead of the deadlines is of great importance
• Fiscal codes – Required for all reports. Fiscal codes comprise of 16 digits for individuals and 11 digits for legal entities. Invalid fiscal codes are one of the main reasons reports are rejected. There is a code validator available on the Revenue Office website to check if a fiscal code exists and if it is valid. The validator can be accessed here.

Many insurance companies work with third parties, and the policy information they collate might not always include all required details. Incomplete and incorrect data prevent the successful submission of the annual reports and can lead to costly fines and reputational damage.

Navigating annual reporting alongside regular monthly and quarterly reporting can feel overwhelming. The more that can be prepared in advance, the smoother the reporting process. Understanding Italy’s specific annual reporting requirements will ensure insurers remain compliant and avoid any unnecessary delays or corrections.

In 2020, the European Commission (EC) adopted a four-year plan to develop a fairer and simpler taxation framework. The Action Plan aspires to tighten up the tax system, ensure that digital platforms are made to follow transparency rules and utilise data better, reducing tax fraud and evasion.

In 2021, the Commission implemented e-commerce changes – another step in the modernisation process. Beginning in July of 2021, the Mini One Stop Shop (MOSS) system was expanded to the One Stop Shop (OSS) and Import One Stop Shop (IOSS).

The implementation of OSS expanded the use of the union and non-union schemes. This allows European and non-European business-to-consumer sellers of digital services and goods to simplify their reporting practices. Meanwhile, IOSS allows businesses to register and import goods into the EU with a value not exceeding €150.

In 2022, there are plans to release legislation under the “VAT in the digital age” Action Plan. Much like its predecessors in 2020 and 2021, the core purpose of this plan is to tackle the issue of fraud and improve the way businesses engage with the VAT system. The Commission has announced three points it seeks to address in its legislation:

• How VAT treats the platform economy
• E-invoicing and VAT reporting obligations
• Single EU VAT registration

Specifically, one point of interest is the single EU VAT registration point, which aims to facilitate compliance among Member States. With this, the European Commission is requesting feedback on how businesses think the I/OSS implementation has gone and on other potential legislative options for the future, including:

• Extension of OSS to:
  • Cover all B2C supplies of goods and services by non-established suppliers
  • Enable intra-Community supplies and acquisitions of goods, thereby avoiding VAT registration when transferring own goods cross-border
  • Include B2B supplies of goods and services while leaving in place the current VAT refund mechanism
  • Include B2B supplies of goods and services while also introducing a deduction mechanism for OSS
• Reverse charge made available for all B2B supplies carried out by non-established suppliers
• Removing the €150 threshold for IOSS so that it applies to distance sales of goods of any value
• Making IOSS mandatory for:
  • All distance sales of imported goods
  • All distance sales of imported goods above an EU turnover threshold (e.g. €10,000)
  • Marketplaces only

The European Commission began a period of public consultation on 21 January regarding adapting VAT rules in a digital economic landscape. They are seeking feedback on how the EC should adapt VAT tax processes and how they can incorporate technology to solve principal issues in tax, such as fraud and the complexity of its systems. The Commission is accepting feedback in this public consultation period until 15 April 2022 – submissions can be made here.

Sovos will continue to monitor the development of this legislation throughout the year as more information about its structure and impact is released, as these changes are sure to be impactful upon the European VAT landscape.

Take Action

Insurance is a dynamic sector in constant flux to accommodate with insured’s needs. An increase in holidays abroad following WWII saw the need for Assistance insurance for any unforeseen events that occurred away from the insured’s home country. Council Directive 84/641/EEC regulated Assistance insurance for the first time, and a new class of insurance was created. This was in addition to the 17 previously regulated classes outlined in Directive 73/239/EEC of non-life insurance and was called Assistance (Class insurance 18).

Travel insurance evolution

Initially, the insured was covered by a policy that provided aid for any event travelling abroad (loss of passport, assistance with any problem in the car etc). The insurer created a range of support with call centres, supplier networks and additional services to help solve difficulties when travelling abroad.

Subsequently, following the insured’s requirements, insurance companies and travel agents created travel insurance that includes a wide range of services. These consist of several protections within different classes of business. This is where the tax complexity of travel insurance policies begins. It’s an amalgamation of coverages, and the application of the correct fiscal treatment needs to be analysed in each territory.

Correct tax treatment in travel insurance

When weighing the correct application of tax for travel insurance, businesses must consider the following: location of risk (LoR), class of businesses and the correct tax approach.

Location of risk: Directive 2009/138/EC Article 13 must be followed in the following circumstances:

• Business travel: The LoR of the employer’s policy to cover their employees will be located where the business is located.
• Individuals: The LoR will be the territory in which the policyholder is habitually resident unless the policy covers travel or holiday risks for four months or less. In this case, the LoR is the Member State where the policyholder took out the policy.

Class of business affected: As mentioned previously, one of the complexities of travel insurance is determining the classes of business affected. It’s common to see, in these policy types, multiple coverages such as medical assistance cover, loss or damage to baggage, travel delays or cancellations, loss of documents or money, personal accident, repatriation etc. Insurers must adequately identify these coverage details to ensure the compliant tax treatment is used.

Taxability: This step is crucial. The correct treatment of the policies could vary the liabilities to be paid, the different taxes and/or levies and parafiscal charges to be included in the tax calculation. This means that the tax treatment can change by country. It’s necessary to identify the tax liability or exemption based on the class of business and the geographical location.

Insurers must understand the importance of the vital details associated with travel insurance. Determining LoR, class of business affected and taxability ensures the correct amount is paid and submitted to the proper jurisdictions.

South Korea has an up-and-running e-invoicing system that combines mandatory e-invoicing with a continuous transaction controls (CTC) reporting obligation. This mature and well-established system, launched over a decade ago, is seeing its first significant changes in years.

Presidential Decree No. 31445 (Decree) has recently amended certain provisions of the Enforcement Decree of the Value-Added Tax Act. Among other changes, the scope of e-invoicing has been expanded and a new timeline and threshold limits introduced. This means that more taxpayers in South Korea must comply with e-invoicing rules in accordance with the timelines.

What is the new timeline and threshold limits for e-invoicing?

In South Korea, e-invoicing has been mandatory for all corporate businesses since 2011. From 2012, individual businesses (entrepreneurs) have also been required to comply with e-invoicing obligations if they meet the threshold limits which have been updated a couple of times over the years. Currently, an individual business whose aggregate supply value (including transactions that are tax exempt) for the immediately preceding tax year is KRW 300,000,000 or more, is required to comply with the country’s e-invoicing rules.

After the recent amendments, the current threshold is now lowered to KRW 200,000,000 and the new threshold limit will be applicable from 1 July 2022. The tax authority has already communicated further adjustments, announcing that from 1 July 2023, the threshold will be reduced further to the limit of KRW 100,000,000. The Korean tax authority aims to enhance the transparency of tax sources by requiring more businesses to comply with the e-invoicing rules.

What´s next for e-invoicing requirements in South Korea?

The expansion of the scope of e-invoicing obligations does not come as a surprise. Like in many other CTC jurisdictions, transactional data collected from a larger number of taxpayers provides greater insight to the tax authority about VAT, market trends and more.

Due to its success and maturity, e-invoicing in South Korea continues to inspire other countries in the Asia Pacific region. The Philippines tax authority is in the process of launching an e-invoicing pilot for the country’s 100 largest taxpayers from 1 July 2022. When designing their e-invoicing system, the Philippines tax authority had several meetings with its South Korean counterparts to benefit from Korean expertise and experience. Therefore, the Philippines is introducing a relatively similar CTC system to the Korean one.

Ebook

Managed Services for VAT Compliance

Many multinational companies find VAT compliance challenging, especially when trading cross-border. With the increase in real-time reporting across Europe and differing VAT registration and reporting requirements, VAT compliance now requires significant resources and specialist knowledge to ensure compliance and avoid costly penalties. As your business expands, so do your VAT obligations. This is why many organisations, turn to managed service providers to ease the burden of VAT compliance, audits and fiscal representation. This e-book discusses the many elements of VAT compliance including:

• VAT registration
• Fiscal representation
• How to determine VAT obligations
• Filing VAT returns
• Preparing for an audit
• Managing VAT changes
• VAT compliance advice from JD Sports’ Indirect Tax Manager

Download a copy of the VAT managed services e-book

Get the e-book

How JD Sports manage VAT compliance with Sovos’ Managed Services

John Dowd, Indirect Tax Manager at sport-fashion retailer JD Sports discusses how he managed cross-border VAT compliance with the help of Sovos’ managed services

“For us at JD Sports and me personally I’m looking for a partnership, something long term, as it takes time and costs money to change advisors. I’m looking for a long-term relationship over a number of years with a VAT service provider.

“I want my advisor to have specialist knowledge, for us that’s retail and cross-border supply chains, overseas tax authorities, and I want to see new talent joining the team. I prefer a single point of contact to make it easier to move things along and of course, competitive pricing, and Sovos ticked all of these boxes for us.”

John Dowd, Indirect Tax Manager at JD Sports

The many elements of VAT compliance

VAT compliance has many elements, beginning with an understanding of place of supply rules to determine where VAT registration is required. Fiscal representation might be required to register in EU Member States.

Once VAT registration is underway, the next step is to determine EU VAT obligations by mapping the supply chain for the country of registration. There are also additional requirements to consider including exemptions, recovering VAT, Intrastat and varying continuous transaction controls (CTCs) mandates.

Submitting VAT returns to ensure compliance is a never-ending process. Each country has its own VAT return regulations and additional declaration requirements.

The VAT compliance cycle also includes preparation for VAT audits. Tax authorities can carry out audits for a variety of reasons so it’s important businesses prepare for audits and ensure they are able to manage the process successfully.

How Sovos VAT Managed Services can help with VAT compliance

Sovos’ end-to-end, technology-enabled VAT Managed Services can ease your compliance workload and mitigate risk where-ever you operate today, while ensuring you’re ready to handle the VAT requirements in the markets you intend to dominate tomorrow.

Download the VAT managed services e-book

The EU-UK Trade and Cooperation Agreement (TCA) provides for tariff-free trade between the United Kingdom (UK) and the European Union (EU) but does not work in the same way as when the UK was part of the EU.

Before Brexit, if the goods were in free circulation within the EU, they could be moved cross-border without incurring any additional customs duty. Therefore, the origin of the goods was not relevant for this intra-EU movement. If the goods originated from outside the EU, customs duty would have been paid as required when they first entered into free circulation but was not payable again.

This difference creates issues for UK businesses where they import finished goods into the UK first before being sold to the EU. As the goods are not being processed in the UK, they cannot be of UK origin and will be subject to double duty unless specific duty mitigations measures are taken.

The same tariff-free trade between the EU and the UK can be achieved under the TCA, but it depends on meeting the detailed rules within the agreement. The key is in the origin of the goods and whether they qualify under the terms of the TCA. This ensures that only eligible goods are tariff-free and removes the risk of goods entering from outside the Free Trade Area without paying customs duty.

The requirement for goods to be of relevant origin to benefit from zero tariffs on imports under the TCA has been in place since 1 January 2021.

Claiming and evidencing relief

If goods meet the appropriate rules of origin, preference can be claimed on the customs declaration when they are imported. Thus, the claim is made by the importer of the goods. However, it is not as simple as completing the appropriate box on the declaration; there is a requirement for the proper evidence to be held.

To claim tariff preference, the importer needs to have one of the following proofs of origin:

• A statement on origin – this must be made out by the exporter to confirm the product originates in the UK or EU; or
• Importer’s knowledge – this option allows the importer to claim tariff preference based on their knowledge of where the goods they’re importing originate.

If they are relying on a statement of origin, the exporter will have to prove that the goods are of appropriate origin to qualify.

End of easement

In 2021, there was a light touch approach towards holding evidence when the customs declaration was made. The TCA allowed for a declaration to be made and the evidence to be obtained later to reduce the burden on business.  There is still a requirement to provide the appropriate evidence on request, so businesses must ensure that it will be available if necessary.

There may be checks that the goods are of appropriate origin to be free of duty under the TCA.  With effect from 1 January 2022, there is a need to have the appropriate evidence that the goods meet the origin requirements when the declaration is lodged. Therefore, businesses will need to ensure that the appropriate documents are immediately available should they be requested.

Post import claims for relief

Businesses should note that it is not obligatory to claim preference at the time of entry of the goods as claims can be made up to three years later, as long as there is valid proof of origin. It is beneficial to claim preference at the earliest possible time to benefit cash flow and provide certainty of the cost of the goods.

Therefore, businesses will need to ensure that they determine origin of goods correctly and have the appropriate evidence to support the goods being tariff-free.

It’s important to remember that the rules for trade between Northern Ireland and the EU are different because of the Northern Ireland Protocol.

Meet the Expert is our series of blogs where we share more about the team behind our innovative software and managed services.As a global organisation with indirect tax experts across all regions, our dedicated team is often the first to know about new regulatory changes and the latest developments on tax regimes worldwide to support you in your tax compliance.

We spoke to Khaled Cherif, senior client representative here at Sovos to discover more about Insurance Premium Tax (IPT) and, in particular, the complexities of France and the French overseas territories.

Can you tell me about your role and what it involves?

I joined Sovos as part of the IPT team in June 2017. My role is senior client representative and I mostly work with our French and Italian clients, which is around 54 organisations.

I am the first point of contact so my role along with the rest of the team is to provide clients with all the assistance that they require, including helping them with filing their liabilities and ensuring they are compliant with the relevant regulations.

Can you explain IPT in France and what is particularly complex about the country’s IPT regulation and requirements?

IPT in France is quite complex as there are many parafiscal charges that can apply to insurance premiums. There are also multiple IPT rates depending on the type of risk being covered. This can range from 7% IPT rate to as high as 30%. As well as the different IPT rates there are also 10 parafiscal charges that could be due on insurance premiums and again all with varying rates.

There are also French overseas territories to be considered. There are two groups of French overseas territories, the Départements and Régions d’Outre-Mer (DROMs), and Collectivités d’Outre-Mer (COMs).

What top tips do you have for insurers that have IPT obligations in France and other EU countries?

It’s important to understand the differences in IPT requirements with the French overseas territories.

DROMs (French Guyana, Guadeloupe, Martinique, Mayotte, and Reunion) are treated the same as mainland France for premium tax purposes. Premiums covering risks located in these territories should be declared in the same way, except for Guyana and Mayotte where the IPT rates applicable are reduced by half.

For COMs the local tax authority for the territory can levy taxes on insurance premiums. Most have set up their own IPT regimes, often requiring insurers to appoint a fiscal representative. In some COMs territories the tax ID issued for Mainland France can be used.

As many French and international organisations have subsidiaries in overseas French territories it’s important to understand how the different IPT rates and filings affect compliance. Not being based in the territory where IPT needs to be filed can make things complicated, so working with local partners or representatives can ease the burden.

How can Sovos help insurers?

Sovos has a team with global IPT expertise, meaning we can help organisations understand their IPT requirements wherever they operate, including in France and the French Overseas Territories.

Sovos has in-depth knowledge of local requirements, laws and regulations as well as local partners and representatives to assist with IPT requirements.

We recently launched the 13^th Edition of our annual Trends report, the industry’s most comprehensive study of global VAT mandates and compliance controls. Trends provides a comprehensive look at the world’s regulatory landscape highlighting how governments across the world are enacting complex new policies and controls to close tax gaps and collect the revenue owed. These policies and protocols impact all companies in the countries where they trade no matter where they are headquartered.

This year’s report looks at how large-scale investments in digitization technology in recent years have enabled tax authorities in much of the world to enforce real-time data analysis and always-on enforcement. Driven by new technology and capabilities, governments are now into every aspect of business operations and are ever-present in company data.

Businesses are increasingly having to send what amounts to all their live sales and supply chain data as well as all the content from their accounting systems to tax administrations. This access to finance ledgers creates unprecedented opportunities for tax administrations to triangulate a company’s transaction source data with their accounting treatment and the actual movement of goods and money flows.

The European VAT landscape

After years of Latin America leading with innovation in these legislative areas, Europe is starting to accelerate the digitization of tax reporting. Our Trends report highlights the key developments and regulations that will continue to make an impact in 2022, including:

• VAT reporting processes become digital and more frequent – Existing VAT reporting is becoming more granular and more frequent in many EU Member States, with the majority quickly evolving towards real-time controls with or without electronic invoice mandates.
  • Italy has mandatory e-invoicing via a data exchange platform previously introduced for public procurement messaging.
  • Since 2017 in Spain, all companies must report inbound and outbound invoices within four days.
  • In Hungary, suppliers have had to report their sales invoices in real-time since 2018.

• Public procurement standards will play a major role in the design of various continuous transaction control (CTC) models – Frameworks such as PEPPOL are increasingly adopted by public administrations as large buyers of goods and services – the standards and platforms used for these transactions will increasingly be repurposed for electronic invoicing as a key enabler of VAT digitization.
• “Own the Transaction” CTC model becomes more popular – More tax administrations aim not only to receive reporting data from business transactions but use legislation to become the invoice exchange platform themselves.
  This trend is gaining traction after Turkey and Italy introduced it as core concepts in their CTC legislation, while countries like France and Poland are introducing similar models.

• SAF-T is here to stay – The OECD’s Standard Audit File for Tax (SAF-T) will remain an inspiration for European tax administrations not only to enforce VAT via real-time or near-real-time controls, but to obtain copies of taxpayers’ entire accounting books on their own systems for broader tax controls and audit support as well.

• EU E-commerce VAT package and digital services – Changes introduced in July 2021 to the One Stop Shop (OSS) and the launch of an Import One Stop Shop (IOSS) concept have drastically changed requirements for all e-commerce vendors and marketplaces selling low-value goods or digital services to European consumers.

According to Christiaan van der Valk, lead author of Trends, governments already have all the evidence and capabilities they need to drive aggressive programs toward real-time oversight and enforcement. These programs exist in most of South and Central America and are rapidly spreading across countries in Europe such as France, Germany and Belgium as well as Asia and parts of Africa. Governments are moving quickly to enforce these standards and failure to comply can lead to business disruptions and even stoppages.

This new level of imposed transparency is forcing businesses to adapt how they track and implement e-invoicing and data mandate changes all over the world. To remain compliant, companies need a continuous and systematic approach to requirement monitoring.

Trends is the most comprehensive report of its kind. It provides an objective view of the VAT landscape with unbiased analysis from our team of tax and regulatory experts.  The pace of change for tax and regulation continues to accelerate and this report will help you prepare.

Identifying the Location of Risk in the case of health insurance can be a tricky subject, but it’s also crucial to get it right. A failure to do so could lead to under-declared tax liabilities in a particular territory and the potential for penalties to be applied once these deficits are identified and belatedly settled. We examine the situation from a European perspective.

Legal background

The starting point in this area is the Solvency II Directive (Directive 138/2009/EC). Notably, Article 13(13) outlines the different categories of insurance risks that are used to determine risk locations. As health insurance doesn’t fall within the specific provisions for property, vehicles and travel risks, it is dealt with by the catch-all provision in Article 13(13)(d).

This Article refers to the ‘habitual residence of the policyholder’ or, where the policyholder is a legal person, ‘that policyholder’s establishment to which the contract relates’. We will consider these scenarios separately, given the distinction between individuals and legal persons.

Where the policyholder is an individual

For natural persons, the situation is generally straightforward. Based on the above, the key factor is the habitual residence of the policyholder. The permanent home of the policyholder tends to be relatively easy to confirm.

More challenging cases can arise where someone moves from one risk location to another. For example, when an individual purchases insurance in a particular country, having lived there for a significant period before moving to another country soon afterwards, the Location of Risk will be the original country. As EU legislation does not go into detail on the point, examples of no apparent habitual residence will be dealt with on a case-by-case basis.

Where the policyholder is a legal person

In this scenario, we have to consider the ‘policyholder’s establishment to which the contract relates’ in the first instance. The establishment is treated quite broadly, as evidenced by the European Court of Justice case of Kvaerner plc v Staatssecretaris van Financiën (C-191/99), which pre-dates Solvency II.

Notwithstanding the above, the habitual residence of the insured should be used to identify the risk location even where the policyholder is a legal person in certain circumstances. This will occur when the insured is independently a party to an insurance contract, giving them a right to make a claim themselves rather than through the corporate policyholder.

This logic can also potentially be extended to dependents of the insured person added to the policy and who can also separately claim under the contract. They will also create a risk location, although this will often be in the same country as the insured person. Ultimately, the compliant approach will be dictated by the overall set-up of the policy.

If any insurers writing business in Europe have any questions on the location of risk rules, whether concerning health insurance or any other insurance, then Sovos is best placed to provide advice to ensure taxes are being correctly declared.

On 30 January 2022, the Zakat, Tax and Customs Authority (ZATCA) published an announcement on its official web page concerning penalties for violations of VAT rules, and it is currently only available in Arabic. As part of the announcement, the previous fines have been amended, ushering in a more cooperative and educational approach for penalizing taxpayers for their non-compliance with VAT rules than previously.

What’s the new approach?

If ZATCA officials detect a violation during a field visit, the taxpayer will first be given a warning about the violation without any penalty. The ZATCA aims to raise awareness instead of penalizing taxpayers for their first violation. Taxpayers will be granted three months to comply and make necessary changes in their processes.

If non-compliance continues after the first inspection, the taxpayer will be fined 1.000 Riyals, roughly 267 USD. The penalty charge will gradually increase if the taxpayer fails to comply with the rules and doesn’t make necessary changes within three months after the notice.

The fine for each additional repetition time will be as follows: 5.000 Riyals for the third time, 10.000 Riyals for the fourth time and 40.000 Riyals for the fifth time. If the same violation is repeated 12 months after its discovery, it is considered a new violation, and the process will begin with a warning without a fine.

What are the violations of e-invoicing?

According to the announcement, the violations of e-invoicing rules will be penalized per the new procedure described above. The instances that require a notice/fine are slightly different than the initial violations described previously and highlighted as follows:

• Not issuing and storing invoices electronically
• Not including a QR code
• Non-compliance with keeping electronic invoices and electronic notes in the form stipulated
• Not notifying the authority of any malfunction that hinders the issuance of electronic invoices
• Deleting or modifying electronic invoices after their issuance
• Including any of the prohibited functions in the e-invoicing solutions
• Violation of any other provision of electronic invoicing.

What´s next?

The ZATCA states that the new approach ensures proportionality between the violation and the penalty imposed on taxpayers while giving taxpayers a chance to comply within a specific time frame. Considering that the introduction of both VAT and mandatory e-invoicing is fairly recent in the country, there are certain aspects that are unclear for taxpayers. This approach will educate businesses and is expected to be welcomed by stakeholders.