The court was asked whether the VAT treatment of mechanised cash bingo breaches the principle of fiscal neutrality: and the core issue on the appeal is whether the burden lay on Rank to adduce evidence to prove not only that there was a difference in VAT treatment between similar (and apparently competing) products but also that the difference did as a matter of fact actually affect competition.
Norris J approved the result that the machines were not gaming machines: ‘The argument proceeded on the footing that the element of chance had to be provided by ‘the machine’ and the problem lay in identifying ‘the machine’. The ‘element of chance’ is the determining event which governs the outcome of the game being played on the machine which has the slot in it and which the player is playing. Where the determining event is a random number there is I think no difference in principle between a human being selecting a numbered ball, an electric ball shuffler (such as that used in the National Lottery) producing a numbered ball or a microprocessor emitting a stream of numbers. It is a question of fact in each case whether that determining event is produced by ‘the machine’, and fine distinctions might have to be drawn. In my judgment the principle by reference to which those judgments have to be made is whether the outcome of the game may sensibly be regarded as determined by an external event which the machine records or is produced by the machine itself. Like the tribunal I would hold that the random generation of a number in a separate unit which serves various player terminals (which may themselves be running different games) is properly regarded as an external event and not one produced by the machine that the player is playing. Like the tribunal I do not think it is possible to elaborate further.’
Judges:
Norris J
Citations:
[2009] EWHC 1244 (Ch), [2009] BVC 598, [2009] STC 2304, [2009] STI 1884
Links:
Statutes:
Jurisdiction:
England and Wales
Citing:
At VDT(1) – The Rank Group Plc v Revenue and Customs VDT 27-May-2008
VDT EXEMPT SUPPLIES – Gaming – Mechanised cash bingo under Gaming Act 1968 s.14 excluded from exemption – Similar supplies under s.21 exempt – Whether principle of fiscal neutrality infringed – Same company . .
At VDT (2) – Rank Group Ltd v Revenue and Customs VDT 19-Aug-2008
VDT COMMUNITY LAW – Fiscal neutrality – Exemption – Gaming – Provision of gaming machines excluded from exemption – Similar supplies under Part III of Gaming Act 1968 exempt – Whether principle of fiscal . .
Cited by:
At ChD – The Rank Group Plc v Revenue and Customs FTTTx 11-Dec-2009
FTTTx Community Law – Fiscal neutrality – Exemption – Exclusion of provision of ‘gaming machines’ from exemption – Whether taxed machines similar to exempt machines – Relevance of regulatory regime – TNT [2009] . .
At ChD – Commissioners for Her Majesty’s Revenue and Customs v Rank Group plc C-260/10 ECJ 10-Nov-2011
ECJ Taxation – Sixth VAT Directive – Exemptions – Article 13B(f) – Betting, lotteries and other forms of gambling – Principle of fiscal neutrality – Mechanised cash bingo – Slot machines – Administrative practice . .
At ChD – Commissioners for Her Majesty’s Revenue and Customs v Rank Group plc C-259/10 ECJ 10-Nov-2011
ECJ Taxation – Sixth VAT Directive – Exemptions – Article 13B(f) – Betting, lotteries and other forms of gambling – Principle of fiscal neutrality – Mechanised cash bingo – Slot machines – Administrative practice . .
At ChD – HMRC v The Rank Group Plc UTTC 4-Oct-2012
Taxation – whether gaming or betting and the different VAT Treatment of newer gaming machines. . .
At ChD – HM Revenue and Customs v The Rank Group Plc CA 30-Oct-2013
The tax payer had sought repayment of sums of VAT charged to a particular form of gaming, saying that the rules infringed the principles of fiscal neutrality under European law. HMRC now appealed against a finding that the machines were exempt from . .
At ChD – Revenue and Customs v The Rank Group Plc SC 8-Jul-2015
The question raised by this appeal is whether, during the period 1 October 2002 to 5 December 2005, the takings on a particular category of gaming machines operated by the appellants were subject to VAT. The answer depends on whether the takings . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.
VAT, European
Updated: 26 July 2022; Ref: scu.346759