The court considered the criteria for determining whether the provision to guests by a hotelier of travel services (and in particular transport to and from the hotel and excursions) constituted supply which was ancillary to the supply of accommodation.
Held: The provision applied not just to travel agents, but to all ‘traders who habitually arrange travel or tours and, in order to supply the services generally associated with activities of that kind, have recourse to other taxable persons’ ‘traders such as hoteliers who provide services habitually associated with travel frequently make use of services bought in from third parties which take up a small proportion of the package price compared to the accommodation and are among the tasks traditionally entrusted to such traders. Those bought-in services do not therefore constitute for customers an aim in itself, but a means of better enjoying the principal service supplied by the trader. In such circumstances the services bought in from third parties remain purely ancillary in relation to the in-house services, and the trader should not be taxed under art 26 of the Sixth Directive. Where, however, a hotelier habitually offers his customers, in addition to accommodation, services which go beyond the tasks traditionally entrusted to hoteliers, and which cannot be carried out without a substantial effect on the package price charged, such as travel to the hotel from distant pick-up points, such services are not to be equated with purely ancillary services.’
Citations:
C-308/96, [1998] STC 1189, [1998] EUECJ C-308/96
Links:
Jurisdiction:
European
Citing:
Reference from – Customs and Excise Commissioners v Madgett and Another T/A Howden Court Hotel QBD 15-Jan-1996
A hotel’s offering of a coach trip to collect guests may make them travel agents for VAT purposes. The case was referred on to the ECJ. . .
Cited by:
Reffered to – Customs and Excise Commissioners v Madgett and Another T/A Howden Court Hotel QBD 15-Jan-1996
A hotel’s offering of a coach trip to collect guests may make them travel agents for VAT purposes. The case was referred on to the ECJ. . .
Cited – Commissioners of Customs and Excise v British Telecommunications Plc HL 11-Feb-1999
The cost of the delivery of a quantity of new cars from the factory or depot to the purchaser is incidental and ancillary to the supply of the cars themselves, and the VAT on delivery charges was not reclaimable by the purchasing company as Input . .
Cited – College of Estate Management v Commissioners of Customs and Excise ChD 13-Nov-2003
The college appealed a finding that the supply of course manuals to its students was part of its exempt rather than zero-rated supply.
Held: ‘Once it is decided that there is a single supply from an economic view which should not be . .
Cited – College of Estate Management v Commissioners of Customs and Excise CA 11-Aug-2004
When offering courses to distance learning students, the College offered materials for the courses. As part of the course this supply would be exempt, as books, the supply would be zero-rated, but the taxpayer would be able to reclaim its VAT . .
Cited – Card Protection Plan Ltd v Commissioners of Customs and Excise ECJ 25-Feb-1999
A company procuring insurance purchases for credit card protection was as exempt from VAT as was the insurer. A provision which restricted the ability to claim such exemption to those registered as insurers under national was invalid under European . .
Cited – Beynon and Partners v Customs and Excise HL 25-Nov-2004
The House asked whether the personal administration of a drug such as a vaccine by an NHS doctor to a patient is a taxable supply for the purposes of value added tax. The provision of medical care in the exercise of the medical and paramedical . .
Cited – College of Estate Management v Customs and Excise HL 20-Oct-2005
The college supplied educational services by distance learning. The commissioner sought to argue that printe daterials supplied with the course were ancillary and did not have the same exemption form VAT.
Held: The supplies did benefit from . .
Cited – Revenue and Customs v Secret Hotels2 Ltd SC 5-Mar-2014
The Court was asked as to: ‘the liability for Value Added Tax of a company which markets and arranges holiday accommodation through an on-line website. The outcome turns on the appropriate characterisation of the relationship between the company, . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.
VAT
Updated: 03 June 2022; Ref: scu.161948