Farmer Wins VAT Penalty Appeal: What The AFRS Rule Change Means For Farms And Rural Businesses

A recent First-tier Tribunal decision on a farm VAT penalty appeal has put a spotlight on a problem many smaller businesses recognise. Tax rules change. Yet communication can fall short.

In Julian & Anor v HMRC [2026] UKFTT 159 (TC), the tribunal cancelled a £43,438 late VAT registration penalty issued to a small island farming partnership after finding it was reasonable they did not know a key VAT change had taken effect.

The case matters far beyond farming. It highlights how “reasonable excuse” can apply where a rule change was not communicated in a way an ordinary taxpayer could spot, even when the underlying law was in place.

This guide explains what changed in the Agricultural Flat Rate Scheme (AFRS), what the tribunal decided, and what farms and rural businesses should do now.

What happened in the Julian case?

The farming partnership operated on St Martin’s, Isles of Scilly. They used the AFRS, which lets eligible farmers charge a 4% flat rate addition on qualifying sales instead of registering for VAT in the standard way.

A reform announced at the 2020 Spring Budget took effect from 1 January 2021. It tightened the AFRS eligibility rules and introduced a clearer requirement to leave the scheme and register for VAT once turnover went beyond a set point.

The partnership’s farming turnover exceeded the new £230,000 exit threshold, but they did not notify HMRC. HMRC later issued a late registration penalty of £43,438.

Once HMRC raised the issue, the partnership registered and paid a large VAT bill within a year. The tribunal still had to decide whether the penalty should stand.

Why the tribunal cancelled the penalty

The tribunal accepted that the taxpayers had a reasonable excuse.

A key factor was how the change was communicated. The judge described the AFRS amendment as “very significant” yet effectively “hidden away” in specialist material, with limited publicity aimed at ordinary taxpayers.

That point is important. HMRC penalties for failure to notify can be cancelled where a taxpayer shows a reasonable excuse for the failure, then corrects the position without undue delay once aware.

What is the Agricultural Flat Rate Scheme?

AFRS is a VAT simplification route for farming businesses that meet the conditions.

Instead of registering for VAT and reclaiming VAT on purchases, an eligible farmer:

  • stays outside standard VAT
  • charges a flat rate addition (commonly shown on invoices) to VAT-registered customers on qualifying supplies
  • keeps that amount, rather than paying it to HMRC

AFRS reduces admin, yet it is not “set and forget”. The eligibility tests matter, and they change.

What changed from 1 January 2021?

HMRC’s VAT Notice confirms the key AFRS thresholds:

  • Entry threshold: farming turnover must be below £150,000 to join
  • Exit threshold: members can stay on the scheme until annual farming turnover goes above £230,000

Once you exceed the exit threshold, you are expected to notify HMRC, leave AFRS, and register for VAT (standard VAT rules then apply).

Key point many farms miss

These AFRS thresholds are separate from the general VAT registration threshold.

For most UK businesses, VAT registration becomes mandatory when taxable turnover exceeds £90,000 in a rolling 12-month period (current figure).

So a farming business might face VAT registration because:

  • it must leave AFRS after passing the £230,000 AFRS exit point, or
  • it exceeds the general £90,000 VAT threshold (depending on supplies and structure), or
  • it expects taxable turnover in the next 30 days to exceed the threshold.

The penalty HMRC used: what it is, and why it stings

Late VAT registration penalties can arise under Schedule 41 Finance Act 2008, which applies where a business fails to notify HMRC of liability to register.

HMRC guidance explains that you can challenge a penalty through:

  • an HMRC review request (normally within 30 days), or
  • an appeal to the tribunal (normally within 30 days of the decision or review conclusion).

In farming, cash flow can be seasonal. A five-figure penalty on top of VAT due can put real strain on working capital, especially where margins stay tight and records are not run through dedicated finance teams.

Practical lessons from this farm VAT penalty appeal case

1) Track the right turnover figure

AFRS uses turnover from farming activities for the entry and exit tests.

Action steps:

  • maintain monthly turnover summaries
  • separate farming activity turnover from non-farming income in your bookkeeping
  • keep a rolling 12-month view, not just year-end numbers

2) Build a “VAT trigger” checklist

A simple checklist prevents missed thresholds.

Use triggers such as:

  • farming turnover approaching £230,000
  • taxable turnover approaching £90,000
  • new income streams (farm shop, holiday lets, events, diversification)
  • major contract wins, that could push turnover over a limit within 30 days

3) Do not assume a scheme removes all VAT risk

AFRS reduces admin. It does not remove responsibility.

A farm can still become VAT-registered due to:

  • exceeding VAT thresholds
  • selling taxable non-farming supplies
  • structural changes in the business
  • changes in HMRC rules or guidance

4) If you find a missed registration, act fast

The tribunal gave weight to prompt corrective action once the issue came to light in this case reporting.

In real terms:

  • register quickly
  • quantify VAT due with working papers
  • agree a payment plan where needed
  • keep an evidence file showing when you became aware and what you did next

You Might Also Want to Know: Impact of the 182‑Day Let Tax Rule on Welsh Farm Businesses 

5) Appeals need evidence, not frustration

“Reasonable excuse” is fact-specific. It is not automatic.

Evidence that helps:

  • copies of communications received (or not received)
  • records showing you ran the business without specialist support
  • notes of advice sought
  • timeline of discovery and corrective steps
    HMRC’s own guidance sets out appeal routes and time limits, so deadlines matter.

AFRS vs standard VAT: A quick comparison

TopicAFRSStandard VAT registration
Admin levelLowerHigher
VAT on salesFlat rate addition (scheme rules)Charge VAT at correct rate
VAT on purchasesNo input VAT reclaimInput VAT reclaim (subject to rules)
Key eligibilityJoin < £150k, leave > £230k (farming turnover)Must register over £90k taxable turnover
Common riskMissing exit pointRate errors, digital records, penalties

Thresholds and scheme conditions per HMRC guidance.

How We Help Farms Plan VAT 

At Apex Accountants, we support farms, estates, growers, and diversified rural businesses with VAT planning and compliance that fits real operations.

Our VAT support typically covers:

  • AFRS eligibility checks and exit planning
  • VAT registration reviews (threshold monitoring, timing, evidence file)
  • VAT return process set-up, plus MTD-ready bookkeeping workflows
  • Diversification reviews (holiday lets, farm shops, events, contracting)
  • Penalty defence packs, review requests, and tribunal-ready evidence bundles, where appropriate
  • Cash flow modelling for VAT liabilities, plus Time to Pay support where needed

If you want a clear position on whether you should stay on AFRS, leave it, or register for VAT, we can review your figures and map the next steps.

Conclusion

The Julian tribunal decision is a reminder that VAT penalties are not always the final word. Where a major change was genuinely hard to spot, a reasonable excuse argument can succeed.

Yet the safer route is prevention.

If your farming turnover is climbing toward £230,000, or your wider taxable turnover is nearing £90,000, put monthly checks in place and get advice early.

Contact Apex Accountants today to review your VAT position and keep your business protected.

FAQs About AFRS and VAT

1) What is the AFRS flat rate addition?

It is a scheme-based addition (commonly 4%) charged on qualifying supplies by eligible farmers, kept by the farmer, rather than paid to HMRC.

2) When must I leave AFRS?

HMRC guidance says you can stay on AFRS until your annual farming turnover goes above £230,000.

3) What is the current VAT registration threshold?

HMRC states the registration threshold is more than £90,000 of taxable turnover.

4) What penalty applies for failing to notify VAT registration?

Penalties can be charged under Schedule 41 Finance Act 2008 for failure to notify liability, depending on facts and behaviour.

5) How do I appeal a late VAT registration penalty?

HMRC guidance explains you can request a review or appeal to a tribunal, typically within 30 days of the relevant letter.

6) Does paying the VAT due remove the penalty?

Not automatically. Payment helps, but penalties depend on notification failures and whether a reasonable excuse exists. The Julian case shows a penalty can still be challenged successfully on the facts. 

These are the questions we see most often from farming and diversified rural businesses, based on recurring VAT registration and penalty queries:

7) Do I need to register for VAT once I pass £90,000?

In most cases, yes, when taxable turnover exceeds £90,000 on a rolling 12-month basis, or you expect to exceed it in the next 30 days.

8) I’m on AFRS. Do I still watch the VAT threshold?

Yes. AFRS has its own £230,000 exit test and other conditions, plus general VAT rules can still bite depending on supplies and structure.

9) Can ignorance of a rule change ever be a reasonable excuse?

Rare, yet the Julian decision shows it can happen where the change was poorly publicised and it was objectively reasonable the taxpayer did not know.

10) How long do I have to appeal a VAT penalty?

Normally 30 days, either for review or appeal, depending on the stage.

April 2026 Car Tax Changes: What UK Drivers Need to Know About UK Vehicle Excise Duty

From 1 April 2026, many motorists will pay more UK vehicle excise duty (VED). The increase is inflation-linked and applies across several parts of the system, not only the “headline” band for the highest CO₂ cars.

For most people, the change is modest. For buyers of brand-new, high-emission cars, the first-year bill can be eye-watering. And for electric vehicle owners, there is still tax to pay, even if the first-year rate stays low.

Also Read: Van Tax Changes and How they Affect Employer Vehicle Costs

Car Tax Changes on 1 April 2026

AreaWhat changes from 1 April 2026Why it matters
Standard rate (most cars registered after April 2017, years 2+)£195 → £200Small rise for many drivers
Top first-year CO₂ band (new cars over 255 g/km)£5,490 → £5,690Up to £200 extra in year one for top emitters
Expensive Car Supplement (ECS) amount£440 per year (years 2–6)Extra cost on top of standard rate for expensive cars
ECS threshold for zero-emission cars£40,000 → £50,000 (rule takes effect 1 April 2026)Helps many EVs avoid the ECS if priced between £40k–£50k

How VED Works 

For cars first registered on or after 1 April 2017, VED is usually split into two parts:

  1. First-year rate (based on CO₂ emissions)
  2. Standard rate (a flat annual rate from year two onwards)

On top of that, some cars pay the Expensive Car Supplement for five years (years 2–6).

For cars registered between 1 March 2001 and 31 March 2017, VED follows a different CO₂ band table and does not work the same way as the post-2017 system.

The Big Headline: Higher First-Year Bills For High-Emission New Cars

If you are buying a new petrol or diesel car with very high CO₂ emissions, the first-year “showroom tax” can be the biggest cost shock.

For cars emitting over 255 g/km, the first-year rate rises to £5,690 from 1 April 2026. That is £200 more than the 2025–26 level.

This matters most if you are:

  • Buying a high-performance model
  • Buying a heavy SUV or large engine vehicle with high CO₂
  • Registering a brand-new vehicle close to the April changeover date

Read: VAT on Car Hire in the UK – What Businesses Need to Know

What About UK Vehicle Excise Duty on Electric Vehicles In 2026?

Electric cars are no longer fully exempt from VED. Under the rules that came in from 1 April 2025, new zero-emission cars pay a £10 first-year rate, and then pay the standard rate afterwards.

From 1 April 2026, that standard rate becomes £200 (up from £195).

There is also a helpful change for many EV buyers: the government is increasing the Expensive Car Supplement threshold for zero-emission cars to £50,000, effective 1 April 2026, for eligible vehicles registered from 1 April 2025 onwards.

Practical takeaway: an EV priced at £45,000 may avoid the ECS once the new threshold applies, while a petrol or diesel car still faces the £40,000 threshold.

VED For Older Cars (Registered 2001 To 2017): Rates Rise Too

If your car was registered between 1 March 2001 and 31 March 2017, your annual VED is still based on CO₂ bands.

Here are the top-end bands for 2026–27:

Band (2001–2017 system)CO₂ emissionsStandard rate from 1 April 2026
L226–255 g/km£760
MOver 255 g/km£790

Planning Tips For Households And Businesses

Small increases add up, especially for fleets. A few sensible checks can protect cash flow.

  • If you are ordering a new car, confirm the official CO₂ figure and expected first-year VED before you sign.
  • If you run a fleet, build the new rates into your 2026–27 budgets and forecasts.
  • If you are considering an EV, check the list price carefully and whether the £50,000 ECS threshold will apply to your licence date.
  • Keep records tidy. For business vehicles, VED is typically treated as a running cost in the accounts, so clean bookkeeping helps your year-end work and reporting.

How We Can Help You Plan For Upcoming Car Tax Changes in UK

At Apex Accountants, we help drivers and businesses understand how motoring costs affect tax, budgeting, and cash flow.

Our support can include:

  • Fleet cost forecasting and budgeting reviews
  • Bookkeeping clean-up for vehicle and mileage records
  • Company structure and cost planning for vehicle-heavy businesses
  • Management reporting so you can track motoring costs month by month

Conclusion

The April 2026 updates to UK vehicle excise duty are not a single “one-off” change. They raise the standard annual rate, increase first-year charges for the highest CO₂ cars, and adjust how the expensive car rules apply to many EVs.

If you want help modelling the cost impact for your household or fleet, contact Apex Accountants for a practical review and clear next steps.

FAQs About UK Road Tax

1. Is car tax rising for electric vehicles? 

Yes. Since April 2025 EVs lost their tax exemption. A new EV now pays £10 in its first year and then £200 per year. However, EV buyers get a higher luxury threshold: if the car’s list price is under £50,000, the extra £425 tax doesn’t apply.

2. How does the luxury tax change? 

The Expensive Car Supplement (also called luxury car tax) stays at £425 per year, but now only applies above £40k list price for petrol/diesel cars, and above £50k for EVs. This means many £40–£50k EVs bought since April 2025 are now exempt from the extra fee.

3. What about car tax on diesel cars? 

Most diesel models follow the same bands as petrol. However, non-RDE2 compliant diesels still pay one band higher (up to £5,490 in 2025). The 2026 update likely maintains that rule.

4. What about car tax on Older cars (pre-2001)? 

These are taxed by engine size. The 2026 rates (via RPI) are modest: e.g. £220 for 12 months on a small petrol car. For cars from 2001–2017, old CO₂ bands now have even the cleanest cars at £20 (no free road tax any more).

5. How to pay UK road tax & check? 

You can pay or renew online via GOV.UK. Input your reg to see the exact VED due. If unsure, consult a tax professional for advice on company cars or vehicle financing, as these changes can affect tax planning.

6. Why are some people saying “£200 extra”?

That refers to the jump in the top first-year band for new cars over 255 g/km, which rises by £200 (to £5,690).

UK Economy in 2026: Retail Sales Rise, Exports Strengthen and Public Finances Record Surplus

The UK economy in 2026 is stronger than many expected. Retail sales rose sharply in January. Export demand improved. The Government recorded a significant monthly surplus in public finances.

At the same time, unemployment remains elevated in certain regions. Business tax pressures are still present. Growth forecasts remain modest.

So what is really happening? And what should businesses do now?

At Apex Accountants, we look beyond headlines. Below, we break down the facts, explain the drivers, and outline practical actions for UK businesses.

Snapshot: What the latest data shows

Here is a summary of the key figures reported for early 2026:

IndicatorLatest FigureWhat It Means
Retail sales growth (January)+1.8%Strongest monthly rise in over a year
December retail growth+0.4%Shows upward momentum
UK Composite PMI (February)53.9Activity expanding (above 50)
Public sector surplus (January)£30.4bnHighest January surplus on record
Self-assessment receipts£29.4bn£3.6bn higher than previous year
London unemployment rate7.6%Above national average (5.2%)

The numbers show economic momentum in spending and exports. However, the labour market remains under pressure in some areas.

Retail sales rebound: What it means for businesses

Retail volumes rose by 1.8% in January. This is significant. It suggests consumers returned to spending after a cautious end to 2025.

Why spending increased

Several factors contributed:

  • Post-holiday promotions and discounting
  • Slight easing in inflation pressures
  • Wage growth stabilising real income
  • Increased online purchasing

Non-store retail activity performed strongly. Jewellery and discretionary goods saw notable demand.

What this means for business owners

Retail growth can improve cash flow in the short term. However, this does not mean consumer confidence is fully restored.

Businesses should:

  • Monitor sales trends monthly
  • Review stock management carefully
  • Avoid over-expansion based on one strong month
  • Maintain tight cost control

Spending is improving. But it remains selective.

Exports and private sector growth: A positive signal

The UK composite PMI reading of 53.9 indicates expansion. Any reading above 50 shows growth.

Export orders increased at the fastest pace since 2021. This supports manufacturers and internationally focused businesses.

What is driving export growth?

  • Improved global demand conditions
  • Competitive pricing from sterling movements
  • Services sector resilience

The services sector remains the largest driver of UK economic activity. Hospitality, finance, healthcare and leisure contributed to growth.

Strategic takeaway

If your business trades internationally:

  • Review export pricing structures
  • Consider currency exposure management
  • Assess new market opportunities

Export demand recovery can provide growth opportunities. However, global conditions remain uncertain.

Public finances surplus explained

January recorded a £30.4 billion public sector surplus. This means government receipts exceeded spending for the month.

This was largely due to:

  • Strong self-assessment tax receipts
  • Income tax threshold freezes
  • Lower debt interest payments

Self-assessment receipts reached £29.4 billion. This was significantly higher than the previous year.

Why this matters for taxpayers

A surplus does not mean tax cuts are imminent. In fact:

  • Income tax thresholds remain frozen
  • Fiscal headroom is still tight
  • Government borrowing levels remain historically high

Businesses and individuals should not assume immediate tax relief.

Labour market concerns: A key risk factor

While spending and exports improved, employment data presents challenges.

London’s unemployment rate has risen to 7.6%. Youth unemployment stands significantly higher.

Sectors affected include:

  • Hospitality
  • Retail
  • Entry-level services

This creates a mixed economic environment. Strong spending data does not remove labour market pressures.

Practical actions for business owners

Economic data provides direction. But strategy matters more. Here is what we advise clients at Apex Accountants:

Cash flow first

  • Review cash flow forecasts monthly
  • Build contingency reserves
  • Plan for tax liabilities early

Tax planning

  • Assess self-assessment and corporation tax exposure
  • Use available reliefs properly
  • Review dividend strategy

Cost control

  • Audit fixed costs
  • Renegotiate supplier contracts
  • Monitor payroll growth carefully

Growth decisions

  • Avoid reacting to one month’s data
  • Base expansion on sustainable revenue
  • Stress-test projections

Short-term improvement does not remove long-term risks.

Sector outlook summary

SectorCurrent OutlookRisk Level
RetailImproving but cautiousMedium
HospitalityDemand rising, labour pressureMedium–High
ManufacturingExport boost positiveMedium
Professional servicesStableLow–Medium
SMEs overallGrowth modestMedium

This environment rewards careful planning. Overconfidence can create problems.

How We Help Businesses in UK

At Apex Accountants, we support businesses through economic shifts with practical financial guidance.

Our services include:

  • Corporation tax planning
  • Self-assessment tax advice
  • VAT compliance and strategy
  • Management reporting
  • Cash flow forecasting
  • Virtual CFO services
  • Business growth strategy
  • Budgeting and forecasting

We focus on clarity, reduce risk, and help you make informed decisions.

Economic data changes every month. Strong financial structure protects your business in both good and challenging periods.

Conclusion

Early 2026 has started with encouraging signals. Retail spending has improved. Export demand has strengthened. Public finances showed a strong January surplus.

However, unemployment pressures remain. Growth forecasts are still modest. Tax burdens remain elevated.

The UK economy is stabilising. It is not booming.

For business owners, the message is clear:

  • Stay disciplined
  • Plan ahead
  • Monitor cash closely
  • Optimise your tax position

Economic momentum can support opportunity. But financial control determines long-term success.

If you would like tailored advice on how current economic conditions affect your business, contact Apex Accountants today and book a consultation.

FAQs About UK Economy in 2026

Based on current UK search trends and client discussions, common questions include:

1. Is the UK economy recovering in 2026?

There are signs of short-term improvement. Retail and exports are stronger. However, growth is expected to remain modest overall.

2. Will taxes increase again?

There are no confirmed new increases at present. However, threshold freezes continue to increase effective tax burdens.

3. Should businesses expand now?

Expansion decisions should be based on cash flow strength and sector-specific performance. Caution remains important.

4. Is inflation still a risk?

Inflation has eased from peak levels. However, cost pressures remain for energy, wages and supply chains.

Rockstar’s “Grand Theft Tax” Row, Explained: What UK Video Games Tax Relief Really Does

Rockstar Games’ UK tax position is back in the headlines. A recent report, picked up by The Scotsman and widely repeated across the games press, says Rockstar’s UK studio claimed more than £70 million through the UK’s Video Games Tax Relief (VGTR) in the 2024–25 financial year. The same coverage points to reported UK profits of over £87 million and dividends of around £85 million, which is why the story has sparked a fresh debate about whether the relief still hits its original target. A Labour MP has also criticised the scale of relief being claimed, using the phrase “Grand Theft Tax”, while worker representatives and unions have argued that public support should come with stronger expectations around fairness and workplace rights. Rockstar, for its part, says it has invested heavily in the UK and created a large number of creative-sector jobs.

At Apex Accountants, we see two separate issues getting mixed together:

  • How VGTR (and its replacement, VGEC) works in law
  • Whether the policy outcomes still match what taxpayers expect

This article explains both, so studio owners, finance teams and founders can make informed decisions.

What is VGTR and why does it exist?

VGTR was introduced in 2014 to support the development of video games with cultural value and to encourage production in the UK and Europe. An HMRC-commissioned evaluation describes VGTR as one of the UK’s creative industry tax reliefs, designed to incentivise culturally British or European games and strengthen the sector.

In practice, VGTR reduces corporation tax for qualifying games projects or produces a payable credit for loss-making companies. It has been especially important for smaller studios that need cashflow support while they build and ship a game.

The key eligibility points (VGTR)

To claim VGTR, HMRC guidance says the game must:

  • Be certified as British by the BFI cultural test
  • Be intended for supply to the public
  • Have started production on or before a stated deadline in the guidance
  • Exclude certain categories, such as gambling and advertising products

The “British values” phrase that appears in some commentary is often a shorthand for the BFI cultural test and certification process, which is the formal route in the law and HMRC guidance.

The policy row: why Rockstar’s claim is controversial

The argument is not that claiming VGTR is illegal. It is about whether it is desirable for a very large studio, owned by a global group, to claim a large share of relief in the same years it reports strong profits and pays substantial dividends.

Several points are driving the debate:

  • Concentration risk: A significant portion of VGTR has been claimed by Rockstar across multiple years, raising questions about the policy balance between inward investment and support for smaller studios.
  • Worker allegations: A UK MP has raised concerns in Parliament after being contacted by constituents who believed they were dismissed for organising at work and said the claims should be scrutinised given the scale of relief.
  • Fairness optics: When headlines highlight large relief claims alongside profits and dividends, the public often reads the relief as “avoiding tax”, even though the mechanism is a relief built into the tax system.

Rockstar’s tax case response has been to emphasise local investment and job creation, stating that it has created substantial UK employment and helped build skills and innovation in the creative sector.

The practical reality: VGTR is changing, and studios must plan for 2026 and beyond

If you develop games in the UK, the bigger operational story is not Rockstar. It is the transition from VGTR to the Video Games Expenditure Credit (VGEC).

VGEC: the new regime replacing VGTR

HMRC guidance confirms:

  • VGEC can be claimed on qualifying expenditure incurred from 1 January 2024
  • The credit is calculated at a headline rate of 34% of qualifying expenditure (subject to the scheme’s rules)
  • Qualifying expenditure is based on UK core costs and is capped through the scheme’s formula

The BFI also explains that expenditure credits are available from 1 January 2024, with new productions moving to the expenditure credits from 1 April 2025, and a full move by 1 April 2027.

VGTR vs VGEC: what changes in real life

Here are the differences that matter for finance teams.

VGTR (older relief)

  • Relief is linked to the qualifying trade computation and can reduce tax or create a payable credit.
  • It relies on the BFI cultural test and qualifying expenditure rules.
  • It applies to games that meet the scheme conditions and timeline restrictions.

VGEC (new credit)

  • It is a taxable expenditure credit calculated on qualifying spend.
  • HMRC sets a 34% headline rate, but you still need to model the net impact after corporation tax and your company’s position.
  • UK spending rules are central, so your outsourcing and subcontracting profile matters.

This is why two studios can have the same budget and receive very different outcomes.

The compliance risks studios need to manage

Whether you are a five-person indie team or a multi-site studio, most VGTR and VGEC problems come from avoidable process gaps.

Watch out for:

  • Incorrect “core costs” classification (mixing production costs with non-qualifying spend)
  • Weak evidence files for cultural test scoring, interim certification and final certification
  • Project boundary issues if several products or expansions are treated inconsistently
  • Late planning around the transition dates, which can affect relief choice and cashflow
  • Overlaps with R&D claims that are not properly mapped, documented and reconciled

HMRC expects clear, supportable numbers, with a proper trail from bookkeeping to claim schedules.

What grand theft tax means for the UK games sector

The headline row will continue. But for most UK studios, the key takeaway is simpler:

  • The UK still backs game development through tax policy.
  • The mechanism is shifting to VGEC.
  • Better record keeping and earlier modelling will decide who benefits most.

Public pressure may also increase scrutiny, even for fully compliant claims. So your documentation and governance matter more than ever.

How We Can Help You

If you are a UK game developer, publisher or creative studio group, Apex Accountants can support you with:

  • VGTR and VGEC eligibility reviews and project structuring
  • BFI cultural test support and evidence packs
  • Claim preparation and submission support with clear audit trails
  • R&D tax credit reviews where relevant to your development activity
  • Management accounts and forecasting for project cashflow control
  • Bookkeeping and cloud accounting setups built around clean cost coding
  • Payroll and contractor payments support aligned to project reporting

Conclusion

Rockstar’s tax case has reignited a public argument about the purpose of creative tax support and who should benefit most from it. The political optics are real, and so are the concerns about policy concentration and fairness.

For studios, though, the action point is not the headlines. It is your own compliance and planning.

VGTR and VGEC can be valuable. But the rules are detailed, and the transition timeline is active. HMRC and the BFI guidance is clear on certification, qualifying spend and the move to expenditure credits.

If you want to claim with confidence, start with clean project cost tracking, early modelling and a strong evidence file. That is how you protect cashflow, reduce risk and keep your claim defensible if questions arise.

If you would like support with Video Games Tax Relief or the new expenditure credit, you can contact Apex Accountants today. Our team can review your eligibility, prepare your claim, and guide you through HMRC requirements. Visit our website or get in touch to discuss your project.

FAQs: Video Games Tax Relief and VGEC in the UK

1. How does VGTR work in the UK?

Video Games Tax Relief (VGTR) allows eligible companies to reduce Corporation Tax or receive a payable credit. Relief is based on qualifying core costs, such as designing and testing. Claims can cover up to 80% of costs, with an effective benefit around 20%.

2. Who qualifies for video games tax relief?

A company can qualify if it develops a game intended for public release, passes the BFI cultural test, and is subject to UK Corporation Tax. The company must be responsible for design, production, and testing and cannot claim for advertising or gambling products.

3. What is the BFI cultural test, and how do you pass it?

The BFI cultural test assesses whether a game is “British”. It is points-based, requiring at least 16 out of 31 points across areas such as cultural content, contribution, location, and personnel. Certification is mandatory for both VGTR and VGEC claims.

4. VGTR vs VGEC: which is better?

VGTR offers a deduction or payable credit on profits or losses, while VGEC provides a taxable credit at a headline rate of 34% of qualifying UK expenditure. The better option depends on project timing, cost structure, and whether production began before April 2025.

5. Is VGTR ending, and when?

Yes, VGTR is being phased out. New productions starting after 1 April 2025 must use the Video Games Expenditure Credit. Existing projects can continue claiming VGTR until 31 March 2027, after which all claims will move fully to the new system.

6. Can overseas-owned studios claim UK relief?

Yes, overseas-owned studios can claim UK relief if they operate a UK company subject to Corporation Tax. The company must meet eligibility rules, including passing the cultural test and carrying out qualifying development activity within the UK.

Proposed ISA Cash Rules: Government Response and Investor Impact

The Autumn 2025 Budget confirmed major changes to Individual Savings Accounts (ISAs) aimed at pushing savers out of low-yield cash and into investments. From 6 April 2027 the annual cash ISA allowance for under‑65s will fall from £20,000 to £12,000. To stop savers simply shuffling funds between accounts, new draft regulations propose anti‑avoidance measures. For example, transfers from stocks and shares ISAs into cash ISAs would be blocked, and “cash‑like” asset tests would determine what investments are allowed in a stocks and shares ISA. Crucially, HMRC has signalled it will charge a tax rate on ISA cash interest earned on cash held inside a stocks-and-shares or Innovative Finance ISA. In effect, these ISA cash rules would revive the pre-2014 rule where idle cash in a stocks and shares ISA was taxed at 20%. The new cap and anti-avoidance rules explicitly apply to savers under 65; over-65s retain a £20,000 ISA cash limit.

  • New cash ISA limit (from April 2027): £12,000 per year for under‑65s (Over-65s stay at £20,000).
  • Transfer restrictions: No transfers from stocks-and-shares or IF ISAs into cash ISAs.
  • “Cash‑like” tests: Criteria will define which assets (e.g. short-term bonds or money-market funds) count as too cash-like to hold in a stocks-and-shares ISA.
  • Interest charge: Any interest paid on cash held in a stocks-and-shares ISA would be taxed, likely at a flat rate around 20%.

These rules were announced in HMRC’s November 2025 tax-free savings newsletter and are subject to industry consultation on the draft legislation. The government’s goal is to encourage long-term investing by making cash ISAs comparatively less attractive. However, the proposals have sparked concern from financial firms, and recent industry-HMRC talks suggest the plans may be softened in response.

Industry Feedback and Potential Softening of ISA Cash Rules

Many investment platforms and asset managers warned that the draft ISA rules were overly complex and could deter savers. For example, AJ Bell’s CFO Michael Summersgill cautioned that taxing idle cash in a stocks-and-shares ISA would “punish retail investors for using the stocks and shares ISA the way it was designed”. He noted that money flows in and out of these ISAs routinely (contributions, dividends, withdrawals) and urged the Chancellor to avoid “horrendous complexity” in the ISA regime. Others pointed out that no ISA can truly be “cash-free” – even routine operations use cash – and that aggressive bans on cash-like assets could undermine savers’ flexibility.

After these warnings, HMRC officials held detailed discussions with industry groups. According to sources, the tone of negotiations has shifted. Platforms report a growing sense that HMRC might ease the hardest measures on cash and cash-like investments. 

One leading investment platform said it was “cautiously optimistic” that HMRC will favour a principles-based approach rather than rigid rules. Another provider remarked they were “a lot more confident [HMRC is] coming around than we were this time two weeks ago”. In other words, talks have opened the door to compromise on both the proposed interest levy and on how “cash-like” is defined.

Indeed, industry participants expect final rules only after further consultation and technical refinements. HMRC has promised a full public consultation on the draft ISA Regulations ahead of implementation. As one government spokesperson told accountants, the aim is to prevent “easy circumvention” of the new cash limit, but HMRC is “listening to concerns and engaging collaboratively” with providers. This suggests some flexibility: the final framework may include targeted safeguards and guidance, rather than inflexible bans.

Key Industry Concerns Regarding New ISA Cash Limits

Interest charge level: 

The proposed tax rate on ISA cash interest is still undetermined. Industry papers have speculated on flat rates around 20% or even 22%. (AJ Bell and others initially feared a 22% flat rate on such interest.) HMRC has not confirmed a rate, but a common assumption is 20%, mirroring the old regime.

Cash-like definitions: 

What counts as “cash-like” is a grey area. Money market funds, short-dated gilts or corporate bonds could be deemed cash-like. Building societies are pushing for tighter rules here, arguing cash-rich MMFs harm bank funding. Conversely, platforms note that small cash buffers and money-market holdings help investors ease into equities. Freetrade’s Alex Campbell calls cash-like funds “a perfect stepping stone into investing” for novices. The Treasury Committee has already asked pointed questions about what counts as cash-like, and HMRC will clarify these criteria in the consultation.

Complexity and investor impact: 

There is broad concern that restrictive ISA changes could deter savers. Tom Selby of AJ Bell warned a “heavy-handed approach” to anti-avoidance “will undermine stocks-and-shares ISAs” at a time when the government wants more retail investment. Justin White of Kaldi argued that discouraging use of cash and cash-like assets in ISAs might confuse new investors, defeating the policy’s aim to close the investment gap. In short, providers fear that discouraging safe cash buffers could backfire unless carefully balanced with investor education and flexibility.

Potential Compromises and Safeguards

Given these reactions, HMRC is reportedly considering softer measures. For example, rather than an automatic tax hit, regulators may rely on platforms to monitor excessive cash balances and encourage customers to invest more. One compromise under discussion would let providers set proportionate cash thresholds and flag idle balances, instead of blanket bans. Providers could also agree not to offer artificially high interest rates on ISA cash, removing the arbitrage that the tax charge seeks to close. IG Group’s Michael Healy notes platforms already track ISA cash levels and could distinguish normal “transactional” cash from long-term parked cash.

On money market funds, HMRC may opt for targeted restrictions rather than an outright ban. A source said regulators now recognise that banning MMFs “outright could do more harm than good for investors”. Safeguards might include limiting high-interest MMFs or classifying them as cash-like, rather than excluding all such funds. Importantly, any transitional cash (e.g., pending investment) is expected to be carved out of the tax levy.

On transfers, HMRC appears set on the no-transfer rule as a hard line but might clarify exceptions. For instance, existing ISAs opened before the change may be grandfathered, and normal intra-ISA transfers (e.g., cash ISA to cash ISA) will still work. The government has emphasised it will provide “clear guidance before the changes come into effect”, so providers and savers can prepare.

At a glance, the likely outcome is a framework where savers can still hold some cash in investment ISAs, but large, long-term cash positions lose their tax advantage. A practical compromise could involve:

  • Platforms automatically channel large cash balances into equity or bond investments, unless the saver specifically opts out.
  • Caps on ISA interest rates (to stop promotional “top-up” offers that gamers could exploit).
  • A clear definition of minimal cash allowed (e.g., a few per cent of the portfolio for liquidity).
  • Detailed guidance or FAQs from HMRC on scenarios like dividends, pending trades, or modest emergency buffers.

While details await legislation, platforms are already modelling responses. Firms preparing now will adapt their ISA account structures and customer communications before April 2027.

From an investor’s standpoint, it’s wise to:

  1. Maximise the remaining cash ISA allowance: With the £20,000 limit intact until 2027, many advisers suggest using the full cash ISA cap now if you value tax-free cash.
  2. Review your ISA asset mix: Plan how much to park in equities vs cash. If you rely on ISAs for cash income, consider alternative wrappers (e.g. bonds outside ISAs or simply accepting tax on savings).
  3. Stay informed: Watch for HMRC updates and consult your financial adviser. ISA rules are technical, and professional advice can help navigate compliance.

How We Help Our Clients Navigate The Proposed ISA Changes

At Apex Accountants, we’re monitoring these ISA developments closely to help clients adapt. Our services include:

  • ISA Review & Planning: We analyse your current ISA holdings and cash allocations, advising on tax-efficient strategies under the new rules.
  • Investment Structuring: We help clients balance cash and equity exposures, taking into account any “cash-like” restrictions.
  • Tax Compliance: Our team ensures all reporting (including interest receipts) is handled correctly in line with HMRC guidance.
  • Regulatory Updates: We keep you informed of any changes to ISA regulations, so you’re never caught by surprise.
  • Consultation Support: For businesses or investors, we can liaise with you on technical questions or draft responses to HMRC consultations.

Our experts simplify complex tax news into actionable advice. If you’re concerned about how the ISA reforms might affect your savings or investments, contact Apex Accountants for a consultation. We’ll help you make the most of the current ISA rules and prepare for the changes ahead.

Conclusion

In summary, the UK government’s ISA reforms aim to steer savers toward investment accounts, but the strongest measures (like high cash-interest taxes and strict cash-like tests) may be trimmed after industry feedback. Official drafts will follow in due course, with HMRC indicating a collaborative approach. Savers should keep an eye on developments: the broad direction is clear, but final rules may be more flexible than first feared. For now, focus on making the most of existing ISA allowances and seek professional advice to stay compliant. As always, Apex Accountants will update clients on any final ISA legislation and advise on the best strategies to protect and grow your savings.

FAQ: Key Questions for Savers

1. Will interest on cash in my Stocks & Shares ISA be taxed? 

Under the draft rules, any interest earned on cash held in a stocks-and-shares or IF ISA would lose its tax-free status. The government’s current plan is a flat charge of about 20% on that interest. No double taxation is intended – you would pay this special ISA charge instead of normal savings tax.

2. What counts as a “cash-like” investment? 

HMRC will define cash-like assets in the consultation. Likely candidates include money market funds, short-dated gilts/bonds or other very low-risk funds. The intention is to stop people using such assets to skirt the £12k cash limit. We expect guidance to clarify this well before April 2027.

3. Can I still move money between ISAs? 

Cash-to-cash ISA transfers remain allowed. However, transfers from a stocks & shares or IF ISA into a cash ISA would be blocked under the new rules. All other ISA-to-ISA transfers (e.g. between cash ISAs, or within stocks & shares ISAs) should still work normally.

4. What if I need emergency cash? 

The proposals don’t ban holding any cash in investment ISAs, they target excessive cash balances. HMRC is aware that savers need some liquidity. Early guidance suggests small cash buffers (for example, unsettled trades or dividend income waiting to reinvest) may be exempt from the interest charge.

5. When will these changes happen? 

The new rules are set to apply from 6 April 2027. HMRC will consult on the draft legislation before then. Expect technical details to emerge throughout 2026. It’s prudent to plan for the changes, but final outcomes could be milder than originally drafted.

Lycamobile Loses VAT Appeal on Prepaid Bundles: Key VAT Lessons for Subscription Models

In February 2026, the UK Upper Tribunal (Tax and Chancery Chamber) ruled that Lycamobile UK Ltd must pay VAT on the full price of its prepaid mobile “plan bundles” at the point of sale, not just on the minutes or data actually used. In a decision widely summarised as Lycamobile Loses VAT Appeal, the tribunal rejected the company’s argument that VAT should be treated purely as a tax on consumption. Lycamobile had only accounted for VAT when customers used their allowances, but HMRC maintained that the entire bundle constituted a taxable supply upfront. The tribunal agreed with HMRC, meaning Lycamobile now faces VAT liabilities exceeding £50 million.

Lycamobile VAT Case

Dispute timeline: 

HMRC first challenged Lycamobile’s VAT treatment in 2012 and issued assessments for around £51 million covering 2012–2019. Lycamobile appealed to the First-Tier Tribunal (FTT) in 2024, but the FTT largely sided with HMRC (allowing only minor adjustments for calls/data used outside the EU). Lycamobile then appealed that decision to the Upper Tribunal (UT). On 12 Feb 2026 the UT (Mr Justice Cawson and Judge Scott) dismissed Lycamobile’s appeal and upheld HMRC’s position.

Bundle structure

Lycamobile sold prepaid bundles, typically 30-day plans, with fixed allowances of call minutes, SMS messages, and data, and in some cases additional value-added services such as roaming or digital content. Any unused allowances expired at the end of the period. The dispute centred on VAT on bundled services, with HMRC arguing that the sale of the bundle itself represented a supply of services, meaning VAT was due on the full price at the point of sale. Lycamobile, however, maintained that the bundles operated more like vouchers or stored credit, so VAT should only arise when customers actually used their allowances.

Arguments: VAT at Sale versus VAT on Use

Lycamobile’s view: 

The company argued that buying a bundle created a right to future services, not the services themselves. In other words, customers had only prepaid for a possible future supply, so VAT should be a consumption tax applied on use. Under this theory the correct VAT “tax point” occurs when and only if an allowance is used. Lycamobile pointed to cases like MacDonald Resorts (Points Rights) and FindMyPast, and to the EU voucher rules, to support the idea that unused rights carry no VAT. It said treating the bundle itself as a supply would “undermine” voucher legislation which treats multi-purpose vouchers as taxable on redemption only.

HMRC’s view: 

HMRC countered that Lycamobile sold a package of services (guaranteed minutes/text/data for a fixed time). The true supply was the bundle itself – the availability of those services – fixed in advance and paid for in full. HMRC compared the bundle to a subscription or ticket: for example, a streaming or gym membership. A person pays a flat fee for access (regardless of how much they use). Likewise, most Lycamobile bundles were under-used (customers typically used only 5–10% of their allowances), yet the price was the same. HMRC argued that VAT had to be charged when the bundle was sold – just like charging VAT on a fixed-price concert ticket or a monthly media subscription – irrespective of later usage.

First-Tier Tribunal Decision

Before reaching the UT, the FTT (in 2024) already decided that Lycamobile’s bundles were supplies taxable at sale. The FTT held that each Type 1 bundle (call/data/text only) was a single supply made when sold, and for Type 2/3 bundles (including value-added or roaming services) the extra features were merely ancillary to the main supply. In practice the FTT charged VAT on the full bundle price, but allowed retrospective VAT adjustments for any services used outside the UK (up to October 2017, before EU rules changed). Lycamobile appealed on four grounds, but the core dispute (first ground) was simply whether the supply occurs at sale or at use.

Upper Tribunal’s Ruling

The Upper Tribunal firmly sided with HMRC. Its key findings were:

VAT at point of sale: 

The UT agreed that the bundle sale is the “real supply” for VAT. “Receipt of the Allowances was the customer’s purpose in buying the bundle… VAT therefore arose at the point of sale,” the UT held. In other words, Lycamobile supplied the availability of minutes/data in advance, so VAT was due on the entire bundle price immediately.

Bundle = guaranteed availability: 

The tribunal emphasised that customers were buying guaranteed access to a set amount of telecommunication services for a fixed period. This “guaranteed availability, at a fixed price, for a fixed period” was the substance of the supply. The fact that most bundles went largely unused (only 5–10% of allowances typically used) only underscored that customers paid for availability rather than per-minute use.

No “all information” requirement: 

Lycamobile had argued (relying on cases like MacDonald Resorts and FindMyPast) that VAT cannot be charged until all relevant details (like future use) are known. The UT rejected this. It noted those cases dealt with prepayment timing, not with identifying the supply itself. The judges pointed out that if Lycamobile were right, it would undermine virtually all fixed-price services: “how could there ever be a supply of availability or access” (for example a monthly streaming subscription) “if usage is unknown” at the start. The tribunal expressly held that there is no legal rule preventing VAT from being due on an advance payment even if not all future details are known at sale.

Voucher rules inapplicable: 

Lycamobile also claimed its bundles were multi-purpose vouchers under Schedule 10A/10B of UK VAT law (and the 2019 EU Voucher Directive). If so, VAT would only be payable on redemption (use of the voucher). The UT disagreed. It agreed with the FTT that Lycamobile’s bundles failed the criteria for vouchers. A true voucher is an identifiable instrument with a monetary face value that can be redeemed. By contrast, a bundle was simply a sale of services: there was no “instrument” being accepted as consideration when the bundle was used. In short, these were not vouchers under the VAT Act, so the voucher deferral rules (Schedule 10B after 2019, or Schedule 10A before) did not apply.

Other grounds: 

The UT also rejected Lycamobile’s arguments about value-added services and about EU outside-use. For completeness, the UT agreed the FTT correctly treated ancillary services as part of the bundle supply, and it agreed the limited VAT adjustments for non-EU usage (pre-Nov 2017) in the FTT decision. But these were minor technical points. The main outcome is that Lycamobile’s appeal was dismissed in full.

In summary, the UT confirmed that VAT must be charged on Lycamobile’s plan bundles at the time of sale. This reflects HMRC’s view that VAT is a tax on the provision of service availability, not strictly on consumption of units.

Lycamobile Loses VAT Appeal Case: Implications for Businesses

This decision has important lessons for mobile operators and others selling bundled or prepaid services in the UK:

VAT timing: 

Companies must charge VAT when prepaid plans or bundles are sold, even if customers do not use all the allowances. They cannot defer VAT until usage. VAT on unused allowances is effectively non-recoverable (because no supplies happen after sale), so selling bundles at a fixed price now carries a higher tax cost.

Pricing and cash flow: 

Some operators may need to revisit their pricing or marketing. Lycamobile and other MVNOs serving cost-sensitive segments often sell bundles with generous allowances (and many go unused). With VAT due on the full amount, operators could face higher upfront VAT bills and cash-flow pressure. Retailers and distributors should also check their margins – VAT inclusion might need adjusting in bundle prices if previously omitted.

Voucher rules clarified: 

The case clarifies that multi-use vouchers (Schedule 10B) will not cover typical prepaid bundles unless they have a distinct redeemable instrument with trackable value. Only genuine vouchers (like gift cards or prepaid cards with face value) can use those deferral rules.

Precedent for other industries: 

While this case is about telecoms, the principle applies to any fixed-fee subscription or bundle. Service providers should note that under UK law VAT is often due on advance payments for access (consistent with the VAT Directive). In practical terms, firms selling subscriptions or membership-type services (online, fitness, travel, etc.) can usually rely on charging VAT at sale.

Roaming and outside-the-EU usage: 

On a side note, HMRC had also examined whether data/voice used outside the UK (pre-Nov 2017) was outside the scope of UK VAT. The UT largely let the FTT’s limited adjustments stand, but also hinted this did not change the main supply treatment. Businesses should still apply the “place of supply” rules carefully for roaming.

Overall, HMRC’s position is now confirmed: VAT is payable on prepaid telecom bundles at sale. Lycamobile (and similar operators) may choose to seek further appeal, but any higher court would likely follow the tribunal’s reasoning.

How We Help Subscription Businesses

At Apex Accountants we help clients navigate complex VAT issues like this one. Our specialists can assist with:

  • VAT compliance and planning – ensuring your telecom or service bundles are structured correctly for VAT, and advising on how voucher and subscription rules apply.
  • Tax dispute support – representation and advice in tax tribunal appeals and negotiations with HMRC.
  • Cash-flow and pricing analysis – modelling how VAT at point of sale affects your pricing, margins and cash flow; we can help redesign bundle offerings if needed.
  • Training and updates – keeping your finance team informed about VAT rules on vouchers, prepayments and digital services.

Whether you sell mobile services, digital subscriptions or bundled products, we can help you stay compliant and minimise surprises.

Conclusion

The Lycamobile case underscores a simple VAT truth: if you sell a product that guarantees future use (like a bundle or subscription), the tax is normally due up front. The Upper Tribunal’s decision is thorough and well-founded: Lycamobile’s prepaid bundles are taxable supplies at the point of sale. Businesses should take note and ensure their VAT accounting matches this outcome.

In future, operators will need to charge VAT on any unused allowances and cannot treat those amounts as tax-free. As one judge noted, otherwise VAT could never be charged on services like monthly streaming or gym memberships, which would not reflect how VAT law operates in practice. This ruling removes uncertainty and aligns UK practice with long-standing principles of VAT law.

If you would like guidance on how these changes affect your business, you can contact us for tailored VAT advice and support.

FAQs: VAT on Bundled Services and Subscription Models in UK

1. When is VAT due on bundled services in the UK?

VAT is generally due at the point of sale when a bundled service is supplied. The Lycamobile case confirmed that telecom bundles create a taxable supply upfront, even if services are used later or remain unused.

2. Do businesses pay VAT on unused services or allowances?

Yes. The Upper Tribunal confirmed that VAT applies to the full price paid for bundled services, including unused allowances. Customers are paying for access or availability, not actual usage, so unused elements remain taxable.

3. Are prepaid mobile bundles treated as vouchers for VAT?

No. The tribunal held that telecom bundles are not vouchers under UK VAT rules. Instead, they represent a direct supply of services at purchase, meaning VAT must be charged on the total price upfront.

4. What was the key issue in the Lycamobile VAT case?

The dispute focused on whether VAT was due when bundles were sold or only when allowances were used. The tribunal confirmed VAT arises at sale, rejecting the argument that taxation should depend on usage.

5. Why did HMRC argue VAT should be charged upfront?

HMRC argued that customers purchase guaranteed access to services for a fixed price. This creates a taxable supply at sale. The tribunal agreed, stating that availability itself is a supply for VAT purposes.

6. Did the tribunal allow any exceptions to VAT on bundles?

A limited exception applied to older supplies before November 2017. Where services were effectively used outside the EU, VAT adjustments could be made. However, the general rule remains that VAT is due on sale.

7. What does this ruling mean for subscription businesses?

The decision confirms that subscription models, including telecoms, gyms, and streaming services, are taxable when sold. Businesses cannot defer VAT based on customer usage, as payment secures access rather than consumption.

8. How does this affect VAT compliance for UK businesses?

Businesses must identify the correct tax point and charge VAT at sale for bundled or subscription services. Incorrect timing can lead to assessments, penalties, and interest, especially where VAT has been under-declared.

9. Can VAT be adjusted if services are not used?

Generally, no adjustment is allowed simply because services are unused. VAT is based on the supply made at sale. Adjustments are only possible in specific circumstances, such as non-EU use under earlier rules.

10. What lessons should UK businesses take from the Lycamobile case?

The key lesson is to assess the real nature of the supply. If customers pay for access or availability, VAT is due upfront. Businesses should review pricing models, contracts, and VAT treatment to avoid significant liabilities.

HMRC Is Hiring Valuation Agents Ahead of New Mansion Tax Plans

The High Value Council Tax Surcharge, often referred to as a “mansion tax”, is a new annual charge on owners of residential properties in England valued at £2 million or more based on 2026 valuations. It was announced in the 2025 Budget and is expected to come into effect from April 2028. As part of the preparation for this policy, HMRC is hiring valuation agents to support the assessment of high-value properties and identify those that fall within scope. The charge will apply to property owners rather than occupiers and will be payable alongside standard Council Tax. Social housing will be excluded from the scope of this surcharge.

Key facts include:

  • Threshold and Bands: Properties valued £2.0m–2.5m pay £2,500 per year; £2.5m–3.5m pay £3,500; £3.5m–5.0m pay £5,000; and homes over £5m pay £7,500 (based on 2026 valuations). These charges will rise each year with CPI inflation from 2029‑30 onwards.
  • Scope: Fewer than 1% of homes in England will pay this surcharge. The Valuation Office Agency (VOA) will run a targeted valuation exercise during 2026 to identify all properties above £2m. Existing Council Tax will continue unchanged; the surcharge revenue goes to the Treasury (though collected by local councils).
  • Frequency: Once identified, affected homes will be re-valued on a rolling basis every 5 years. A public consultation on details (reliefs, appeals, ownership rules etc.) was held early 2026. Further consultations will cover support for those who struggle to pay, reliefs/exemptions, and complex ownership arrangements.

Also Read: The Problems with the Mansion Tax: A Closer Look at Design Issues and Criticisms

Why Is HMRC Hiring Valuation Agents?

HMRC is recruiting up to 1,000 new valuation officers in anticipation of this surcharge. About a third of these roles will help implement the high-value surcharge, with the rest covering other priorities (such as customs checks on goods). The VOA (responsible for council tax banding) is being merged into HMRC in April 2026, and will use these extra staff to carry out property revaluations.

According to Treasury officials, these hires will peak in 2027–28 and 2028–29 to handle the extra workload. VOA Chief Executive Jonathan Russell told MPs that the agency plans to use “professional valuers” and additional support staff to assess homes potentially in scope. In fact, the VOA has said it will review not just homes over £2m, but also many houses from about £1.5m upwards, to make sure nothing is missed.

The Treasury’s own analysis suggests roughly 150,000–200,000 properties could be caught by the surcharge. For example, any house that might now be worth over £2m (and even up to £5m) is likely to be rechecked. These figures come from VOA estimates and parliamentary evidence; current Council Tax band data shows under 1% of homes are above £2m, but the broader review up to £5m (and including £1.5m+) expands the pool to about 0.5–0.7% of properties.

What This Means for Homeowners

Who pays: 

Only owners of qualifying homes pay the surcharge – not tenants or lodgers. That means any mortgage or equity-share owner on the title at the valuation date (2026) would be liable.

Where it applies: 

Only homes in England are affected. Northern Ireland, Scotland and Wales use different systems. Social housing (council and housing association homes) is explicitly exempt.

How payments work: 

The new charges will be collected by local councils alongside normal Council Tax, but funds go to central government. Owners will get an annual bill. The surcharge is in addition to existing Council Tax, not a replacement.

Valuation and appeals: 

The VOA will use up-to-date market data (2026 values) and property attributes (size, location, features) to assess each home. In most cases the initial valuations will be done by officials (a “desk-based” valuation using sales data and maps). However, homeowners can challenge their surcharge valuation through a formal appeals process, details of which will be set out in new legislation. Affected owners should keep property records (purchases, improvements, planning info) handy.

Timeline: 

VOA valuations are expected to start in late 2026 or early 2027, so that bills can be ready for 2028. HMRC has not confirmed exactly when each house will be reviewed, but Jonathan Russell told MPs the review of high-value homes will begin this year (2026). Revaluations will then follow every five years for properties over the threshold.

Also Read: Mansion Tax in UK to Affect 200,000 Homes Starting in 2028

How We Help Deal With Mansion Tax

Apex Accountants can help high-value homeowners and professionals prepare for the new surcharge:

  • Property Review: Analyse your property portfolio. If any home may be near £2m (or held by company/ trust), we check the likely 2026 value.
  • Tax Planning: Advise on timing sales/purchases. Build the surcharge into financial planning. Model the annual cost and cash flow.
  • Ownership Structuring: Guide on whether to own property in a company, trust, joint names or a partnership. We will stay up-to-date on the government’s consultation outcomes for complex ownership.
  • Valuation Support: Help provide information to the VOA valuers. Ensure improvements and unique features of your property are documented to justify value.
  • Appeals Assistance: If you believe an assessment is too high, we can work with you (and a surveyor if needed) to submit evidence and appeal the valuation.

Conclusion

The new high-value Council Tax surcharge is now law, with detailed rules to follow a public consultation. From 2028 on, owners of homes worth £2m+ (and some up to £5m) will pay an extra annual tax. HMRC’s VOA is already preparing for this by recruiting specialist valuers and planning assessments for up to 200,000 homes. For those potentially affected, early preparation is key – understanding the bands and possible reliefs and keeping good records will make the transition smoother.

Supreme Court Ruling on Input VAT Recovery: Hotel La Tour Decision and Its Impact on Share Sales

The UK Supreme Court has brought finality to a long‑running dispute about whether companies can reclaim VAT on professional fees associated with selling shares in a subsidiary. In HMRC v Hotel La Tour Ltd [2025] UKSC 46, the court held that the input VAT incurred on adviser fees for an exempt share sale is not deductible, even where the purpose of the sale is to fund future taxable activities. This landmark ruling clarifies the direct and immediate link test for input VAT recovery and underscores the importance of transaction structuring for businesses.

Background to the Hotel La Tour dispute

  • Hotel La Tour Ltd (HLT) acted as a holding company and owned all the shares in Hotel La Tour Birmingham Ltd (HLTB). HLT provided management services to HLTB, and together they formed a VAT group.
  • In 2015 HLT decided to build a new hotel in Milton Keynes. To finance the project it sold its shares in HLTB to a third party. The sale proceeds, minus professional fees of about £382,900 plus VAT of £76,823, were used to fund the Milton Keynes development.
  • HLT reclaimed the input VAT on those fees, arguing that the services were linked to its general hotel business and not the share sale. HMRC denied the claim on the basis that the share sale was a VAT‑exempt transaction.

Hotel La Tour Decisions of the tribunals

  • First‑tier Tribunal (FTT): The FTT accepted HLT’s argument. It found that the professional services were not cost components of the share sale and that the sale’s purpose—to finance the Milton Keynes hotel—meant the fees were linked to taxable downstream activities.
  • Upper Tribunal (UT): HMRC appealed, but the UT agreed with the FTT. It held that the share sale did not break the link to the taxable hotel activities; since the proceeds funded the new hotel, the fees were indirectly linked to taxable supplies.

Court of Appeal Outcome

HMRC appealed again. The Court of Appeal overturned the tribunals’ decisions, finding that the professional services were directly and immediately linked to the exempt share sale and therefore the VAT was irrecoverable. The Court of Appeal emphasised the BLP Group plc v Customs and Excise Comrs (CJEU) precedent, which states that where costs relate to an exempt transaction, input VAT cannot be deducted.

HLT then appealed to the Supreme Court.

Supreme Court Ruling on VAT Recovery on Share Sale

On 17 December 2025 the Supreme Court unanimously dismissed HLT’s appeal. Lady Rose, delivering the judgement, confirmed key points:

  • Direct and immediate link test: 

The court reaffirmed that to recover input VAT there must be a direct and immediate link between the services received and a taxable output. Where a service is a cost component of an exempt transaction—here, the share sale—VAT cannot be recovered. The court rejected the FTT and UT’s use of a ‘cost component’ analysis focused on whether the fees were built into the share price.

  • Purpose of fundraising is irrelevant: 

HLT argued that because the purpose of the sale was to fund the taxable hotel business, the fees should be linked to that business. The Supreme Court disagreed. It held that the purpose for which funds are raised does not override the statutory treatment of a share sale as an exempt supply.

  • Distinguishing exempt and out‑of‑scope transactions: 

The court drew a clear distinction between transactions within scope but exempt and those out of scope of VAT. If a transaction is out of scope (e.g., issuing new shares or obtaining a loan), costs may be linked to the general business, and VAT recovery may be allowed; but where the transaction is an exempt share sale, no deduction is possible.

  • VAT grouping: 

HLT argued that because it and HLTB formed a VAT group, the share sale should be treated as out of scope and the fees attributable to the overall business. The Supreme Court rejected this, explaining that VAT grouping simplifies tax administration but does not change the nature of supplies; members continue to carry on economic activities between themselves.

The court therefore concluded that the professional fees were directly linked to the share sale and not to HLT’s general business; the input VAT was irrecoverable.

Key principles on input VAT recovery

The decision clarifies several principles for businesses considering share sales:

  • Exempt share sales block recovery

When a company sells shares in a subsidiary, the transaction is exempt from VAT under the financial services exemption. Input VAT on adviser fees incurred for that sale is not deductible.

  • Out‑of‑scope transactions may allow recovery

If a transaction is outside the scope of VAT—such as issuing new shares or obtaining a loan—the related costs can be attributed to the overall business and input VAT can be recovered to the extent the business makes taxable supplies.

  • Partial exemption for holding companies

Holding companies providing management services can sometimes recover VAT on professional costs if they can demonstrate that the costs relate to their economic activity and not solely to exempt transactions. However, the Supreme Court indicated such cases are fact‑specific and require evidence that services are linked to the general business.

  • VAT grouping does not create a ‘fundraising exception’

Being in a VAT group does not convert an exempt share sale into an out‑of‑scope transaction. VAT grouping is a mechanism for simplifying administration and does not create new reliefs.

Why purpose doesn’t trump exemption

Some commentators hoped that the Supreme Court might recognise a “fundraising exception” for share sales used to raise capital for taxable activities. The court firmly rejected this approach. It said allowing the underlying purpose to determine VAT recovery would create uncertainty and encourage companies to manipulate records to suit tax goals. The decision restores legal certainty: if costs are directly linked to an exempt transaction, the intended use of the proceeds is irrelevant.

Implications of input VAT recovery case for businesses

Plan the transaction structure

The ruling makes clear that the method used to raise funds determines VAT recoverability. Companies that sell shares to fund projects cannot recover VAT on adviser fees because the share sale is exempt. In contrast, selling the business assets as a transfer of a going concern (TOGC) is outside the scope of VAT. In such cases, provided the buyer continues the same business and meets other conditions, VAT is not charged, and the seller may recover VAT on related costs.

Consider alternative fundraising options

  • Loan financing or share issues: Raising finance via loans or issuing new shares may be outside the scope of VAT, meaning adviser fees could be attributable to the general business and input VAT recoverable.
  • Selling assets instead of shares: If HLT had sold the hotel as a going concern rather than the shares in HLTB, the sale might have been outside the scope of VAT and VAT recovery on fees could have been possible.
  • Partial exemption: Businesses with both taxable and exempt activities should regularly review their partial exemption method to maximise recovery of overhead VAT and ensure compliance.

Importance of expert advice

The Hotel La Tour case illustrates how easily VAT recovery can be misunderstood. Advisory fees for major transactions can be substantial, and getting the VAT analysis wrong may materially affect deal economics. Professional advisers can help businesses assess whether costs are linked to exempt or out‑of‑scope transactions and plan accordingly.

How We Help Businesses

At Apex Accountants, we specialise in helping businesses navigate the complexities of VAT on corporate transactions:

  • Transaction planning and structuring: We analyse whether a proposed sale or acquisition should be structured as a share sale, asset sale or other finance arrangement to optimise VAT recovery.
  • VAT and partial exemption reviews: Our team reviews your business’s VAT position, ensuring that partial exemption methods are appropriate and that input VAT on overheads is maximised within the law.
  • Deal execution support: We work alongside legal advisers during due diligence to identify VAT risks, manage adviser fees and ensure compliance with HMRC requirements.
  • Representation and dispute resolution: If HMRC queries your VAT treatment, we provide robust defence and negotiate with HMRC on your behalf.

Conclusion

The Supreme Court’s decision in HMRC v Hotel La Tour confirms that adviser fees connected to exempt share sales are not recoverable. It emphasises that the method of fundraising matters more than its purpose: selling shares is an exempt supply, whereas issuing shares, taking loans, or selling assets as a going concern may be out of scope and allow VAT recovery. 

Businesses planning transactions should carefully examine the VAT implications and seek professional advice to avoid costly surprises. By structuring transactions appropriately and understanding the direct and immediate link test, businesses can maximise VAT recovery while remaining compliant with UK law.

If you are planning a share sale, restructuring, or fundraising transaction, it is important to review the VAT position early. Apex Accountants provide practical VAT advice tailored to your business activities. You can contact us to discuss your situation and understand the best approach before taking any steps.

Zero-Rated VAT on Hair Loss Treatments: Mark Glenn Ltd v HMRC Explained

In January 2026, the Upper Tribunal (Tax and Chancery Chamber) issued a landmark ruling on VAT for hair-loss treatments. In Mark Glenn Ltd v HMRC, the court held that a specialised hair-loss service for women could be zero-rated. Mark Glenn Ltd provided the “Kinsey System” – a custom wig fitted over bald patches, with natural hair woven into it – and had treated this supply as 0% VAT. HMRC challenged that, saying it was a standard-rated service. The FTT initially agreed with HMRC, but on appeal the UT sided with the company.

Key outcome of the VAT on hair transplant case:

The Tribunal decided the Kinsey System supplies were made for disabled persons (women with severe hair loss) and involved adapting goods to their condition. This meant each supply fell within Item 3 of Group 12, Schedule 8 of the VAT Act 1994 and was therefore zero-rated. In other words, severe hair loss in these women counted as a “disability,” and the custom wig service was an adaptation for that disability.

The Kinsey System for Hair Loss

The Kinsey System is a bespoke hair replacement service. In practice:

  • A custom-made wig is placed over a bald or thinning area. A fine wig-mesh backing is used where needed.
  • Any remaining natural hair is pulled through the mesh alongside the wig’s hair (often using a small hook or needle). This makes the client’s own hair appear to grow through the wig.
  • The wig is then trimmed and styled. The effect is that healthy hair isn’t shaved or hidden but is integrated with the wig as a “second skin”.
  • Clients return roughly every 4–6 weeks for maintenance. During these visits, stylists adjust and secure the hairpiece to fit the client’s new hair growth (e.g., re-anchoring it to the natural hair).

None of this involves any surgery or medicine – it’s a highly skilled cosmetic service. Mark Glenn Ltd always treated it as a supply of services (not goods) for VAT purposes.

VAT Relief for Disabled Persons

Under UK VAT law, certain goods and services for disabled people can be zero-rated. In particular, Group 12, Schedule 8 of the VAT Act 1994 offers relief. Item 3 of Group 12 says the following supplies can be zero-rated:

“Services of adapting goods to suit the condition of a disabled person.”

Here, a disabled person is defined broadly as “any person who is chronically sick or disabled”. HMRC’s guidance (Notice 701/7) explains that this generally means someone with a long-term physical or mental impairment that substantially affects daily life or a condition recognised as chronic by doctors (for example, diabetes). The term “disability” is not limited to listed illnesses; it uses its ordinary meaning, taking into account the full impact on the person’s life.

Practically, many hair-loss-related aids are already zero-rated (for example, wigs for alopecia or post-chemotherapy patients are treated as medical aids for the disabled). The Mark Glenn case tested whether the more complex Kinsey System falls under the same relief.

VAT on Hair Transplants Case – First-Tier Tribunal Findings

The First-tier Tribunal (FTT) originally sided with HMRC. It found that:

  • Female baldness was not itself a disability: The FTT said significant hair loss in women is “not, in itself, a disability.” It noted baldness is not an impairment or chronic illness and does not physically prevent normal activities.
  • Kinsey System was more than an adaptation: The FTT saw the Kinsey System as a single, labour-intensive service (including regular styling and maintenance), not just the adaptation of a wig. In their view, carving part of that service into “adapting goods” would be an artificial split.

On that basis, the FTT concluded the supplies were standard-rated and dismissed the appeal.

Upper Tribunal Ruling

The taxpayer appealed. The Upper Tribunal disagreed with the FTT on two key issues:

Severe hair loss as a disability: 

The UT held that “severe hair loss in women constitutes an impairment that adversely affects the ability to carry out everyday activities.” It recognised that the problem is not physical inability but “the distress that would ordinarily be experienced by a woman with severe hair loss” if her condition were untreated. The judgement emphasised the cultural importance of hair to female identity and how society treats hair loss. Because of those factors, women with baldness or patchy hair loss (not merely thinning) were found to be “disabled” for VAT purposes. The court noted that it was only considering severe, patchy loss in women, not other appearance issues.

Adaptation of goods: 

The UT also found the Kinsey System was indeed an adaptation service under Item 3. The process of fitting, styling, and maintaining the wig was carried out to suit each disabled client’s condition, specifically the lack of hair. VAT relief on wigs becomes important here, as it may apply where the supply is linked to a qualifying disability. The wig’s construction and the placement of individual hair strands were tailored to each woman’s hair pattern. Even the maintenance, including readjusting anchor points, was viewed as adapting the device to the client’s remaining hair. In short, although sold as one overall service, it involved adapting a hairpiece to the disabled person.

Result:

Each Kinsey System supply fell within Item 3 of Group 12, so the UT declared them zero-rated. The appeal was allowed, and HMRC’s VAT demands were quashed.

What Does This Mean for Businesses?

For firms in the hair-loss or medical-aids business, this ruling has important implications:

Zero-rating now applies to eligible sales:

 If you supply custom hair-replacement systems to women with serious hair loss (alopecia, etc.), you can treat those sales as 0% VAT – as long as the client is truly disabled by their hair loss. The Mark Glenn case essentially confirms that such clients meet the “chronically sick or disabled” test.

Gather proper evidence: 

To claim zero-rating, continue to follow Notice 701/7 practices. Obtain a written declaration from each customer stating that they need the system for a disabling condition. Keep any supporting medical notes or references. If HMRC audits you, these documents prove the sale was for a disabled person’s use. Remember, the relief is for personal use by the disabled individual, not for someone buying it for general use.

Be clear on adaptation: 

This case shows that complex systems can count as “adapting goods.” Other businesses should review if similar services (like integrating natural hair with medical hairpieces) might now qualify. The key is that the product is customised to the user’s condition. Simple off-the-shelf wigs for medical reasons are already zero-rated as appliances, but now bespoke fitting and maintenance services also clearly qualify.

Scope limits: 

The decision is confined to the facts – it dealt with women with severe, patchy hair loss. It does not automatically make every hair-loss product zero-rated. For example, male pattern baldness or mild thinning were not part of this case. Use caution and consider whether each client truly has a serious medical condition.

No change to fundamentals: 

VAT can’t be charged if criteria aren’t met. If a hairpiece is provided to someone without a qualifying condition, standard VAT (20%) still applies. The new ruling simply means more suppliers can justify zero-rating when the situation fits Group 12 requirements.

Many UK wig suppliers already offer VAT-free sales to alopecia patients (where the wig is worn for medical reasons). The Mark Glenn judgement provides legal backing for that practice and extends it to more advanced hair-loss systems. If you were previously uncertain about zero-rating such services, this case gives clarity. 

You may want to review past VAT returns (within the allowable period) to see if any corrections are due. Going forward, ensure your contracts, invoices, and customer paperwork clearly reflect the disability relief.

How We Help Businesses Deal With VAT

At Apex Accountants, we keep abreast of changes like this so your business doesn’t miss out on legitimate tax relief. Our VAT and tax experts can help you:

  • Review whether your hair-loss products or services qualify for zero-rating.
  • Set up correct pricing and invoicing (with 0% VAT) for eligible supplies.
  • Draft and file customer eligibility declarations in line with HMRC rules.
  • Assist with any VAT audits or appeals, citing cases like Mark Glenn Ltd v HMRC.
  • Train your staff on identifying disabled-person reliefs for goods and services.

Staying compliant with VAT legislation can save your clients money. We can advise on the specifics of Group 12 reliefs and ensure your approach is fully supported by the latest case law.

Conclusion

The Mark Glenn decision confirms that custom hair-loss treatments for disabled women may be zero-rated VAT. Businesses should review their supplies of wigs and hair systems for VAT exemption. If a patient’s severe baldness meets the disability criteria and the service involves adapting a hairpiece to that condition, you can charge 0% VAT. Proper records and customer declarations are essential. If you have any questions about VAT on medical or disability-related products, our team is here to help.

FAQs

1. Is there VAT on hair transplants?

Hair transplants are usually exempt from VAT when they are carried out for medical purposes by a qualified healthcare professional. However, if the procedure is purely cosmetic, HMRC may treat it as a standard-rated service at 20% VAT.

2. Do you pay VAT on beauty treatments?

Most beauty treatments, including cosmetic procedures and non-medical services, are subject to VAT at the standard rate of 20%. Only treatments that meet strict medical criteria or qualify under specific relief rules may be exempt or zero-rated.

3. What does hair loss treatment cost?

Hair loss treatment costs vary depending on the type of service, level of customisation, and maintenance required. Costs can range from a few hundred pounds for basic solutions to several thousand pounds for bespoke systems with ongoing care.

4. What conditions qualify for VAT relief?

VAT relief applies to individuals who are chronically sick or disabled, meaning they have a long-term condition that significantly affects daily activities. This may include medical conditions such as alopecia, cancer-related hair loss, or other recognised impairments.

5. How to avoid VAT on hair loss treatment?

VAT is not simply avoided but may be reduced to 0% if the treatment qualifies under disabled person relief rules. The supply must be for personal use by a qualifying individual and supported by appropriate documentation and declarations.

6. Is VAT charged on hair loss treatment costs?

Hair loss treatment is normally subject to 20% VAT. However, it may be zero-rated where it involves adapting goods for a disabled person and meets the criteria set out in VAT legislation and HMRC guidance for relief.

7. How to get VAT relief on hair loss treatment?

To obtain VAT relief, the treatment must qualify under disability rules. The customer usually needs to provide a written declaration confirming their condition, and the supplier must keep evidence that the service is for personal use.

Book a Free Consultation